Jump to content

Is Anything Real?


midniterider
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've asked myself the same question before- and couldn't come up with a satisfactory answer.  So I just operate on the assumption that the world around me is in fact real... it'd be damn impractical to assume that isn't the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Realism is my religion!

 

 

 

Oh, and thanks for sharing this.  I'm watching more of the Vsauce vids.  Very nice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

     Of course it's real.  It hurts when I bump into it in the dark.

 

          mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Of course it's real.  It hurts when I bump into it in the dark.

 

But if you are dreaming that you are bumping your head in the dark, it might also hurt.  Until you wake up.  wink.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Here's a pretty good video about how we define reality. Anti-wooists plug your ears around 17:30. The word 'soul' is used instead of 'awareness' or 'consciousness' which would have been my preference. Pretty good presentation though overall using logic and science.

 

If anyone can find a video concerning 'dynamically generated reality' I'd like to watch it. I get tired of reading sometimes. :-)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a very interesting question. Mostly in eastern religion but also even in western philosophy. Bishop George Berkeley:

 

Berkeley’s famous principle is esse is percipi, to be is to be perceived. Berkeley was an idealist. He held that ordinary objects are only collections of ideas, which are mind-dependent. Berkeley was an immaterialist. He held that there are no material substances. There are only finite mental substances and an infinite mental substance, namely, God     

 

http://www.iep.utm.edu/berkeley/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone can find a video concerning 'dynamically generated reality' I'd like to watch it. I get tired of reading sometimes. :-)

 

There is a lot of stuff, including videos, on the subject of "creating your own reality" if this is what you mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://onswipe.com/thedailygalaxy/#!/entry/are-we-living-in-a-holographic-universe-this-may-be,4fd035474b672622b824b30a

 

The holographic universe. Turns out it holds water and our 3dimensional universe could be described in 2d at the plank scale (strings).

 

Damn ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BO: All our perceptions of the world are only as good as the senses and brain they are filtered through. Even a materialist should get that, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But if you are dreaming that you are bumping your head in the dark, it might also hurt.  Until you wake up.  wink.png

 

     My dreams tend to have great lighting unlike my waking life. :)

 

          mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reductionists just cannot fathom something other than the five senses. 

 

     I cannot fathom what you mean my "reductionist."  You use it over and over and over again but it doesn't seem to mean anything in particular.

 

          mwc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh....try googling it...wink.png

 

     You aren't able to tell me what you mean when you use the term?

 

          mwc

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BO: All our perceptions of the world are only as good as the senses and brain they are filtered through. Even a materialist should get that, right?

 

 

If you want to know what a materialist thinks you could always ask one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm currently studying how specific genes code for certain protein channels, specifically Sodium channels at the moment. In some sense this makes me "reductionist." However my colleagues and I absolutely believe in "senses" beyond the standard five that are thrown about. For example, concepts such as proprioception are well established and reasonably well explained. Unfortunately, you can run into significant pitfalls when making sweeping generalisations about people, particularly when you may not actually understand what they really know or believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Okay.
That means that...
our whole solar system...
could be, like...
one tiny atom in the fingernail of some other giant being.
This is too much!
That means...
one tiny atom in my fingernail could be-
Could be one little...
tiny universe.
Could I buy some pot from you?

 

 

- Animal House dialog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Unfortunately, you can run into significant pitfalls when making sweeping generalisations about people, particularly when you may not actually understand what they really know or believe.

 

True. And what I've discovered over time is that individuals can and do hold conflicting beliefs and opinions. Doubtful there is an absolute "materialist" or an absolute "idealist" just like there isn't an absolute democrat or republican. Labels are fixed ideas while people are not. And yes, I use sweeping generalizations a lot (one of my faults). :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Babylonian Dream

Interesting thing isn't it? Somehow though, creationists and theists like to use this as "proof" of their idiotic beliefs. Wouldn't it prove that they don't know if the Bible isn't real? much less God.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

BO: All our perceptions of the world are only as good as the senses and brain they are filtered through. Even a materialist should get that, right?

 

 

If you want to know what a materialist thinks you could always ask one.

 

 

Why?  You take the same attitude with nonmaterialists. 

 

 

That is a lie.  Of course you cannot back up your accusation because it is based on nothing at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Oh...let's see...you call non material thinking "MAGICAL THINKING"....and other things that mean less than real.  

 

 

Nope.  Another lie.  I call only magical thinking by the name "magical thinking".  It's very specific and not anything as generalized (or undefined) as "non material".  Are you done lying?

 

However even if I were to call all "non material" thinking "Magical thinking" that would not demonstrate that I think I don't have to ask people what is on their mind to already know what is on their mind.  Your original lie is still a lie that you can't back up.

 

http://phobias.about.com/od/glossary/g/magicalthinking.htm

"Magical thinking is a clinical term used to describe a wide variety of nonscientific and sometimes irrational beliefs.  These beliefs are generally centered on correlations between events.

 

For example, a belief in the power of spells or rituals could be considered magical thinking"

 

You see BO it's actually believing in magic and things that are like magic. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Naw...you're just closed minded and you like to say I'm lying as a way of denial.  

 

 

You didn't back up either accusation you leveled at me.  So you level more accusations at me as distraction.  Seeing that you are firing blanks could you at least define "nonmaterialists"?  Who are these people and what defines them as a group?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Naw...you're just closed minded and you like to say I'm lying as a way of denial.  

 

 

You didn't back up either accusation you leveled at me.  So you level more accusations at me as distraction.  Seeing that you are firing blanks could you at least define "nonmaterialists"?  Who are these people and what defines them as a group?

 

 

More closed mind more denial. 

 

 

A question is neither closed minded nor a denial.

 

Again I ask:  Tell us who are these "nonmaterialists" and what defines them as a group?

 

If you can't do this simple thing . . . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on what you mean by real. The argument between BO and Mymistake is not actually really happening.

 

This entire discussion is nothing more than a series of zeros and ones projected creating light patterns on a surface that is either made of partially reflective opaque material made of superheated sand, or a series of very small lights that are each projecting a single color in to create patterns that your eyes interpret as words.

 

For all intents and purposes, this conversation does not actually exist. Yet here it is anyway.

 

Matter is just another state of energy after all, so in a way we're not much different than the words that you're reading on the computer screen.

 

Real is subjective I guess. An individual can't really prove that they actually exist, much less whether everything else does or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...It is anybody who can conceive of a level of reality or understanding, conscious or unconscious that goes beyond the realm of of the five senses.  

 

BTW....I edited my previous post to add something I forgot to add...so you cannot accuse me of Stealth editing.  Hope your happy....wink.png

 

 

Very funny.  So by your definition I am a nonmaterialists.  Well now wasn't this a fun little exercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

...It is anybody who can conceive of a level of reality or understanding, conscious or unconscious that goes beyond the realm of of the five senses.  

 

BTW....I edited my previous post to add something I forgot to add...so you cannot accuse me of Stealth editing.  Hope your happy....wink.png

 

 

Very funny.  So by your definition I am a nonmaterialists.  Well now wasn't this a fun little exercise.

 

But you claim it doesn't exist.

 

 

Where did I do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.