What is Reality?

[zyzygy]

It is my contention that reality without consciousness, without perception, is completely meaningless. You said earlier you disliked things that are meaningless, yet here you are defending the notion of something utterly devoid of meaning and influence is "real".

If we were not here the universe would not be real? That is absurd. And why should the universe have meaning, whatever that means.

 

[zyzygy]

There exists vast amounts of the universe untouched by consciousness and just as where consciousness has perceived physical objects it is all meaningless. Life is meaningless. Death is meaningless. The universe is meaningless. That is reality.

True, and no amount of philosophy and new age waffle with change that.

 

[Manny]

There exists vast amounts of the universe untouched by consciousness and just as where consciousness has perceived physical objects it is all meaningless. Life is meaningless. Death is meaningless. The universe is meaningless. That is reality.

I give it meaning, and in doing so create the reality.

 

[marduc]

I give it meaning, and in doing so create the reality.

reality does not have to have meaning, it just IS. Individually an observer may give reality a subjective "meaning" but that does not create reality, it just refines the definition of it for a particular observer - with or without this meaning artificialy imposed upon it, and with or without this observer, it has been there and it will continue to be there.

 

[zyzygy]

I give it meaning, and in doing so create the reality.

And just how do you give reality meaning? I don't. Reality would still be here even if you and I were missing.

 

[Manny]

reality does not have to have meaning, it just IS. Individually an observer may give reality a subjective "meaning" but that does not create reality, it just refines the definition of it for a particular observer - with or without this meaning artificialy imposed upon it, and with or without this observer, it has been there and it will continue to be there.

You mentioned 'observer'. I discussed this earlier the thread, that at the most fundamental level of things, according to modern science, at the planck length there is no definitive reality, only a non-finite number of indeterminate states. It is only when something is observed that its state becomes determinate.

Imagine, if you will, that the universe, this universe (not other universes, not 'multiverse' or such concepts), never developed any life in it. None of us ever existed, there is no life anywhere, for all 'time', if that could even be said to exist in such a case. Null. Do you understand?

 

[Manny]

And just how do you give reality meaning?

By my free will.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

I give it meaning, and in doing so create the reality.

What you are explaining is psychological observation. Your meaning for something gave you only a stylized perception of reality. For example you look at a cloud and that cloud looks like a fish, but someone else may see a cow, either way it is just a cloud and will continue to be a cloud until it dissipates. A cloud is psychologically meaningful for various reasons (personal, cultural, collectively, scientifically etc) but giving meaning to a cloud for any reason will not change the nature of the cloud. A cloud exists whether you die looking at the cloud or not. Your thoughts do not change causative reality. You are not at all important or magically causing a reality to exist. It is in your head only, I mean the reality that you speak of is like I said just your psychological observation of your surroundings.

You believe that there is meaning and therefor that meaning spun a reality from your thoughts? How exactly would that work? I mean what physics would be involved in such a universe that can only exist with a consciousness giving it meaning? That would mean that our brains would have to have a mechanism to make that work. And you would have to identify the entire process before jumping to such conclusions. But up front I am able to reject your idea on the basis of the absurdity of your proposition. All I need to to is give meaning to my rejection and I change reality? That isnt at all rational. I could just say that the meaning of any given situation is because I am a god. The meaning of everything is that I am a god. All I need to do now is believe...

 

[Cephus]

By my free will.

Reality doesn't need your help, you're totally meaningless to reality.

 

[grip]

"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions regarding observation and knowledge of reality.

The sound is made but it's not literally a sound without hearing, it's a concussive force creating shock waves in the air, with the potential to make sound-- if there's a cochlear nerve available. The concept of sound and noise are only a reality if they're heard, otherwise they remain merely the potential for observation, though they still contain vibrations, amplitude and frequency.

It's the same with sight. Light, shape and depth exist without vision, but until an optic nerve translates the stimulus to a brain, it's only electromagnetic waves capable of transferring images. Vision, hearing, taste, smell and touch only existed in the universe as potential or possibilities, until life evolved with these senses as a result of the stimuli responses.

Reality unobserved may still exist, but its ability to be interacted with on a level of awareness gives it a focal point. Thru our senses, thoughts and feelings we define reality, which otherwise has no meaning. The universe is a field of energy potential with, literally, no consciousness or other purpose to exist. As a matter of fact, you can't even use 'words' to not describe it, since they wouldn't exist. It's merely an _________ ugh of unconsciousness.

 

[Manny]

Reality doesn't need your help, you're totally meaningless to reality.

You've got the cart before the horse now. Since you believe it is meaningless, that's what it is for you. You are what you believe.

 

[Manny]

You believe that there is meaning and therefor that meaning spun a reality from your thoughts? How exactly would that work? I mean what physics would be involved in such a universe that can only exist with a consciousness giving it meaning? That would mean that our brains would have to have a mechanism to make that work. And you would have to identify the entire process before jumping to such conclusions. But up front I am able to reject your idea on the basis of the absurdity of your proposition. All I need to to is give meaning to my rejection and I change reality? That isnt at all rational.

I've been over this a few times already. Problem is, most people cannot accept modern science as it stands today. Most people are not even aware of it. We go on saying we agree with Einstein of Hawking, as though we even know what they are talking about. For the most part, we don't. When they describe their theories to a layperson, it is like hearing a nice piece of music, which most people enjoy but we have no concept of the underlying theory, that is, the musical score which is not readable by many people. The score is the underlying mathematical foundation, but what we hear is the music. In fact it is so incomprehensible to ordinary people that even if it were explained to us in detail, we still wouldn't get it.

Richard Feynman: "The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiments. So I hope you can accept Nature as she is - absurd."

Berkeley- "It is indeed an opinion strangely prevailing amongst men, that houses, mountains, rivers, and in word all sensible objects have an existence natural or real, distinct from their being perceived by the understanding." In other words, Berkeley finds it strange that some humans believe that things could have an existence independent of what is perceived. Berkeley concludes: "Esse est percipi" meaning "Existence is perception."

Heisenberg-
"The next step was taken by Berkeley. If actually all our knowledge is derived from perception, there is no meaning in the statement that the things really exist; because if the perception is given it cannot possibly make any difference whether the things exist or do not exist. Therefore, to be perceived is identical with existence."

Sorry FreedomFromAll but you are incorrect. This is physics not psychology.

I could just say that the meaning of any given situation is because I am a god. The meaning of everything is that I am a god. All I need to do now is believe...

Not bad... keep it up. You might be getting somewhere!

 

[zyzygy]

By my free will.

How,exactly? If you weren't here reality would not exist? You appear to have a very high opinion of yourself. What will happen to the poor universe and reality when you die? It doesn't bear thinking about.

 

[zyzygy]

Reality doesn't need your help, you're totally meaningless to reality.

As we all are. I am beginning to suspect that we may be being taken for a ride. Tentative troll alert!

 

[Manny]

As we all are. I am beginning to suspect that we may be being taken for a ride. Tentative troll alert!

http://www.debatepolitics.com/philosophical-discussions/208784-reality-9.html#post1063958645

 

[zyzygy]

I've been over this a few times already. Problem is, most people cannot accept modern science as it stands today. !

Proof of that statement please. I know a lot of people who are clued up on the latest developments. I don't know where you live. Those sort of blanket statements are the hallmark of the troll or the woo fan. You have not contacted most people in the world so you have no idea if most people accept modern science or not. Just because you don't know much about science it does not follow that most people are equally ignorant about the subject. If you were run over by a bus tomorrow then that would have no effect on reality, except for the fact that your loved ones would mourn you. The universe would not even notice your absence.

 

[Manny]

Proof of that statement please. I know a lot of people who are clued up on the latest developments. I don't know where you live. Those sort of blanket statements are the hallmark of the troll or the woo fan. You have not contacted most people in the world so you have no idea if most people accept modern science or not. Just because you don't know much about science it does not follow that most people are equally ignorant about the subject. If you were run over by a bus tomorrow then that would have no effect on reality, except for the fact that your loved ones would mourn you. The universe would not even notice your absence.

Your post is my proof.

 

[Manny]

Proof of that statement please. I know a lot of people who are clued up on the latest developments.

They know nothing. They only know the pretty pictures.

I was referencing Sylvester Gates. Have you ever heard of him? That's a question.

In this video, Gates explains the problem of people in the public being unable to grasp the mathematics necessary to understand modern physics.

It's a long video. Interesting if you like string theory though. Suggest you fast-forward to 14:30 where he says "Most people in our society are math-phobic" and go for as long as the attention span allows.
Minnesota Channel - The Legacy of Einstein : Sylvester Gates - YouTube

 

[zyzygy]

Your post is my proof.

I have no idea what that means.

 

[zyzygy]

They know nothing. They only know the pretty pictures.

Where did you meet my friends and acquaintances? Stop making statements about matters that you know nothing about.

 

[zyzygy]

They know nothing. They only know the pretty pictures.

I was referencing Sylvester Gates. Have you ever heard of him? That's a question.

In this video, Gates explains the problem of people in the public being unable to grasp the mathematics necessary to understand modern physics.

It's a long video. Interesting if you like string theory though. Suggest you fast-forward to 14:30 where he says "Most people in our society are math-phobic" and go for as long as the attention span allows.
Minnesota Channel - The Legacy of Einstein : Sylvester Gates - YouTube

This Sylvester Gates is of course the fons et origo of all knowledge. No chance he could be wrong. He seems like another person who has chatted with most people in the world. This is of course off topic. Even if most people in the world are math phobic that does not support your claim that the universe didn't really exist until were here to observe it.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

This is physics not psychology.

Bwahhaha Physics you say? Then why are you presenting philosophy instead? Did you not think I would not notice?

So you believe that reality is dependent on consciousness meh no one cares. Idealism has no place in reality. You may think that it does but that is just your opinion or as it sounds someone elses opinions that you are parroting.

 

[Manny]

I should point out, at no point did I mention anything about philosophy. Every word I said was about quantum electrodynamics. Your reality, your world, is an illusion.

 

[zyzygy]

I should point out, at no point did I mention anything about philosophy. Every word I said was about quantum electrodynamics. Your reality, your world, is an illusion.

It's your reality too, and it's real. If you saw a car bearing down on you at high speed would you jump out of the way or stand still, confident of the fact that the car is merely an illusion?

 

[Manny]

It's your reality too, and it's real.

Since we exist and can observe it, therefor it is real.

If you saw a car bearing down on you at high speed would you jump out of the way or stand still, confident of the fact that the car is merely an illusion?

There is a slight chance that it would go through me without harm, if all the atoms in my body aligned with the spaces between the vehicles atoms. That's an extremely remote possibility, but does exist. Since I never gamble, I would step out of the way.

Any more questions? :doh