Printable View
OK......So I am on a very abstract frame of mind right now. How many of you think that reality defines our perceptions? How many think that perception defines or reality? How many coudn't give a **** and wander around the world without ever thinking about this? This is an argument that I get in with my friends all the time.
-NeuTron
the act of perciveing reality by definition modifies reality. Look with out getting philosphical its plain to see, first our eyes work in binary and our brain construts the image form the incompleate data that it gets (why optical illusions work so well). Second there is that whole quantom mechanics issue, by observing something we are changeing its energy state thus by preciveing we change what we preive in at least a small way.
Let us look at a spider's multiple eyes, or a bee's ability to see ultraviolet, and even a snake's ability to feel heat. These things offer totally diferent realities. All from the same universe we see (percieve) in technicolor through binocular vision that takes two diferent perspective viewes integrates them into a single distorted picture. Based on that it seems our perception makes reality. Of course I am not even touching on things like quantum mechanics that bbalad mentioned.
The concept and argument go both ways, it seems to be a cycle.
<knocks wooden desktop> this is reality. :)
Anyone else see 'In the Mouth of Madness'... might give you some ideas.
Reality is a fluid concept, and perceptions are just as fluid... the only way I can describe this at the moment is.... take a brightly coloured dye and a beaker of water - one represents perception the other reality. Pour the dye into the water... both liquids interface with each other and influence the other -eventually both mix completely and you get what we experience. As an analogy it can explain a lot if you think about it enough.
I sound like I'm on drugs don't I?
Z
PS one other thing the perceiver changes just as much as that which is perceived... but you can infer that from the fluid analogy above
So according to your thinking (which happens to be mine as well) Reality is made up of our perceptions and not the other way around.Quote:
Originally posted here by RoadClosed
Let us look at a spider's multiple eyes, or a bee's ability to see ultraviolet, and even a snake's ability to feel heat. These things offer totally diferent realities. All from the same universe we see (percieve) in technicolor through binocular vision that takes two diferent perspective viewes integrates them into a single distorted picture. Based on that it seems our perception makes reality. Of course I am not even touching on things like quantum mechanics that bbalad mentioned.
The concept and argument go both ways, it seems to be a cycle.
Yes, our ability to percieve the physical makeup of the universe is reality. For instance, If you are a creature that could only see or detect (percieve) 2 dimensions, your idea of reality would be a flat surface with no height or depth. If you were looking at an object that moved just a single milimeter up or down, you (as a 2 dimensional creature) would fail to percieve it's existance. To you it would not exist, averting your percieved reality.
Sometimes I look at bees buzzing around my office window. They see in ultraviolet, many objects that reflect colors in the lower visible light spectrum are completely invisible. They have no reality substance to this bee. In fact he can't seem to detect the fact that this window exists. To this insect, a window is an object that CANNOT exist based on the understanding this creature has for our shared universe. I think he can see an object on the other side that shines through but he cannot percieve what is blocking him from the flower's nectar. Some great force field? Nope a window made of glass.
That was a cool analogy. You must be a very visual person. But because we know that the actual window exists, does that mean that the bee's perceptions are limiting it's capabilities to perceive reality? I guess it all depends on your definition of reality.Quote:
Originally posted here by RoadClosed
Sometimes I look at bees buzzing around my office window. They see in ultraviolet, many objects that reflect colors in the lower visible light spectrum are completely invisible. They have no reality substance to this bee. In fact he can't seem to detect the fact that this window exists. To this insect, a window is an object that CANNOT exist based on the understanding this creature has for our shared universe. I think he can see an object on the other side that shines through but he cannot percieve what is blocking him from the flower's nectar. Some great force field? Nope a window made of glass.
-NeuTron
The theme here seems to be acknowledging preception based reality as a primary answer.
However......
Does that mean that any individual or species, as a whole, is actually attempting to avoid the reality of the singular by engrossing oneself/itself in the illusion of the multiple? As a matter of questioning ones own reason is this even possible?
Reality comes first, perception is imperfect. Any other view will lead you to
leap off bridges trying to fly. I have used enough LSD to know that the
mind is capable of misleading you profoundly.
Maybe we never fully or perfectly experience the big picture of reality,
but I am convinced that it exists externally, and independent of my
perception.
If I were to die tonight, chances are that your universe would
still exist, because reality doesn't depend on me.
The fact that there are shared perceptions is another strong argument
for the idea that there is such a thing as objective reality.
Even in the story of the blind men and the elephant, they had to agree
that there was some phenomenon that they were all
observing, even if they disagreed on the details.
:cool:
Quote:
reality
n 1: all of your experiences that determine how things appear to you; "his world was shattered"; "we live in different worlds"; "for them demons were as much a part of reality as trees were" [syn: world] 2: the state of being actual or real: "the reality of his situation slowly dawned on him" [syn: realness, realism] [ant: unreality] 3: the state of the world as it really is rather than as you might want it to be; "businessmen have to face harsh realities" 4: the quality possessed by something that is real [ant: unreality]
Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University
Boy is that a contradiction.............Quote:
re·al·i·ty ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-l-t)
n. pl. re·al·i·ties
1. The quality or state of being actual or true.
2. One, such as a person, an entity, or an event, that is actual: “the weight of history and political realities” (Benno C. Schmidt, Jr.).
3. The totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence.
4. That which exists objectively and in fact: Your observations do not seem to be about reality.
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
I believe that it would be cultural relativity to be modifieing the perception of reality to each individual, or species.
If you put two vastly different people (as from different cultures) in the same room, you would have three different perceptions of the same room. One for each of your subjects, and one for yourself.
/me grabs a bottle of tylenol.
To much thinking for me here.
But is it still not the same room?Quote:
Originally posted here by moxnix
I believe that it would be cultural relativity to be modifieing the perception of reality to each individual, or species.
If you put two vastly different people (as from different cultures) in the same room, you would have three different perceptions of the same room. One for each of your subjects, and one for yourself.
Reality is a concept for people whose minds can't handle drugs.
Yes and no, while its basicly the same room, there will be difrences in how it is precived makeing it slightly difrent room for both people.Quote:
Yes, if the room is painted Red someone who is color blind sees it in a very different manner than someone who is not. It's the same room with different perceptions for each reality. When I was a kid I remember a room where it was painted to make your "perception" of it different from what it's make up was really like. In this case you could argue that my perception was different from reality. The reality of the room was this....
It was painted to make it look like the person in the back was deep into the room and the person in the front was very close to you. In "reality" the room had no depth at all. So I make a contradiction to my earlier statement and ponder deeper into perception and reality. I seek another word for Reality in the physical form. Because I still believe perception makes reality.
For example; I am going back to the room analogy and my own earlier bee example. What if I place the occupants in a cube of glass in the middle of the room? Then I made this glass so clear that there was no way to detect it until someone touched it. Then what if it left no mark or prints as to its proof of existence? The physical makeup of the room is apparent from my point of view, since I made the cube but to those inside it's completely undetectable. Their reality is a perception of a large room with only limited access and they don't know why?
So we all perceive this room with various understandings and our realities are very different. But there is a reality that is true and never changing in the room. It’s physical makeup. This is what I seek another word for. Much like our universe, but what is the definition of the ultimate perception, and what would I call it? I am sure it exists.
Let me try and explain further. What is the difference between real “reality” of a physical universe and illusion? What if - what we have been talking about all along in this thread is wrong, as in “reality” is always true and non changing and what we consider as perception based “reality” is really just illusion to the true physical form of “reality”, and we haven’t even begun to comprehend what “reality” really is?
Is it beyond understanding at our current knowledge of physics?
Isn't it a fun topic to think about. I think that the more you think about this question, the smarter you become.:)
My last paragraph is hard to comprehend but I have a physical example. I just need to scan it and present it. Stay tuned....
Ok here is the drawing I finally jotted down and scanned. It's nothing new, I learned to do this is kindergarten or 1st grade once upon a time. But it came to mind the other day during this discussion. Take a look, what do you see. Some may see and open box at the top, another at the side. One may also just see wire lines with no definition. Here is what I see....
I see an object
This object has multiple definitions that constantly shift as my brain tries to assemble what it is. At one single glance I can see multiple perceptions of its supposed reality, all at the same time. Now if you stare at the object the message your brain gets is never complete. It cannot decide there fore; shifts reality.
But all those perceptions are actually illusions to its true makeup. Its physical existence in my understanding of this universe is 12 equally spaced lines, intersecting on a flat piece of paper. But my perception is much deeper and ever changing.
In fact when one tries to count the lines it becomes impossible because the brain keeps shifting perspective! Try it. To get a count I had to physically cross out and eliminate each line. Very interesting…. And now that the lines are crossed out the illusion becomes less transparent.
There are many examples of illusions I can think of, but this one stands out because it could be used to represent a constant shift in dimension of perception. I guess one could also loosely ask the question, what if something like this represented the universe and dimensions of space time. Could one then perceive the existence of many parallel dimensions and etc… all within the same object (the universe).
There fore: perception creates reality for the perceiver, but reality can be modified through illusion of a perceived concept?
I will refer you all to Plato's analysis of reality and perception in the Analogy of the Cave.
RoadClosed is making much the same points, using different tools.
I love the Allegory of the Cave. I live by it. I totally agree with RoadClosed, just playing devil's advocate. Ever notice how much the Matrix used from the allegory of the cave?
sorry guys,
none of this is real.. you are all victems of mass hysteria.. now take your pills, and those nasty Coputer things will dissapear, and when you wake up in the morning you will be safely back in your cave enjoying a freshly killed rabbit for breakfast..
now it is the blue tables you take tonight.. remember that
cheers
"Is that air that your breathing?"
Something I missed. Not sure why but I either never heard of the cave or forgot about it, even though I have had many classes with Plato involved. So I googled and found this site, for those in my boat...
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/320/cave.htm
This relationship with shadows is fascinating because when I was younger I was exposed by Carl Sagen in a series about the cosmos. In one episode he was talking about a 4th dimmensional object (bear with me if I am wrong but I was very young). And I remember him stating that we (as humans) cannot possibly percieve this object but we could see it's shadow! And he demonstrated it. It's amazing to me ALWAYS, when I read the stuff that people thought of over 1 thousand and 2 thousand years ago. We owe a lot to those inventors and thinkers of logic.
Perhaps in the future, mankind will be unbound and when we turn our heads we will percieve the real 4th dimensional object.
Yeah, well if you haven't read the alegory of the cave, grab a peek at it. Then check out William James (Principles of Psychology: Spirituality) and Vygotsky (Thought and Language). You should be able to google them for interesting links.
Here is a Vygotsky link:
http://www.sk.com.br/sk-vygot.html
Wrap some brain cells around that!
:-D
you percieve your own reality. Everything you hate or love is your own creation.
take the line from matrix: what is real? how do u define real? is real means what we see ,hear,touch etc.,, then these r just the electrical signals interperated by our mind!!!
IMHO
There is reality distinct from our perceptions and understanding of it. However, we can only ever relate to that reality through our perceptions - so trying to define it is both pointless and impossible. The reality we deal with daily is our perceived interpretation of reality, and it is only this reality that makes any sense to us.
Our personal understanding/perception of reality is defined by our personal history, experience, culture - whatever. So we never truly share reality with anyone - because our experience of an event ( which does have, IMO, a reality of its own ) will always be affected by who we are. Is it the same room ( to pick up an example from before )? Yes, but NONE of the people have a grasp of the real room. Each has a partial ( even if significant ) grasp of the real room.
Yes, this is Plato's cave. Except that you can never turn around. While it is important to understand the limits of ones own perception, if we want to engage with others, we can only do this throught the shadows.
Does that make any sense?