100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: What is Reality? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
If me and you and abra are sitting in a room, and I have a blue rubber ball, we all see it, we all agree it exists. Then that is proof that this ball has an existence outside of our own. This is not rocket science. This is the same old if a tree falls crap. Reality is existence, with or without acknowledgment by consciousness. Is Skyhook still around? He had a very good explanation of this. You're argument here is very short-sighted. You're looking at the moment. Skyhook offered a 'conscious evolution' of the human spirit. Collectively over time we have all agreed to come to a consensus about certain aspects of reality. Today the culmination of that 'conscious evolution' appears to give rise to an objective universe. By your same arguement if we sat down three people who all agree that fairies exist then we must conclude that fairies have objective existence. It's nothing more than a conscious consensus. In fact, this is one thing that became vividly apparent in the presentation I just watch of the shaman. He compared the difference between the social acceptance of the 'western world' versus the social acceptance of an indigenous shamanic people. The bottom line is that they heal differently because they have consenusally agreed to heal differently in the respective cutlures. By the way this man is a western MD who was educated at a medical school in California and then when to South America to study the ways of the shaman. Clearly there are different conclusions from the different societies. In one society it's the rubber ball that eveyone agrees on. In the other society it's the shaman journeys that eveyone agrees on. If agreement is what proves objective reality then in South Americal shamanic healing and contacting the spirit world is objective. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am still not giving up my imaginary friend and no one can make me so I don't recall anyone ever asking you to give up anything Feral. It seems to me that all people have ever asked of you is to respect their right to have imaginary friends that differ from yours and not to be told that they are rejecting your imaginary friends just because their imaginary friends are different. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am still not giving up my imaginary friend and no one can make me so  stop popping those pills displayed in the picture and your imaginary friend probably just go away |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am still not giving up my imaginary friend and no one can make me so stop popping those pills displayed in the picture and your imaginary friend probably just go away What if she wants to keep them? How dare you suggest they are something that she should find undesirable. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am still not giving up my imaginary friend and no one can make me so stop popping those pills displayed in the picture and your imaginary friend probably just go away What if she wants to keep them? How dare you suggest they are something that she should find undesirable. yep your right ..er...sorry "feralcatlady" ..I apologize .. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
voileazur
on
Sun 02/15/09 11:23 AM
|
|
Reading this exchange between you 'funches', and you 'abra', gives me insight into the difficulty I've been having on these threads to communicate the legitimate 'existence' or 'reality' of both FAITH and FACT.
Meaning, FAITH exists and is real in as much as it remains FAITH: no fact, no evidence. And likewise, FACT exists, and is real, as long as it remains FACT: only the observable and verifiable dimensions of life, from the 'human' perspective. Taking this conversation here, an imaginary friend is 'REAL' in as much as 'he' be spoken from the perspective and context of an IMAGINARY FRIEND; an imaginary friend is a REAL-IMAGINARY-FRIEND!!! Not a REAL FRIEND, but surely and absolutely a REAL-IMAGINARY-FRIEND. And that is not a delusion when thought and spoken this way. One must cross the line, and represent t 'imaginary-friend' as a real-friend, to be considered delusional. There is a world of difference between the two forms, without which poetry wouldn't be poetry, art wouldn't be art, and LOVE certainly woldn't be LOVE!!! Are those three concepts real?!!?! Just as it is with the product of our imagination, they are REAL ABSTRACTIONS. There is real universal consensus for the 'reality' OF ABSTRACTIONS. When that distinction is made, it allows for the powerful coexistence of the natural and supranatural realities inside which, whether we acknowledge or deny them, we very much exist. To speak responsibly of our imaginary world as such, will never be delusional, nor will it ever constitute a 'warping' in reality. So it is with believing, or belief, or faith. As long as they are spoken responsibly, from the context and perspective inside which they exist: 'BELIEF-FAITH': no facts, no evidence, ... faith as such is therefore 'not real': physical, material, but is certainly real from an imaginary, non-observable dimension. That is what paradoxically, just as we have a 'real-imaginary' world that is not not REAL, from the evidence and material dimensions, but 'really-imaginary', ... there is 'real-faith', that is not real, from the evidence and material worlds, but 'really-faithful'!!! Faith, beliefs, or imaginary friends are REAL, only for the one's for whom none of it is real from the material and observable consensus of 'real'. But REAL-abstractions, ... YOU BET!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am still not giving up my imaginary friend and no one can make me so stop popping those pills displayed in the picture and your imaginary friend probably just go away But funch I don't want abra to go away. And yes I am an addict of jelly bellies....roglh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
voileazur
on
Sun 02/15/09 12:00 PM
|
|
So,
'... what is reality??? ...' Don't know dor sure. But it sure sometimes feels like a dual, a fight within, something you have the impression of knowing only to 'realize' you don't, ... maybe nothing other than a subtle, half intuitive, half logical dance, between the ... 'abstract- immaterial', and the ... 'tangible-'materiality'' ... dimensions of the possible, 'whole' human experience. A 'REAL' journney to be sure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An illusion... as tangible, as smoke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
abra, if you walk out of the room and no consciousness is there to perceive the room. Does the room still exist?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
abra, if you walk out of the room and no consciousness is there to perceive the room. Does the room still exist? I love it!!! I had that thought at 1.30 this morning, heading home.... I indicated to turn into my street, and asked myself if I indicate, and no-one is here to see it.... is it real? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taking this conversation here, an imaginary friend is 'REAL' in as much as 'he' be spoken from the perspective and context of an IMAGINARY FRIEND; an imaginary friend is a REAL-IMAGINARY-FRIEND!!! Not a REAL FRIEND, but surely and absolutely a REAL-IMAGINARY-FRIEND. And that is not a delusion when thought and spoken this way. One must cross the line, and represent t 'imaginary-friend' as a real-friend, to be considered delusional. " voileazur"....an imaginary friend that one realize is imaginary cannot be real... it's a fantasy an imaginary friend that is considered to be a real-imaginary-friend becomes delusion once you place "real" or "truth" into a belief it borders on delusion or the attempt to either delude oneself or someone else |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An illusion... as tangible, as smoke. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's what you make it to be
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
abra, if you walk out of the room and no consciousness is there to perceive the room. Does the room still exist? It exists in the imagination of my memory. Whether it continues to exist 'physically' when I'm not percieving it I have no way of knowing. That's the realm of pure faith. We have faith that if we find our way back to the place where we believe the room to be it will reappear just as it was before we left it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funches Wrote: 'Abracadbra" you yourself use called the child's friend imaginary so aren't you being hypocritical or are you being an atheist You missed the point entirely. I'm saying that imagination is just as much a part of reality as anything else. If the fairy exists in the imagination then it exists in this reality because imagination is part of reality. usernamesroverrated wrote: stranded in an desert with no food, you can imagine a nice juicy pear all you want as hard as you can, but you will still die of hunger if all you do is sit and imagine that pear. Again, the point I'm making is totally lost. You say that imagination can't be used to conjure up sustenance, therefore it's not "real". Well duh? Your emotions can't conjure up sustenance either. Does that mean that your emotions aren't "real"?  This is the whole point to the thread and why I named it "What is Reality?" If atheists want to claim that only the things that can change or affect the physical world around us are real then they have no choice but to confess that emotions are not real. The next time they are claiming to be in a good mood or a sad mood we can just laugh at them and say, "That's just in your imagination! It's not REAL!" But then if they try to argue that emotions are real because they produce measurable psychological effects, then they must also confess that imagination is real because imagination can directly affect emotions which are 'real'. In other words, if emotions are considered to be 'real' then so must imagination because the results of imagination directly affect emotions. The argument that you can't eat what you imagine for the purpose of sustenance is the same as saying that emotions aren't real because neither can they be used to alter your reality. So my only point is that the atheistic view of what is 'real' falls short of recognizing the entirety of the reality of human experience. If emotions are 'real' then so is imagination. That's my only point. What is imagined doesn't need to become manisfest within the physical world to be 'real'. The human psyche is real (i.e. within the realm of experience), therefore the human imagination is real also. This idea that things need to be physically tangible to be 'real' is truly absurd. Such a philosophy automatically denies human emotions. Where is there a difference between emotions and imagination? I claim that we imagine our emotions and that produces physiological effects and therefore imagination is most certainly no less 'real' than emotions. Our emotions come from our psyche. The psyche is just as much a part of reality as anything else. That's my point. I am sorry but your argument is invalid. 1. Imagination can't be used to conjure up substance 2. Emotions can't be used to conjure up substance 3. Emotions are real (i feel them) 4. Therefor Imagination is real (i feel it.) Sorry but it doesnt work that way I understand what your trying to go about Emotions and imagination are both subjective experiences, they are a part of personal reality, but on greater reality, both could be easily said not to exist. Try telling someone who is emotionless that you feel upset, they wont know what you are talking about. Imagination however can become a part of reality through art and invention, to imagine something alone does not make it real, its just an idea, to put the idea into the world through action does make it real. Of course you could get into deeper things i cant remeber the username that said it but they said something along the lines of i know i am real because i think, the rest of you could just be my imagination. Philosophers have been arguing over reality and imagination and there connection for a loong loong time (probably since the words themselves were defined.) And of course one could argue that there truly is not one correct answer to any of this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perception is reality.
If someone perceives something to be true, it is... at least to them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James...
Agreement alone does not equate to actuality(actual reality). It only equates to a mutually shared belief between individuals. Within the availability of our human understanding, we (as conscious inhabitants of the universe) attempt to accurately define that which we perceive... or at least we should. Reality, in the sense of a personal interpretation of our perception of actuality, is personal. Actuality [IS] that which we are interpreting, and is impersonal. I have often witnessed a multiple universe notion being constructed in an attempt to explain this universe(actuality). If we fabricate another universe in an attempt to explain this one, it merely multiplies the unknowns. It adds complication, not understanding. The same principle holds true with the concept of actuality, which basically [IS] the objective universe outside of humans. Actuality exists independently of human existence. The very fact that we have discovered(uncovered) and will continue to discover previously unknown things necessitates a distinction between our reality(individual interpretation of perception) and that which we are interpreting(actuality). Imagination ceases to exist without perception of any kind. Therefore, imagination is a product of perception, as are cognition, volition, and memory, which are also necessary for imagination. We, as humans, have never truly invented anything... we have but only discovered that which already existed and/or had the possibility of being able to exist. We have only became "better" at using the available tools, including our physiological ones. All human discovery, imagination, invention, thought, feeling, etc. stems in some way, shape or form, from our perception of that which already existed... before we did... Figments of the imagination can have a very real affect on the person, however, whether or not the imagined thing has a corresponding existence outside of the imagination is what determines whether or not the thing is "real"... A "real" fake gold ring, is a ring, none the less... The term "real" and "reality" have been so loosely abused in our language that they have been rendered meaningless and without a shared value. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a world of difference between the two forms, without which poetry wouldn't be poetry, art wouldn't be art, and LOVE certainly woldn't be LOVE!!! Are those three concepts real?!!?! Absolutely, my imagined fairies aren't any less real than love.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranded in an desert with no food, you can imagine a nice juicy pear all you want as hard as you can, but you will still die of hunger if all you do is sit and imagine that pear. polaritybear you beat me to my incubus reference lol |
|
|
|
|
