Question #4 -- The Real Deal
February 26th 2007 16:07
This is a topic that has exactly ONE right answer. Unfortunately, no one really knows what that answer is, or how to define it. Of course, that doesn't mean that all ideas on the subject are equally valid. It just means that there is no complete, concise answer to the question. And that question is: what is reality?
I know right from the start here that no one is going to agree on this subject. Most of the time we can't agree on which TV shows are terrible and which are good, so how can we possibly agree on how to interpret the flood of sensory input that we call reality? I won't pretend to know the answer to this question: this is more an excuse to throw a few ideas against the wall and see what sticks, and to invite comments.
Reality is defined in the dictionary thusly:
1. the state or quality of being real.
2. resemblance to what is real.
3. a real thing or fact.
4. real things, facts, or events taken as a whole; state of affairs: the reality of the business world; vacationing to escape reality.
5. Philosophy.
a. something that exists independently of ideas concerning it.
b. something that exists independently of all other things and from which all other things derive.
6. something that is real.
7. something that constitutes a real or actual thing, as distinguished from something that is merely apparent.
I like #7 the best. To me, it is the most concise yet inclusive definition. It is exceedingly common for us to accept outward appearances as "reality" when in truth the reality is far different. Here's a good example: snow is not white. It looks white, doesn't it? Well, actually the whiteness is a trick of the light. The way light interacts with the water molecules as arranged when frozen causes us to perceive snow as white. But when it melts, it's clear water. Where does the white go? Nowhere, since it was never there in the first place. Appearances can be deceiving.
This is a very simple example, and most people know that snow is not really white. But it is indicative of the larger question. Is what we see really real? To take the idea to the farthest point, it could be argued that nothing we see is actually what we think it is. As all matter is composed of molecules, all molecules are composed of atoms, and all atoms are composed of protons/neutrons/electrons, everything is essentially the same. The distance between an atomic nucleus and it's orbiting electrons is proportionately vast -- most of an atom is comprised of empty space. Extending that knowledge outward leaves us with the conclusion that everything we see is essentially empty space. Weird huh? It feels pretty solid to me. The science is undeniable, but that doesn't change how we experience it. So which is real, the nitty-gritty detail, or the everyday experience we all share?
Hindus have a view of reality that states that all reality derives from the deity Brahman. It's important to understand that Brahman is not a god in any sense that Judeo-Christians can relate to. In essence, Brahman is the sum total of all that is reality, and all existence as perceived by humans is simply manifestation of Brahman. Even all the other Hindu gods (Vishnu, Shiva, Kali, et al.) are manifestations of Brahman. Therefore, reality as perceived by humanity is all illusory, and the only reality is that in which unity with Brahman is achieved. I'm sure my explanation of this is very poor, so feel free to click on the link to get some better info!
Perhaps one of the most famous dissertations on the nature of reality is Plato's Allegory of the Cave. I'm not even going to try to get into a lengthy discussion about this piece. Long-story short, Plato (writing, as usual, using Socrates as the speaker) postulates a scenario wherein people are chained from birth in a cave, facing inwards towards the wall. The cave has an opening behind them, and a fire burns outside but they cannot see it. Instead, all they ever see are the shadows of people moving about outside the cave, between the entrance and the fire, projected upon the wall. Their perception of reality is merely that of the shadows, and not that of the real, colorful life outside. Give it a look. It's a cool read, if you haven't perused it already.
This is just the teeny-tiniest tip of an enormous iceberg. There are about 6.5 billion people on earth, and about that many ideas of reality. True, most of us keep our views of reality contained to one "camp" or another, but every single person perceives it at least slightly differently. None of us are exactly right.
Let me stress, though, that this does NOT mean that all ideas are equally viable. Perception of reality is slightly subjective, but there is only one, true reality. For the most part we can use our senses and our knowledge to at least agree on some basics. If someone posits an idea that currently has no basis on proof, that idea doesn't belong in even the "maybe" reality camp. If a shoemaker really thinks elves are cobbling for him at 3 a.m., that does not deserve to be considered as reality. Yes, reality's ultimate nature is still up for debate, but we must be careful to limit the debate to ideas that are reasonable. Bring your best ideas to the table! Otherwise, get real. Whatever that means.
I know right from the start here that no one is going to agree on this subject. Most of the time we can't agree on which TV shows are terrible and which are good, so how can we possibly agree on how to interpret the flood of sensory input that we call reality? I won't pretend to know the answer to this question: this is more an excuse to throw a few ideas against the wall and see what sticks, and to invite comments.
Reality is defined in the dictionary thusly:
1. the state or quality of being real.
2. resemblance to what is real.
3. a real thing or fact.
4. real things, facts, or events taken as a whole; state of affairs: the reality of the business world; vacationing to escape reality.
5. Philosophy.
a. something that exists independently of ideas concerning it.
b. something that exists independently of all other things and from which all other things derive.
6. something that is real.
7. something that constitutes a real or actual thing, as distinguished from something that is merely apparent.
I like #7 the best. To me, it is the most concise yet inclusive definition. It is exceedingly common for us to accept outward appearances as "reality" when in truth the reality is far different. Here's a good example: snow is not white. It looks white, doesn't it? Well, actually the whiteness is a trick of the light. The way light interacts with the water molecules as arranged when frozen causes us to perceive snow as white. But when it melts, it's clear water. Where does the white go? Nowhere, since it was never there in the first place. Appearances can be deceiving.
This is a very simple example, and most people know that snow is not really white. But it is indicative of the larger question. Is what we see really real? To take the idea to the farthest point, it could be argued that nothing we see is actually what we think it is. As all matter is composed of molecules, all molecules are composed of atoms, and all atoms are composed of protons/neutrons/electrons, everything is essentially the same. The distance between an atomic nucleus and it's orbiting electrons is proportionately vast -- most of an atom is comprised of empty space. Extending that knowledge outward leaves us with the conclusion that everything we see is essentially empty space. Weird huh? It feels pretty solid to me. The science is undeniable, but that doesn't change how we experience it. So which is real, the nitty-gritty detail, or the everyday experience we all share?
Hindus have a view of reality that states that all reality derives from the deity Brahman. It's important to understand that Brahman is not a god in any sense that Judeo-Christians can relate to. In essence, Brahman is the sum total of all that is reality, and all existence as perceived by humans is simply manifestation of Brahman. Even all the other Hindu gods (Vishnu, Shiva, Kali, et al.) are manifestations of Brahman. Therefore, reality as perceived by humanity is all illusory, and the only reality is that in which unity with Brahman is achieved. I'm sure my explanation of this is very poor, so feel free to click on the link to get some better info!
Perhaps one of the most famous dissertations on the nature of reality is Plato's Allegory of the Cave. I'm not even going to try to get into a lengthy discussion about this piece. Long-story short, Plato (writing, as usual, using Socrates as the speaker) postulates a scenario wherein people are chained from birth in a cave, facing inwards towards the wall. The cave has an opening behind them, and a fire burns outside but they cannot see it. Instead, all they ever see are the shadows of people moving about outside the cave, between the entrance and the fire, projected upon the wall. Their perception of reality is merely that of the shadows, and not that of the real, colorful life outside. Give it a look. It's a cool read, if you haven't perused it already.
This is just the teeny-tiniest tip of an enormous iceberg. There are about 6.5 billion people on earth, and about that many ideas of reality. True, most of us keep our views of reality contained to one "camp" or another, but every single person perceives it at least slightly differently. None of us are exactly right.
Let me stress, though, that this does NOT mean that all ideas are equally viable. Perception of reality is slightly subjective, but there is only one, true reality. For the most part we can use our senses and our knowledge to at least agree on some basics. If someone posits an idea that currently has no basis on proof, that idea doesn't belong in even the "maybe" reality camp. If a shoemaker really thinks elves are cobbling for him at 3 a.m., that does not deserve to be considered as reality. Yes, reality's ultimate nature is still up for debate, but we must be careful to limit the debate to ideas that are reasonable. Bring your best ideas to the table! Otherwise, get real. Whatever that means.
| 70 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Wendi
Damn it!
*smiles*
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Wendi
There's your faerie trivia for the day. I know you were itchin' for it. *LMAO*
W
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Wendi
And here, I seem to be in random quotation mode, so let me offer you these:
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick (1928 - 1982), Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
"Disbelief in magic can force a poor soul into believing in government and business."
Tom Robbins (1936 - )
This one SCREAMS you! *GRINS* - "When you want to believe in something, you also have to believe in everything that's necessary for believing in it." Ugo Betti, Struggle Till Dawn
"Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality." Jules de Gaultier
Source: http://www.quotationspage.com/
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Is this a new quote? Maybe Ugo Betti ripped us off!? I cry plagiarism!!!!
Comment by Wendi
Good man!
Comment by Kleonaptra
Kalikapsychosis
When God says "I am the one true God and none shall be before me..."
When the Goddess says " I am the one true Goddess and all Goddess' are one"
They are talking about themselves AND each other. Brahman is the state we are in NOW because light(God) and darkness(Goddess) have joined to become ONE and that is the state we live in now, where they constantly make love, life, and expand the universe through the power of the STAR(Sun, God) and the ABYSS(darkness or womb of space, the Goddess)
Get me?
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Kleonaptra
Kalikapsychosis
But it is literal. We say 'God' or 'goddess' to personify those powers, when those great powers just are - The light of the Sun(any sun) and the darkness of space.....They joined together to create us, and are still one, its hard to describe, but them joined as one is the entirety of the creation we live in. When they stop getting it on(for whatever reason) its the end of creation, because they become separated again.
Man, this is hard stuff to describe! I think thats why we personify them.
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Not trying to be dense, we're just approaching this from two very different perspectives!
Comment by Kleonaptra
Kalikapsychosis
Its funny you say "two different perspectives" Because Im really trying to use both.
We use 'God' and 'goddess' as metaphors but most of us have forgotten what they represent. Most of us have forgotten they are metaphors at all, and think that there are people running around in the sky.
The only truth is - The two great powers of the universe are - The darkness of space, and the light of stars. Stars, (suns) create GRAVITY when combined with the PULL of SPACE which creates planets and solar systems and from there LIFE.
We say (very romantically) that the Goddess and the God make love to create us, using ourselves as a metaphor almost. Whats actually true is those forces out there pushing and pulling and creating the universe.
Am I making sense yet? I'll shut up now.
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Kleonaptra
Kalikapsychosis
One of my favourite sayings is "God doesnt have ears"
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions
Comment by Mountain Fog
Infognito
I fart,
roll over,
still slumbering.
you fart,
my dreams release,
when reality,
stabs me,
in the nostrils!
fog
Comment by Winston
Small Thoughts on Big Questions