What is "Real"

I define myself as real. And I define my perceptions as real. I define the world that I perceive to be "real" within a certain tolerance of my perception and deduction.

"real" is whatever Lady Diane tells me it is.

It may or may not involve mayonaise.



Oh, I'll be quiet and listen to the philosophy folks.

You have to put it within context. What Plato means by "real" is not the same thing as what Sartre means by the same word.

Sartre asked to hold the mayo and the sandwich was still just as real, just not as tasty.

But was it dual or non dual?

Essentially, that's true.

Actually, I agree with Rosborne. So it goes. Though as I know more and more about the brain, I take my reality with a grain of salt.

No, Osso, it was on marbled rye.

Is there a mustard spectrum?

ok...now you guys did it..I'm hungry for a REAL Stage Deli (NYC) brisket sammich! Now..we're talking real!

I've had this conversation with JLNobody. He's my mental entry gate into the nondual, er, sense of things, with which I partly agree, but am not all that engaged in most of the time. I'm busy with .. not my dual self, but my singular self and my perceptions, effervescent as they are.

No, in Platonic terms, Ragman, now we're talking actual, not real. The idea of Stage Deli sanwichness would be 'real.'

Are you sure you didn't mean to say 'evanescent'? But maybe not. Maybe your perceptions really do effervesce.

MA, tell me more about that, if you would?

As I said on another post recently, I never read the philosophers for one reason or another - I just got through logic and theology at a catholic college before I switched to the commie pinko place, UCLA, and was otherwise busy. But maybe after those school and work years it also had to do with my attention-interest span.

So, I've kept hearing about them, but I don't know how to distinguish them. Some that I have quickly glanced at this and that book about seem boring as all get out. And recently I've heard Dys scoff at Aristotle and Plato and Socrates.

But I don't diss all eastern and western philosophical thought out of hand, just yet.

Any pickles?

I did mean effervescent, but, remember, I'm cuckoo about word play.

Let me scrabble to check evanesce, which I think of similarly if not quite so filled with CO2.

To respond to myself on this, NYer article that made my day about the brain, within the last three months, was about a fellow from India and now UCSD who has done studies re the brain - the whole mirror thing, for example, but that is just a smidgeon of his interests.. I don't have the article in front of me, so I can't rattle his name off.

I once had a disagreement with an english professor over the usage of "super" vs "supra'.

"Real" is a term that only has meaning relative to its logical complement "illusory". (Like "up" and "down") . It is an aspect of social transactions in particular contexts. Statistical agreement tends to promote concepts of "absolute reality" at the layman's level but scientists argue against such a concept.