Reality from the view point of theists

@Setanta,

Quote:

The observer constructs a description of reality. The inability of any observer or commentator to categorically describe reality with complete accuracy is not evidence that reality is a construct. It is evidence that the descriptions of reality are constructs. Not to put too fine a point on it, reality doesn't care if you live or die.

BINGO!

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

Oh dear ! Then there seem to be a lot of "silly people" making a living from those ideas, in some of our foremost learning and research establishments !

If any of them are making a living out of saying that it is impossible for REALITY to be independent of our ability to understand or describe it...they are cheating their employers, Fresco.

Surely you see that.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

That's what so many academic careers are all about.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Sorry, I can't get down to that level Frank. Take a break and do a bit of contemporary reading. I will be pleased to offer suggestions.

1 Reply

God is reality.

0 Replies

In 1740, during what is now known as the War of Jenkins' Ear, George Anson lead an expedition into "the Great South Sea" (the Pacific) to cruise against the Spanish. By 1741, most of the ships had rounded Cape Horn and were sailing north, looking for the island known as Juan Fernandez. Finding lattitude is relatively easy, and people have done it with amazing accuracy for thousands of years (cf. the voyage of Bjarni Herjolfsson in 985). Finding longitude was the problem, and it could be a serious one.

Having reached the lattitude for Juan Fernandez, Anson's officers came to a consensus that they needed to sail east. Although Anson did not agree, he bowed to their judgment, and sailed east until the lookout saw the snow-capped mountains of the Andes to the east. They brought the ship about then, and sailed west until they found Juan Fernandez. Hundreds, literally hundreds of men died of scurvy before they reached Juan Fernandez. Even after they reached the island, more than a hundred more men died of scurvy before they could be saved by the "green stuff" and fish they found there. Juan Fernandez exists, and it hasn't moved. The problem was not with the reality of Juan Fernandez, it was with the Royal Navy's relative inability to accurately describe the reality of where to find it.

I have sufficient experience of universities, both as a student and an employee to know that at least hundreds of thousands, if not actually millions of academics make a good living playing these word games. None better than the semioticians--arguably, the most useless well-paid employees of state and private insitutions anywhere.

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

Sorry, I can't get down to that level Frank. Take a break and do a bit of contemporary reading. I will be pleased to offer suggestions.

You are confusing me now, Fresco.

Allow me to go back to a question you have not answered:

May I assume from this reply (the one earlier), though, that you are not saying that it is impossible that "REALITY may be independent of any conceptions we may have of it?" In other words: It is possible that REALITY is independent of any concepts we may have of it.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

Oh dear ! Then there seem to be a lot of "silly people" making a living from those ideas, in some of our foremost learning and research establishments !

By the way, the appeal to authority aspect of your suggestion here is weird. What is its purpose?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I will re-iterate the reply, The meaning of the word "reality" depends on the context in which it is being used. The non-representational position I concur with is that that a word stands for a concept not a thing whose status is dependent on other context related concepts, including "observer" and "social function". In this view, there are only concepts, so to ask whether "reality" can be "concept independent" is an oxymoron.

Now to ask" how I know this view is correct" is naive, because I base it on the empirical evidence of cognitive scientists dealing with perception that the representationalist view is incorrect. For a simplistic analogy, note the physical concept of "the luminiferous ether" was rejected on the basis of counter evidence. Yet, physicists still utilize equations based on the existence of the ether because they still work. In the same way we utilize the concept of a geocentric solar system because it works for mundane use. So I "know" the sun moves across the sky when I'm gardening, but I also "know" that the earth circles the sun when I think about the seasons. So which one is "reality"?..answer BOTH are according to context.

NB That was not so much an appeal to authority as a statement that there are many "big thinkers" on my page.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

So I "know" the sun moves across the sky when I'm gardening, but I also "know" that the earth circles the sun when I think about the seasons. So which one is "reality"?..answer BOTH are according to context.

The REALITY, Fresco, is that the when you are gardening, it may appear to you that the sun moves across the sky…but the REALITY is that it is an illusion. You do not truly KNOW it, because it is not the truth to be known. The Earth, spinning on its axis causes the illusion. No matter the illusion…the REALITY is that the Earth spins on its axis…and the illusion is that from the perspective of a viewer on Earth, it seems as though the sun is moving around the Earth. One is reality; one is illusion.

Quote:

NB That was not so much an appeal to authority as a statement that there are many "big thinkers" on my page.

I think it was more an “appeal to authority” than my earlier comments are “begging the question” as you charged. In any case, I think a reasonable argument can be made that this last comment of yours is also a form of “an appeal to authority”…albeit a more subtle form.

2 Replies

@fresco,

I have read many of the replies you recently left and I do wish that Frank and Setanta would reconsider them because I do think you have a good ground to stand on with what you are saying.

I was not aware of that with the doctors but I am sure there were many other things thought to be absolute truths as well.

Quote:

I "know" the sun moves across the sky when I'm gardening,

I am not sure if that is a reality but it does look as if that is what is happening even though the sun is not really moving.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

reasoning logic wrote:

I am not sure if that is a reality but it does look as if that is what is happening even though the sun is not really moving.

The sun is moving, it's highly volatile, and isn't the universe expanding?

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

I was meaning in reference to what was being seen in the sky silly.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

As opposed to the sun being where?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

The REALITY, Fresco, is that the when you are gardening, it may appear to you that the sun moves across the sky…but the REALITY is that it is an illusion. You do not truly KNOW it, because it is not the truth to be known. The Earth, spinning on its axis causes the illusion. No matter the illusion…the REALITY is that the Earth spins on its axis…and the illusion is that from the perspective of a viewer on Earth, it seems as though the sun is moving around the Earth. One is reality; one is illusion.

Wow I see we were both on the same page but you had posted yours 20 minutes before me. I guess it took me a long time to read and post.

I am certain that fresco is well aware about the sun but it is always fun to trip up a fellow thinker on reality

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

I'm not just getting on your back on this RL, just pointing out how reality can seem so elusive. You stated that in reality the sun isn't moving, that it's the Earth spinning on it's axis that causes it appear to move across the sky, but the sun is moving, admittedly not anywhere near as much as it appears to be.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Check out the basic physics Frank. They both revolve about a common axis according to the equation ! Which brings out the point that "reality" in physics ( a specialist context)is about the predictive power and "beauty" of the equations. Your word "illusion" could equally apply to the lay-concept of the ontological independence of objects because the"cognitive science" has shown this to be empirically false.

There is no intellectual mileage in my knocking down your layman's points one by one like a high school teacher. Your "self" concept is tied into an "independent reality" relationship and you have a vested interest in maintaining the integrity of such a relationship. I will close this non-discussion by merely pointing out that the dissolution of psychologically damaging "integrity relationships" ( e.g "self as victim of the world") is one practical psychiatric offshoot of the views I have described. That is obviously. not to say your "self concept" falls within that category, but that your usage of the word "illusion" is hopelessly simplistic. It takes a bit of courage to move on from there !

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Reality is embedded in context Izzy. "Knowing" is about predicting within that context. The gardener "knows where the sun is going to go" even without having to bother his head with the concept of a mathematically more elegant heliocentric universe (which some posters think has non paradigmatic status !)...and that gardener's contextual knowledge is good enough for the task at hand. The word "illusion" is totally inappropriate. It has "gone on holiday"(Wittgenstein) from its astronomical context.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

The sun's movement is not making the illusion that is fresco was describing but we all know that everyone here should be well aware of that. I was just kidding with fresco on what appeared to be a slip up on his part about reality.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

The sun's movement is not making the illusion that is fresco was describing but we all know that everyone here should be well aware of that. I was just kidding with fresco on what appeared to be a slip up on his part about reality.

I'm not just getting on your back on this RL, just pointing out how reality can seem so elusive. You stated that in reality the sun isn't moving, that it's the Earth spinning on it's axis that causes it appear to move across the sky, but the sun is moving, admittedly not anywhere near as much as it appears to be.

Sounds good to me.

0 Replies

Reality from the view point of theists

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know