@JLNobody,
Are you suggesting that "reality" is a concept which figures in non-human communication ? I do not mean
anthropomorhically applicable to non-humans
by humans (as in birds luring predators away from their nests).
I would argue that the
word "reality"
only arises in everyday transactions where there are possible alternatives as to "what is the case", and that "is-ness" is always functionally contextual or paradigmatic.
Consider an couple example to illustrate the point.
I buy a car from a third party. On day one the "reality" of my ownership is undisputed hence the concept never surfaces. Suppose two days later the police call and inform me the car was stolen. Only then does the issue of "realty of ownership" becomes an issue, Or alternatively, two days later, the car rolls off a cliff and the "reality of ownership" takes on a different angle.
What these incidents have in common is that
my relationship with a thing has
changed.
But isn't such change in relationship with all
things inevitable according to the second law of thermodynamics (perhaps another human concept) ? What "IS the case" is always temporary. And is such a conclusion "the ultimate reality" ? ...Not if we consider the second law to be a human construct about the nature of a thing we call "order ", for surely "order" is always contextual to human purpose too. Note too the religious claim/need for a "permanent deity" to
fix their reality.
