Can we ever really know reality?

@Frank Apisa,

What you say to Carlos is much worse than Fresco's designating you philosophically FOOLish.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

What you say to Carlos is much worse than Fresco's designating you philosophically FOOLish.

We disagree on that.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Carlos...as respectfully as possible: You simply are not equipped for this discussion. You ought really to try some other subject.

I am sure that what I will say to you is not disrespect, because it is based in your sad reality of you ignoring what reality is: You really need mental heath treatment..

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

I am saying that whatever REALITY is...it IS.

It is a tautology.

"A tautology (from Greek το αυτο, "the same" and λόγος, "word/idea") is a logical argument constructed in such a way, generally by repeating the same concept or assertion using different phrasing or terminology, that the proposition as stated is logically irrefutable, while obscuring the lack of evidence or valid reasoning supporting the stated conclusion." --wiki

3 Replies

@Razzleg,

Excellent!

0 Replies

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

Frank reduced his argument to "Whatever is...is". I think he can reduce it further to the "valley girl" thesis of: "Whatever!"

Good one. 'Whatever' does sum up Frank's 'philosophy' pretty nicely...

1 Reply

@carloslebaron,

carloslebaron wrote:

Quote:
Carlos...as respectfully as possible: You simply are not equipped for this discussion. You ought really to try some other subject.

I am sure that what I will say to you is not disrespect, because it is based in your sad reality of you ignoring what reality is: You really need mental heath treatment..

I did not say it was not disrespect. In fact, the wording indicates that it is...but that I was trying to be temperate as possible.

Suggesting I need mental health treatment is also disrespect, but I am not going to blubber about it the way you seem to be doing.

I do not mind your disrespect...mostly because I do not especially respect your opinions. (That also is disrespect...but as temperate as I can make it.)

And I do not know what the true nature of REALITY is...even though you seem to think that I should...unless I am nuts. Which, of course, is the reason I think you are not equipped for this discussion.

0 Replies

@Razzleg,

Razzleg wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

I am saying that whatever REALITY is...it IS.

It is a tautology.

"A tautology (from Greek το αυτο, "the same" and λόγος, "word/idea") is a logical argument constructed in such a way, generally by repeating the same concept or assertion using different phrasing or terminology, that the proposition as stated is logically irrefutable, while obscuring the lack of evidence or valid reasoning supporting the stated conclusion." --wiki

Are you saying you do not think it to be a tautology, Razz?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

JLNobody wrote:

Frank reduced his argument to "Whatever is...is". I think he can reduce it further to the "valley girl" thesis of: "Whatever!"

Good one. 'Whatever' does sum up Frank's 'philosophy' pretty nicely...

Lame! But that is normal for you.

0 Replies

@Razzleg,

Quote:

tau·tol·o·gy
tôˈtäləjē

noun

the saying of the same thing twice in different words, generally considered to be a fault of style (e.g., they arrived one after the other in succession ).
synonyms: pleonasm, repetition, reiteration, redundancy, superfluity, duplication

"avoid such tautology as "let's all work together, everyone, as a team" by saying simply "let's work together""

a phrase or expression in which the same thing is said twice in different words.

plural noun: tautologies

LOGIC
a statement that is true by necessity or by virtue of its logical form.

That is my point when I use it. Some people like to argue that reality is whatever anyone says it is; some that each person has his/her own reality; some that reality is subjective...

...I am saying that I do not know what the REALITY is (and suspect neither does anyone else)...

...but whatever it IS...it IS.

So I ask again, do you think it is not a tautology?

Or if you think it is...do you think there is something wrong with it being offered?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank, you say that you do not know what reality is. I agree that it is profoundly mysterious as some kind objective, absolute, ultimate phenomenon, as if it were the experience or perspective of some kind of omnicience God. Subjectivists, like your's truly, suggest (i.e., argue meekly) that all we can know of "reality" (a human construct) is what our perspectives permit--and that's an objective fact.

Let me further suggest that it is no coincidence that my view is similar to the Hindu (not the Buddhist*) position that all subjective perspectives of distinct Atmans are, as concrete/phenomenal or experiences of, reality. In other words, they constitute in the aggregate ultimate reality, i.e., the "worldview" of (a somewhat anthropomorphized) Brahman or "God".
*(The Buddha's rejection of all separate Atmans--the position called "anatman"--constitutes a rejection of egocentric perspectives, at least that's how I understand it)

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

Frank, you say that you do not know what reality is.

Actually, what I say is that I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence.

I also do not know why people refuse to quote what I actually say...rather than paraphrasing it.

Can you enlighten me on either of those things, JL?

Quote:

I agree that it is profoundly mysterious as some kind objective, absolute, ultimate phenomenon, as if it were the experience or perspective of some kind of omnicience (sic) God.

I think it is profoundly mysterious no matter what...and especially no matter what some people want to guess about it.

Quote:

Subjectivists, like yours truly, suggest (i.e., argue meekly) that all we can know of "reality" (a human construct) is what our perspectives permit--and that's an objective fact.

As you know, I am of the opinion that "the true nature of the REALITY of existence"...is an objective thing. Whatever actually IS...IS. It may be...as you assert above "a human construct"...but humans may be so inconsequential to reality that thinking our constructs actually say anything about it...is presumptuous.

Now I know some people here have problems with the word "is"...and some people actually want to assume that what we "perceive" is the reality...but it may be the reality only insofar as it is a perception of an illusion of reality...

...which I see as coming full circle to "I do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence"...and I suspect neither does anyone else.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I'm sorry that we are responding not to your positions but to our falsifications of them. I'm sure we do that to all our A2K colleagues regularly. I have to go out now, but I do want to respond further. I just want to be sure that you know my last post referred to a grand religious METAPHOR of the ultimate nature of Reality.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I think it is profoundly mysterious no matter what...and especially no matter what some people want to guess about it.

The screamingly obvious point is that if you agree that reality is "mysterious" , you are in fact defining as "unknowable". THAT is the essence of your vacuous tautology. In Lancashire we would say, you have said "bugger all" ! (to which I would add "as usual")

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

I'm sorry that we are responding not to your positions but to our falsifications of them.

Sounds like a bit of sarcasm there, JL...but I would suggest that if you quote what I actually say...you can respond to that rather than to what you want me to have said. Then there would be no reason for me to protest...or for you to offer sarcasm. If that was not offered as sarcasm, I apologize.

Quote:

I'm sure we do that to all our A2K colleagues regularly.

I do not know about that, but I try to avoid it like the plague. (I am not always successful, but I do give it my best.) Most of the time you can tell exactly what I am addressing, because I quote the exact words I am dealing with. (Like here...and my previous posts.)

Quote:

I have to go out now, but I do want to respond further. I just want to be sure that you know my last post referred to a grand religious METAPHOR of the ultimate nature of Reality.

Not sure what that means, but I hope you explain it when you get back.

0 Replies

@fresco,

fresco wrote:

Quote:
I think it is profoundly mysterious no matter what...and especially no matter what some people want to guess about it.

The screamingly obvious point is that if you agree that reality is "mysterious" , you are in fact defining as "unknowable".

Ah, so in your world...something mysterious is unknowable.

Well, be that as it may...the fact is that I think the true nature of the REALITY of existence...is almost certainly unknowable to humans. If I am wrong...I am wrong.

Quote:

THAT is the essence of your vacuous tautology. In Lancashire we would say, you have said "bugger all" ! (to which I would add "as usual")

And if that makes you feel better...be my guest. I truly do not care what you think of me or my comments...and frankly, the pretension and affectation driving most of your comments just make me laugh.

2 Replies

What I really want to know is:

Can we ever really know if we can really know if we can ever really know reality?

My instinct is to vote 'No', but 'Yes' is also cool, and I am not certain we can actually know the answer to that question anyway...

;-)

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

I think that's a subjective-objective experience.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Can we ever really know if we can really know if we can ever really know reality?

Ask Frank. The answer is "a real mystery" or maybe the real answer is " a mystery" !

3 Replies

@fresco,

A mystereal, therefore.

0 Replies

Can we ever really know reality?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know