Lying

Forums:
Email this Topic • Print this Page

I've been wondering why lying is even possible lately. Why would I be able to even perceive something that is not true?

A thought on it. Lets say that I am the original-objective-conscious-truth, behind our reality, and I am drowning in my own loneliness so I decide to create the illusion of subjectivity for myself. Would this deception constitute the original lie which makes all others possible? I suppose that would make all of reality a lie anyway......

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 259 • Replies: 6

No top replies

@isaakleslie,

isaakleslie wrote:

I've been wondering why lying is even possible lately. Why would I be able to even perceive something that is not true?

A thought on it. Lets say that I am the original-objective-conscious-truth, behind our reality, and I am drowning in my own loneliness so I decide to create the illusion of subjectivity for myself. Would this deception constitute the original lie which makes all others possible? I suppose that would make all of reality a lie anyway......

Subjectivity isn't equal to a lie.

A lie is a statement made counter to reality.

Subjectivity isn't decided by the observer. Instead it's assumed only the observer has experienced reality to be the way it is perceived.

You can't lie about reality and make it true. Any statement made that contradicts reality is false.

Therefore there is no original lie in subjective reality. You either see reality for what it is or you become delusional.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Well that leaves us all delusional on some level. What is the precedent for false perceptions though, and also is perception not part of reality?

1 Reply

@isaakleslie,

isaakleslie wrote:

Well that leaves us all delusional on some level. What is the precedent for false perceptions though, and also is perception not part of reality?

Well at first I only thought you were asking me to dip my toes into philosophy and now you ask a question that requires swimming in it.

If you see hilucinatons are they real? Is essentially what you are asking.

By definition they are not.

Philosophically it can't really be determined.

The reason is we are using comparative brains.

person A sees a "ghost"
Person B doesn't see the "ghost".

Which saw reality and which had the hallucination?

Its possible only person A had some unknown ability to allow them to precieve ghosts.

But that only opens the Pandora box of philosophy.

0 Replies

Perception is really the route of the problem here for me. I can't wrap my mind around the idea that the mind is not bound to the same laws of the physical world that the body is. Free will of the mind to perceive and communicate both reality and delusion, as you call it, is confounding. It almost seems like evidence that the mind and body exist within two intersecting realities that have completely different rules. Or possibly the reality the mind exists in has no rules.

1 Reply

@isaakleslie,

isaakleslie wrote:

Perception is really the route of the problem here for me. I can't wrap my mind around the idea that the mind is not bound to the same laws of the physical world that the body is. Free will of the mind to perceive and communicate both reality and delusion, as you call it, is confounding. It almost seems like evidence that the mind and body exist within two intersecting realities that have completely different rules. Or possibly the reality the mind exists in has no rules.

I wouldn't exactly say no rules but far less than the body yes. However are the things the mind can do actual things that are really breaking the same rules?

For example can you have two thoughts simultaneously?

How fast is a thought?

The thing here is the mind can hold two contradictory statements as both being true. How can that be?

Just because you can imagine floating in the air with your mind does that really mean floating?

Perception is difficult to address because we are talking about how data is obtained and sorted out in the brain with other baggage dumped on it as well. We can't really be certain about our perceptions which is why we rely on a collective whole of majority agreed upon observation must be objective experience then.

If we didn't have this we couldn't even communicate.

For example the word "tree" in your brain and mine have an agreed upon definition however; you might visually see in your mind a different shape, color, or type than I do. Or perhaps mistake the word for a different meaning all together.

1 Reply

@Krumple,

Are you saying far less rules or different rules? Because if the body and mind exist completely within the same reality then should they not be bound to the same rules in their entirety? Or is perception the force that binds the body to the universal laws that we perceive?

0 Replies

Forums
» Lying

Read Question
Reply to All

Lying

Quick Links

My Account

able2know