Does Reality Objectively Exist?

1. 64

   PhoenixVposted 7 years ago

   Does Reality Objectively Exist?
   
   Provide proof.

   replyreport
2. 67

   Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years ago

   does reality exists Without the Contamination of people's individual perceptions? Sure it does......
   
   If a people believes fires to be surreal, they could still be burnt by a flame whether or not they believe in fire.
   
   PAIN IS Objective.........

   replyreport
   1. 78

      dashingscorpioposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I imagine the pain would change their perception thus creating a new reality for them. At one time the world was factually known to be flat until someone sailed around it without falling off the edge. Whatever is impossible today may be possible

      replyreport
   2. 67

      Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      so your saying reality can"t exist without people's perceptions?

      replyreport
   3. 78

      dashingscorpioposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'm saying reality is combination of one's known experiences, beliefs, and their perception. If you lived in a remote place and were on your deathbed without ever seeing or hearing about airplanes then in (your reality) planes do not exist.

      replyreport
   4. 46

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Strange about pain. We have a built in system that increases tolerance to it over time. I am not so sure that we cannot "mind over matter" it's existence. Certainly with drugs pain changes - does the reality of the pain?

      replyreport
   5. 67

      Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      But dashing that does not mean that airplanes don't exists. U see reality is not individual perception. The question above is above is about subjectivity vs objectivity and objectivity always wins. Our personal beliefs don't matter: WHAT IS ALWAYS IS

      replyreport
   6. 78

      dashingscorpioposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Dwight I get where you're coming from. However it's because (we) live in a "shared world" where there is proof of airplanes. If you never seen or heard of them as you lay there dying (your reality) and your perception would be different.

      replyreport
   7. 67

      Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I see U say U understand me, okay.........but we're still saying different things I believe.
      I, don't think that reality has ANYTHING to do with people.
      But U do......(am I right?)
      I think that's where the difference lies.

      replyreport
   8. 46

      Ericdierkerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It is cool that we use a language to communicate with each other. "reality" is one of the words. Juries decide the truth. Why do we have twelve of them? A husband and wife joint reality is different than their separate realities.

      replyreport
   9. 78

      dashingscorpioposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      We're saying different things because you're not putting yourself in the place of someone who (lacks awareness) of airplanes. You're viewing the world from an (all knowing) or big picture perspective. I'm talking about (his) perspective.

      replyreport
   10. 67

       Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years agoin reply to this

       mhh Ur right dashing........that's what I'm doing. But isn't that the okay way to look at it? shouldn't there just be one reality? Where we all look at it in different ways. Like opera; different individual perceptions but it's Still Opera.

       replyreport
3. 78

   dashingscorpioposted 7 years ago

   
   
   "Perception is reality."
   Whatever (you believe) to be true is true to (you).
   Someone says: "The world is going to hell in a hand basket!"
   And yet another person {on the same planet} is having the best time of their life! Which one is "reality"?
   It depends on who's shoes you're in.
   Does time really exist? or Is it manmade?
   We measure it by looking at things. Does a tree know it's Tuesday?
   When someone says: "Today (feels) like a Saturday."
   The assumption is we're all in agreement with what Saturday feels like. Our beliefs and perceptions determine (our) reality.
   Generally speaking "reality" is whatever the majority agree upon. Whenever something changes our perception we have a new reality.

   replyreport
   1. 67

      Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      ?

      replyreport
   2. 65

      tsadjatkoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Yes Dwight, "?" is correct. Try hard as you may you will never make sense of that kind of thinking because it is insanity, to believe it "requires a willing suspension of disbelief." Odd isn't it, Hiliary (the liar in chief) said it best.

      replyreport
   3. 56

      JJ McHaleposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Dwight & Tsad.  Really gentlemen?  Perhaps too many ?? just exposes lack of wisdom & creativity? (Insanity?) R U qualified to diagnose or simply relating on a personal level? Hillary? How does she come in here??  Hope U can do better.

      replyreport
   4. 65

      tsadjatkoposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Really JJ?if u don't know that is a famous quote of Hiliary's to General Petraeus when questioning him then I'd say u are out of touch& if you ascribe to DS's definition of reality,well that goes a long way to explaining your comment.

      replyreport
   5. 56

      JJ McHaleposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Not a fan of Hillary. She's irrelevant & speaks jibberish. Wouldn't waste my time quoting her.  A lot of time on UR hands?  Congratulations. U ascribe as U choose. I ascribe as I choose. Check UR map.  This is America. No dictators, Sir.

      replyreport
4. 65

   tsadjatkoposted 7 years ago

   
   
   Dr. Robert Lanza Named One of TIME Magazine’s 100 Most Influential People in the World has written a book called "BIOCENTRISM."
   
   Consider a theory where biology & life are central to being, reality & the cosmos.
   Biocentrism is a new “Theory of Everything” proposed by American scientist Robert Lanza. Biocentrism declares that present theories of the physical world don't work, and can't ever be made to work, until they fully account for life & consciousness!
   
   Stem cell pioneer Robert Lanza has been on the frontier of cloning and stem cells for more than a decade, a genius of first magnitude. His book basically explains a theory that what we view as reality doesn't exist outside of life & consciousness. The biocentric universe is an intriguing theory that may help answer some of the biggest questions in science. Just visit Lanza's website and watch all the videos, it may change your entire perspective of reality, life
   http://www.robertlanzabiocentrism.com/
   and life after death.
   https://youtu.be/aXZOhqbQsOw

   replyreport
5. 84

   tsmogposted 7 years ago

   Objectively means based on facts and is unbiased. It is not based on personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice. Another meaning is "intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings".
   
   The question itself is reality. So, in essence any answer from one's own thoughts will not qualify as an appropriate answer for one's self. That is because it would be an interpretation of the reality of the question proposed itself. But, any answer read as content answering the question by a non-author is objective. In essence for 'readers' any answer other than there own is objective when used as objectively.
   
   However, for you, the author of the question, any answer would be objectively done . . . if read and done so with mutual exclusivity. In other words you own view would have to be considered null and void. So, we discover a conundrum with the reality of the question itself seeking objectively.
   
   For instance what occurs if 'you' as author reply to any given answer? Does that change the reality of the question? Does it taint 'your' position regard the reality of the question and as objectively? In essence replying if even a question or off topic there would be bias and the objectivity of the continuous reality of the 'another' answer of the question is at task. For that matter any opinion of any answer provided even with internal thoughts would be biased would it not? A conundrum? I dun'no . . . just idle thoughts offered.
   
   This reminds me, although may not parallel, a question once proposed. A glass enclosure is constructed. There is someone on the inside and there is someone on the outside. Where is reality for each person? From that comes is the inside on the outside or is the outside on the inside?

   replyreport
   1. 78

      dashingscorpioposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Facts are accepted via awareness) of them. At one time it was believed the world was flat until man learned it was indeed round. From a big picture view it was always (factually) round. They're no unicorns only because no one yet has seen one.

      replyreport
   2. 84

      tsmogposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Well said regard facts, yet remains provided is opinion regard objectively regard your 'self' and reality. There is bias present with the assertion being a truism and you as the authority. To be objectively for 'self' one cannot be the authority.

      replyreport
   3. 67

      Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      excellent TIM.
      Nice and deep.  It begs the question if anything can indeed be objective.........If we all have to  speak from a subjective standpoint.
      
      Good one......

      replyreport
   4. 84

      tsmogposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, Dwight I concur. Thus, your subjective reply has been validated with veracity as objective. Thus, as reality objectively exists. However, this one for me does not remaining subjectively . . . Perhaps? is cause for peer review . . .

      replyreport
   5. 67

      Dwight Phoenixposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      

      replyreport
6. 50

   bradmasterOCcalposted 7 years ago

   What difference would any answer make to change your experience in life today?

   replyreport
7. 0

   RTalloniposted 7 years ago

   Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes:  You can say a dog has 5 legs if you call the tail a leg, but that does not make the tail a leg.  A. Lincoln

   replyreport
8. 64

   Matthew Woolseyposted 7 years ago

   I don't think so. I wrote a hub called Ant Gods? Its about the different realities we life in like do we even exist in the ants reality or are we God's to them. As far as people are concerned we all see a different reality than each other what one person sees as normal may be horrible to another. Reality is one own perception of the world they live in. You may see a pastel blue sky, but I may see a baby blue sky. I hope this answer is good for you, but your reality may think it is a bad answer. Who knows ?

   replyreport
9. 64

   wingedcentaurposted 7 years ago

   You sound like someone who reads Philip K. Dick novels, as I do. But tell me: Are you sure that is the best phrasing of the question?
   
   What I mean to say is that your wording treats "reality" as some kind of localized object that we're trying to point to. The wording suggests that "it" is outside of ourselves.
   
   That is to say: Isn't the wording of your question sort of like asking if Santa Claus exists? With a question like that, a basis for an investigation is presented. We could, conceivably, investigate Santa Claus, you know, like those "History Detectives" on PBS, or something.
   
   Seriously, I am not disrespecting you or being facetious. I am completely in earnest. How would investigate reality?
   
   With Santa Claus, we have somewhere to start. He is said to hang out at the North Pole. How would we begin to "look for " reality. Even if we were dreaming "all of this," like on the Matrix, that would prove nothing.
   
   Dreams are thought to be a component of reality. The "reality" is that when we go to sleep at night, sometimes we dream. And dreams are said to be the subconscious trying to work certain things out---emotional/psychological stuff. So even if the way we are interacting now is a "dream," that would not change the fact that, as far as we know, "it" is based on the "reality" of the underlying emotional/psychological "stuff" we are trying to work out.
   
   Does that make sense?
   
   But then again, our "dreaming selves" might inhabit a universe in which different rules are operative, than the ones we "know" in "this dream." That is to say, perhaps in the "world" from whence we come, dreams are nothing but dreams. But I still think that there is something significant in the kinds of stories we tell ourselves---dreams can be thought of as story-telling.
   
   You know something? When you think about it, the question might not be: Does reality objectively exist? The real question might very well be: Does un-reality exist or Can we make our way to un-reality?

   replyreport
   1. 64

      Matthew Woolseyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      we al see different realties. How I see the world and you and every one else sees the world interprets it differently. what I mean is we all have a different option on how we see and understand things.

      replyreport
   2. 64

      wingedcentaurposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      The fact of different interpretation-generation, would seem to make the point about an underlying, existing objective reality. The objective reality is the thing generating different interpretations for different people.

      replyreport
10. 60

    Dr CHE Sadaphalposted 7 years ago

    Only if we objectively exist to use our senses as say reality objectively exists.

    replyreport