Real is Rare

1. 66

   Jessie L Watsonposted 6 years ago

   Concepts, constructs, conflations, construals, axioms, ideas, beliefs, schemes, language, words, terms, descriptions, definitions, nomenclature, nomology, function, and symbols are all mental representations of the world. We use them to generate theories that ultimately structure the way in which we experience reality. What you know, or what you believe you know, alters how the world looks to you and how you behave in it. The bitter pill is: none of these accurately represent what's actually "out there". Most of these impressions are just cobbled together bits of information that we use as heuristics (rules of thumb) to move through the world rather than making cold calculations every step of the way. We really are living in a self-generated fantasy. We impose our will onto reality which has already been pre-structured by what we've imposed or experienced in the past.
   
   There are ways around that but it requires rigorous discipline in logic, reason, and the cultivation of insight through practices like deep reading, writing, meditation, and introspection. Otherwise, we stumble around in the dark with constantly outdated information. These are the truths of the human condition that I contend with on a daily basis.
   
   Every truly dedicated thinker risks losing their sanity at least once in their life, or, perhaps, risks the sanity of the people with whom they influence. But, I would argue that these uncomfortable revelations are ultimately desirable to us as a species. Seeing the world more clearly helps us solve problems.
   
   Copernicus: "The math works better with the sun at the center..."
   
   The World: *mind explodes, then ushers in the scientific revolution over the next several hundred years...*

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Paul K Francisposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I think that there is more to reality than what meets the brain. This is, in a way, a good thing because it means that there is more out there to be discovered, or better yet, uncovered by us and future generations. And sometimes it can be helpful to throw a little imagination into the mix. Enjoyed reading, thanks.

      replyreport
      1. 66

         Jessie L Watsonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         +1

         replyreport
2. 60

   ChesterMBANGCHIAposted 6 years ago

   No matter the concepts, words, theories, etc., what is, is and what is not, is not. That's the impression I have, after reading your hub. However, my worry is this: who determines what's right and what's wrong?

   replyreport
   1. 66

      Jessie L Watsonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      No one outside the individual would be my answer to your question. And that's not to be meant in a relativistic way - that we are somehow the arbiters of truth because we can subjectively decide that it is so. Further, If what an individual does is universally "good" for them, their family, and the world at large simultaneously, then we might be able to entertain what is ultimately right or wrong. It's not a verbal contract of others that make reality, its the consequences of our individual choices that affect the entire network. If that wasn't complicated enough, calculating the degree to which a choice is good or bad is no easy task either because things may seem horrible in the short term but profoundly beneficial in the long-term...
      
      I guess we'd also have to have a conversation about the difference between what is "real" versus what is true...

      replyreport
3. 60

   ChesterMBANGCHIAposted 6 years ago

   I have this "conviction" that man can easily decipher what's true and not what's real. What makes something true is the summation of assumptions and complacencies that have metamorphosed into " subjective truth". Such may and may not be real. However, what Is "real" cannot be deciphered by man in this physical realm. In that case, then, the world has, for ages, depended on what's true and maybe, not what's real.
   Reality and truth, to some extent, are intersubjective constructions because truth relies more on appearance and reality is no more than the similarity between various subjective projections.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      Jessie L Watsonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I have this "conviction" that man can easily decipher what's true and not what's real
      
      I think what you're describing is this intuition that we have. Something like an existent but not-yet accessible apprehension of something. I can't remember which Greek philosopher who it was that said "learning is remembering".
      
      I also get the sense that some truth can be apprehended in a vague way, like that of what a blind person might imagine his house to look like based on the mere textual and auditory data he receives. In his mind's eye, he has a pretty good sense of what is there. I feel like we can do this with some of the more mysterious riddles of the universe. Art has a way of skirting the edge of these major unknowns...

      replyreport