Your definition of existence and reality?

in your opinion, what is the definition of existance? how can something be said to "exist", or be said to be "real"? what are the qualities of something you perceive as "real"?

in my opinion, if you say that that something is real if you can taste it, if you can touch it, if you can see it, then your definition of reality is merely the signals you interpriet with your brain, and therefore coulden't your whole reality be a fabrication, isn't that possible? nay, probable?

anyway, don't get intimidated, let's just get some thinking going :jointsmile:

I'm up for learning a bit too.

Maybe the question shouldn't be whether anything is real, but whether it's real in the way that you think it is.

This reminds me of a Rush song:

I am born.
I am me.
I am new.
I am free.
I'm together.
I'm apart.
I'm forever,
at the start.

Still, I am.

yeah but is it real if we can't experience it? i am not talking about god or anything, but what is there were things that could be proven to exist (through quantum science and such), but we could never percieve in our lifetimes, like alternate dementions?

Let us think, we are always thinking I think therefore I am. At the cogito we can begin. I know i exist because i am thinking. What is real? Here are my hands, that i type with, i know them to be real and under my control, not under control of an alien or demonic monstrosity. Do we percieve objects directly or indirectly, through sense data? Is red, really red? ;)

Its so easy to get caught up in trying to perceive the unknown. I tend to think reality is a condition we (our subconsious) create ourselves. If by real you mean we can taste it, touch it, and see it. How do you know what you are actually seeing, tasting, or touching is real? How do you know it is not an image or "simulated sense" created by our brains? We see color but that is really just light reflection off the surface of what is there and depending on which spectrums of light that object absorbs/reflects is the color we see. How o we know that color exists? Reality is something that our brains cannot fully perceive which is why it is such a vague thing. And does something have to be real to exist? Are ideas in your head real? Are hallucinations real? I mean if you see them.. taste them.. hear them.. would that make it based in reality. I have thought about this most of my life and have concluded that there is either no answer or to know the true answer would crush everything thats you know. Ignorance is bliss... But who knows. The unknown is a mysterious and scary thing. If the truth was devastating would you still want to know? Say we weren't "real" would you just go on with your life as if nothing changed?

It is difficult to define reality as it is mainly based on our perception of the world around us, I think therefore i am

To me reality can be studied in a lab. Take for example quantum physics: Quantum scientists will tell you that if you claim to know anything about quantum physics you really know nothing about quantum, however it is still studied in a lab-proving its reality. Gravity and magnetism can be studied in a lab. All things we can't see but know exist. Not to say there aren't things we haven't discovered yet. But I certainly am not going to believe it until its discovered and studied.

existance is a concept, reality is a concept, life is a concept.
we are the deffenitions of these concepts.

we live within the concept of infinity, existance, life, and reality; just a part of the infinite all, a part of the whole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

Let us think, we are always thinking I think therefore I am. At the cogito we can begin. I know i exist because i am thinking. What is real? Here are my hands, that i type with, i know them to be real and under my control, not under control of an alien or demonic monstrosity. Do we percieve objects directly or indirectly, through sense data? Is red, really red? ;)

---

There is thought. Is that the beginning? Let's consider this. There is information. A flimsy concept, but for the purposes of the discussion it will do. On one level, reality is information. It does not exist as sights, sounds, colors, smells, or tactile objects. There is awareness. This awareness is a reflection of the 'information' level of reality; information is passed through the body's senses and is reflected into the brain by electrical signals. These signals are filtered immensely, and then reconstructed into a form that can be percieved; as electrical signals are reconstructed into images and sound that are percieved when a TV is flicked on.

It is at this level that information becomes what is commonly called 'reality'; sights, sounds, smells, color, texture, space, lines, borders, etc. Then this perception is reflected and filtered again into concepts and constructs, into thoughts and also, more abstractly, into emotions. Often, thoughts are further filtered and simplified into symbols known as language.

Thoughts are reflections of reflections; words reflections of reflected reflections. Throughout all of this, the different levels of reality remain intact and exist simultaneously. Thoughts exist on the level of unfiltered information, as well as on the level which they are percieved. The words being taken off of this page and re-structured into concepts exist simultaneously as thought and information.

Now, what I'm driving at is this: What gives the impression that any level of reality, whether filtered or unfiltered, is possesed by something called 'I'? What is this 'I' that that the existence of thought assumedly proves the existence of? Is 'I' made up of the reflections themselves? Or, perhaps, is 'I' the filtration system? What has us convinced that 'perception' is different from 'perceiver'? Where exactly does this separation take place?

You've been watching too much Matrix man... makes for fun discussion though! :)

trippy stuff... I am a concept and information... wow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Earthy Dank

trippy stuff... I am a concept and information... wow

---

Don't be too certain of anything. ;) Keep questioning... too many people have closed their accounts with reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by afghooey

There is thought. Is that the beginning? Let's consider this. There is information. A flimsy concept, but for the purposes of the discussion it will do. On one level, reality is information. It does not exist as sights, sounds, colors, smells, or tactile objects. There is awareness. This awareness is a reflection of the 'information' level of reality; information is passed through the body's senses and is reflected into the brain by electrical signals. These signals are filtered immensely, and then reconstructed into a form that can be percieved; as electrical signals are reconstructed into images and sound that are percieved when a TV is flicked on.

It is at this level that information becomes what is commonly called 'reality'; sights, sounds, smells, color, texture, space, lines, borders, etc. Then this perception is reflected and filtered again into concepts and constructs, into thoughts and also, more abstractly, into emotions. Often, thoughts are further filtered and simplified into symbols known as language.

Thoughts are reflections of reflections; words reflections of reflected reflections. Throughout all of this, the different levels of reality remain intact and exist simultaneously. Thoughts exist on the level of unfiltered information, as well as on the level which they are percieved. The words being taken off of this page and re-structured into concepts exist simultaneously as thought and information.

Now, what I'm driving at is this: What gives the impression that any level of reality, whether filtered or unfiltered, is possesed by something called 'I'? What is this 'I' that that the existence of thought assumedly proves the existence of? Is 'I' made up of the reflections themselves? Or, perhaps, is 'I' the filtration system? What has us convinced that 'perception' is different from 'perceiver'? Where exactly does this separation take place?

---

:clap::clap::clap:
If don Juan Matus would read this, he certainly would smile... You put it very well... i agree whole-heartedly, and couldnt have written it any better.
Anyway... as most people dont think in such ways, i prefer to say that reality is what one believes that is real. Each one percieves the world through its own mind, and each mind have its own notion of what is real for it, so each one thinks some things are real and others are not.
As the mind of people are different, what is real for one may not be real for other. But we cant make other people percieve the world in the same way we do, and is meaningless to discuss which way is "better", as the way to perceive the world is a personal matter. For each people, its own way of percieving is the "right", and so, its the "real".
IMHO, i agree completly with the view of Afghooey. But, is only my own (and his) view. Its right and real for me, but it may be crazy for somebody else.

I believe reality to exist independantly of humanity.

good topic..ill try to post later

we exsist, simply as we percieve we exsist, i do not know how animals percieve, or even other humans. There is an entire universe, all around us, happening without much connection to us, except our interactions with it. We are born, learn, live, and die... the end

ther is no magic, only facts, what you can't understand, can be explained logically... it just might take enlightenment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

I believe reality to exist independantly of humanity.

---

I understand. Everybody sees Real TV, but, it's taped. You're not actually seeing it happen. And then you just saw it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

I believe reality to exist independantly of humanity.

---

Can you expand on this? In what way is humanity separated from reality?

i think therefore i am
i see therefore i believe
i feel therefore i know

reality is the surroundings and conditions put on you (check out platos cave)
existance is your take on your percivement of reality and own processes

i guess there is no definative.

i think to exist is to know you exist on some level. wether this is just an automated idea of survival or a deep philosophical understanding.

wether or not we do exist or reality is a mirage. it is real as it is the only reality and existance we have

peace

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reefer Rogue

I believe reality to exist independantly of humanity.

---

Well... its a belief shared by many... but its only a belief. I think we will never know for sure if its so or not , because we only percieve reality through our "human-ness", we only percieve the reality as human beings. As there is no way to abandon our human-ness to percieve the reality, there is no way to know for sure if the reality we percieve as humans depends or not of our human condition.



PS. Ok... don Juan teached Castaneda how to percieve the world like a crow does, but i think most people wont even believe or concieve that its possible... so i think this fact is not of much use here...

you know i was going to say, my definitions are the same.... but...

i believe in karma, and i can't touch it, or see it.... so i really don't know how to answer that question.....

reality tho, is easy.... anything that can be proved without a doubt.... reality is something you can touch, see, feel, hear, smell or whatever... something that is tangible and right there....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slipknotpsycho

you know i was going to say, my definitions are the same.... but...

i believe in karma, and i can't touch it, or see it.... so i really don't know how to answer that question.....

reality tho, is easy.... anything that can be proved without a doubt.... reality is something you can touch, see, feel, hear, smell or whatever... something that is tangible and right there....

---

I think that's a good definition and a bad definition, depending on the stance you take.

There are lots of things that exist in reality that we can't sense, like frequencies above 20000hz for hearing, ultraviolet light for sight, but we have instruments to detect them.

But since we're relying on these senses to perceive the world, how trustworthy are they? We're only sensing a small picture of what the world is really like. maybe we trust out senses too much, and the world and reality are entirely different than we perceive it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hardcore Newbie

I think that's a good definition and a bad definition, depending on the stance you take.

There are lots of things that exist in reality that we can't sense, like frequencies above 20000hz for hearing, ultraviolet light for sight, but we have instruments to detect them.

But since we're relying on these senses to perceive the world, how trustworthy are they? We're only sensing a small picture of what the world is really like. maybe we trust out senses too much, and the world and reality are entirely different than we perceive it.

---

but those can still be proved.... i'm sure you know what i meant....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slipknotpsycho

but those can still be proved.... i'm sure you know what i meant....

---

Yes... but we only can search and try to prove the existence of things we think that exist.
If someone dont even concieve the possibility of existence of something, they will never try to prove or disprove that this thing exists or not.
So, our senses and our minds limits what we search for, and so, limit what we actually can know.

I think the world (universe) would continue to exist regardelsss of me presence inside of it. We are in time. There was a beginning, we are in the middle and eventually, there shall be an end. An end to each and every one of us, one by one, day by day.

Also remember that there are different phases of reality. We have physical reality, ie we can see, touch, feel, smell, etc... We have mental reality, a persons perception of reality is dependent on a persons ability and/or inability to think. And there is also metaphysical reality, which is something derived from emotion and feeling (cannot be proven). Our mental perception of the world, along with our physical surroundings and our spiritual opinions can all change reality for each individual. Which is why the answer to the question will never be solved. I, for example, will not believe in something until it has been proven, others may find it quite easy to believe in things they cannot see. Reality is relative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeedTillDeath

To me reality can be studied in a lab. Take for example quantum physics: Quantum scientists will tell you that if you claim to know anything about quantum physics you really know nothing about quantum, however it is still studied in a lab-proving its reality. Gravity and magnetism can be studied in a lab. All things we can't see but know exist. Not to say there aren't things we haven't discovered yet. But I certainly am not going to believe it until its discovered and studied.

---

Quantum Physicists quote the Heisenberg uncertainty principle when they say that to some degree, you can know the position of an electron, but you cannot know its velocity. Or, you can know its velocity, but not its position. You will always be unsure of it, you can never be certain, because an electron can act like a wave of energy, or a particle with mass. Electrons/Electricity can bounce off objects like insulators (i.e., rubber around a wire), or act like energy waves (i.e., light bulbs).

As for perceptions of reality, such things are subjective, as anyone who has had a vivid dream can tell you. Most people will see reality in terms of their own experience, a subjective viewpoint, or an emotional one. The best way to know how you feel about reality, or to know if something is real, is to look at a situation that DOES NOT AFFECT YOU.

You will be less interested in such an event, i.e., the proverbial tree falling in the forest with no one around to hear it. However, you still retain the option of seeing if the tree fell or not. Now, whether or not it affects you in the purest sense is debatable. You still had to take up your own time to see if the tree fell or not, and what if you had gotten hurt in the forest? It would seem more "real," would it not?

Even when we observe the stars we cannot be certain of a star's position, because light bends when it is near gravity. So, all of our perceptions of reality are subjective.

I cannot think of a single way to objectively or logically prove
that I myself exist.

We can, however, prove existence in various contexts, save for the ultimate context - Identity. That is the real question, does my IDENTITY exist, do I have meaning?

I could prove that I exist in at least one mathematical dimension by using my finger to connect two dots on a paper. That proves I exist one dimensionally. If I stand outside and I have a shadow, that proves that I have at least two dimensions. If I can drink water, and hold volume, that proves I exist in three dimensions. But how satisfying is that? Not much.

I think that when we ask ourselves how we perceive existence, We are also asking, in the philosophical sense, do we exist, do we have a purpose?

If I had to ask If I had a purpose, I would say yes. And that purpose is to improve myself.

we define existence in our own ways with our own actions; our actions are the deffenitions of our (personal) existance(s).