Does the past is real?

[sd6515]

I can start by saying that most scientist do not think that religon doesnt exist infact most the opposite. But when it really comes down to it reality is what you percive to be real and concrete so if you believe that we where just out on this earth with all memories and so forth "installed" in us then that is your reality same if you believe scientific proof, reality is subjective. However I choose to put my faith in science and religion and where they meet but even that is my own reality and belongs to only me. It is my "safe place" my reality not yours or anyone else and wouldn't impose it on anyone. And all aspects of life from perception of pain to perception of reality are yours to explore, accept and own. Perceptions of reality differ as much as perceptions of pain ex. I personally percive the pain of a tatoo as a slight discomfort and have gotten one in all of the most painful places from the most which contary to popular opinion is the center of the calf to the least right on the forearm, but just because the pain is nothing to me doesnt mean my wifes pain is ignorable or not valid and I belive the same is true when it come to perception of reality because it all comes down to perception who are we to even say that green to me is green to you as far as we percive it if i percive green as your red and red as your green when we both look as red we both percive it to be red because regardless of how we see it we have been taught that it is red so we say it is red. and on the other end if we choose to pervcive reality tv as real or an autobiography as real and truth then that is our reality and NO ONE has the right to judge our reality of anything and all should stand up and defend there reality I mean even schizos and such think what they see and hear is real and what right do we have to say it isn't when we can't see through there eyes and believe what they believe. Reality by definition is what you define as real and believe so in "reality" how can anyone judge, criticize or otherwise refute ones own perception of reality beyond comparing it to there own or societies general consensuses of what is real and what is stupid and delusional.
Sorry to go on and on but I feel to force anyones perception on anyone is inappropriate because the same way you feel towards there perceptions would in turn be the way they feel towards yours and our society as a society say that general consensus is right and if that were the case the usa wouldn't exist and the world would still be perceived as flat.

[Coelho]

Well... im sorry if i passed the impression that i was forcing my view of reality into anyone... that was not my remotest intention... i agree with you that reality for each one is what each one chooses to believe as "real".
I only wished to say that the common-sense reality, or the reality that most people shares, is not as real as we think it is. Only because we agree with the "reality" of it dont mean that its real.
Of course, most people chooses to believe that the reality shared by other people, the common-sense reality is real... its a personal choice, of course. But the mere fact that its the viewpoint adopted by most people dont mean thats the only one, or the right one. And so, it shoud not be forced into anyone, not even the schizos.

[sd6515]

I think we are on the same page and wasn't refering to you or anyone in paticular with my post just the way that society general percives that the general consenus is right and all others should "fall in line" from religion to colors even though they are rarely disputed but I feel obligated to say I definately was not speaking to anyone in particular especially not you.

[tha_green_ghost]

The past doesn't exist,....but it used to!:stoned:
Time doesn't exist either, it's just a way of keeping record.
There is only one instant which is "now" constantly/infinitely being renewed as the future .
Karma is created by the output of energy each action sets off.

This universe is basically a chaotic machine and no one knows where it came from but it had to have come from something ,that came from something etc...

However, the universe couldn't have just been created like a few minutes ago because the evidence and record of the "past" is still here and continues to be here in this instant.

P.S.Did that make any sense? I'm really stoned (haha)

[Hardcore Newbie]

The past doesn't exist,....but it used to!:stoned:
Time doesn't exist either, it's just a way of keeping record.
There is only one instant which is "now" constantly/infinitely being renewed as the future .

If the past no longer exists, what is it that makes it no longer exist, if not time?

Actually I maintain the opposite view, that the past exists forever. If the universe is in fact infinite, then the past travels throughout the universe, just as when we look into very distant galaxies, we actually see what these galaxies were like millions and even billions of years ago because of how long it takes light to travel.

So the past exists forever, it just depends on your vantage point.

[delusionsofNORMALity]

the past is a dream, the future is an old wives tale made up to get children to eat their vegetables and the present is too fleeting to be of much consequence. right now is already moment in the past that didn't even exist before we watched it slip away.

[imitator]

How do we know that we exist? How do we know, assuming that we do exist, that what we percieve around us is real?

There is never going to be a point in time where we can prove 100% that we are real, and that everything around us is real. We can come incredibly close, but again, no matter what, there will still be theories and possibilities which cant be proven/disproven, which means we cant know for certain.

The 5min theory, or Thursdayism, or any of the other variations are very plausible theories, which would be incredibly difficult to disprove in almost any scenario, because of how they frame the theory, and what the theory covers. If all your memories were inserted into you 5 minutes ago, even though you remember all these things, you just started to exist 5 minutes ago.

Its a perfect example of how flawed we as humans are, and how flawed all of our perceptions really are. Movies like Bladerunner and The Matrix really showcase these problems, although most people dont ever really look that deep into the movies to see the underlying theme. Hell, half the people I talk to never really thought into the Matrix at all, just thought it was a kickass sci-fi action film. /sigh

That being said, I think that the past is subjective in a way, to each individual. Ever heard the phrase, "the victor writes history"? If you look into that, you can see some startling things.

First off, for the sake of argument, lets assume that in some time in the history of mankind, a victor rewrote history to suit their purpose, and changed it from what the truth actually was. If thats the case, and this new "truth" is handed down for hundreds of years, you reach a point where that falsehood actually becomes a reality to all those who have heard it.

Now does that mean that the entire world, or at the very least all those who believe this falsehood, are living in a false reality? Its obvious that the reality they live in is different then the "actual" reality that exists independant of people and their perception... but if that idea is true, and that would indicate that they are living in a false reality, wouldnt that mean the entire world is likely living in a false reality?

I just in the middle of writing this up had a conversation with one of my coworkers, and found out that Paul Revere was not the man who did all the major work riding to cities to spread the news. Can any of you name the man who did do the riding? How many people do you know of who know that, who know that Paul wasnt the person who did all the work?

Just one example of the majority of the people living in a false reality.

And unless we were actually there during every event in history, we have no way of ever knowing what really happened, or if it ever really happened at all.

Hell, a recent event can show this well too. Al Gore, if you ask the average person, they will tell you that he claimed to have "created the internet". Is that true? Not at all, but it was spun, and repeated enough that a large majority have accepted it as fact, but its not fact. Or is it? We cant know, unless we were there at that moment, in person, when he made the statement. Otherwise, we are accepting what others tell us as the truth, but as we know... the "truth" isnt always the truth, and people are suspectable to "changing" things, and trying to sell it as the truth still.

Im done rambling for the moment...

[dragonrider]

I agree that our perception of reality is not the complete picture of the "real" reality. Like in Plato's cave, we see the shadows of the higher reality. We only experience the model of reality that our brain constructs out of the input from our senses.

But now we have more and more tools to extend our senses, and we can begin to understand more and more about the "real" reality that we never could have understood with just our senses we were born with. For example, using only your senses, you could percieve a certain limited picture of what a plant is, but if you get a microscope, you can see that it is composed of cells and microscopic structures. If you use more powerful instruments, you can understand the molecular structures and chemical properties of the plant, and you can understand the life processes that go on inside the plant. Even more powerful tools and you can begin to understand the atomic and subatomic structure of the matter that makes up everything, including the plant. Using telescopes and other tools, you can look across space and back in time and begin to understand where those atoms and particals came from. If you put it all together in your mind, soon you have an understanding of that plant that goes far beyond what you could personally sense. Then the model your mind constructs includes more than just the input from your senses.

That's not to say that scinetific investigation is ever going to allow you to fully experience the "real" reality, but it definitely gives you an understanding beyond your own senses.

The other route some people take to understand higher orders of reality is through religion, prayer and meditation. I think that when people talk about things like the "real" reality, they want to personally experience it, not just understand beyond what they can see and feel. When people talk about experiencing "nirvana" they are talking about directly experiencing the higher reality. I've never decided for myself whether I truly belive in the nirvana experience or not. Without getting into the chemicals involved, I have experienced what I felt to be transcendental states. But I'm not sure they were any more "real" than the ordinary reality that I experience through my senses.

Certainly many people have experienced things that can not be explained with our standard common-sense models --- paranormal events, visions, nirvana experiences, miracles. etc. I would never discount anyone's personal transcendantal experiences, or their search for having those experiences, or their feelings for what they mean. But it seems like trying to have it both ways if you say that our day-to-day experience of reality is just an illusion and these other exceptional experiences are not. I'm a natural sceptic, so it seems more logical to me to say that our day-to-day experience of reality may be an illusion, but it is a decent model for reality, and the exceptional experiences that don't fit the model are probably illusions too, maybe even more so. Hopefully our common-sense model can be expanded to include an understanding of such experiences beyond just dismissing them as hallucinations, just like it now includes subatomic particals that could not have been imagined in the past.

[imitator]

Of course, I agree with you entirely in regards to "paranormal" events that happen. The fact that we know so little means that we shouldnt be so quick to dismiss things we dont understand.

If you had told someone from 500 years in the past some of the things that are common place for us, I would imagine that they would view it just like some in todays day and age view "paranormal" events.

Skepticism is an important thing, but if you apply it to everything without any waiver you will find yourself in a very hairy situation. We cant really know for sure about anything, but we can know what has happened without being disproven so far... and it doesnt matter if this reality that each person experiences is real or not, you are still experiencing and interacting in it...

Its a balancing act, we need to be questioning everything around us, but we also need to be able to still be functional in whatever reality we may be in. Alot of the time, we only find people who are sitting at the extremes of either side, or better put... we only really notice those who are on the extreme fringes of each line of thought.

[dragonrider]

The 5min theory, or Thursdayism, or any of the other variations are very plausible theories, which would be incredibly difficult to disprove in almost any scenario, because of how they frame the theory, and what the theory covers.

Thank you for putting that so succinctly. That is exactly the point I was trying to make earlier when I got in so much trouble with the religious misunderstanding. By framing the theory in such a way that everything is consistent with everything we observe today and everything we can project into the past, it is impossible to DISPROVE the theory that the past was somehow manufactured.

But to me, the fact that a theory cannot be disproved, does not necessarily make in plausible. The problem with these kinds of theories is that they bring in an element that is not necessary. They make things more complicated than they need to be. If you say the universe came into being, proceeded according to physical laws that have remained unchanged over time, life eveloved, I was born, and my life is pretty much like I remember it, that is the most simple explanation. If you say that it only seems like that is what happened, all the evidence is consistent with that model, but actually the universe was created 5 minutes ago and all your memories were implanted, then you have brought in the element of whatever force did the creating and implanting. The second model is so much more complicated than the first, that is seems implausible, even if it cannot be disproven.