have they truly been successful in putting much of a dent in the concept of an 'ideal' world?

Idealism is the philosophical theory that maintains that the ultimate nature of reality is based on mind or ideas. It holds that the so-called external or "real world" is inseparable from mind, consciousness, or perception.

Contemporary philosophical realism is the belief in a reality that is completely ontologically independent of our conceptual schemes, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc.

Philosophers who profess realism also typically believe that truth consists in a belief's correspondence to reality. We may speak of realism with respect to other minds, the past, the future, universals, mathematical entities (such as natural numbers), moral categories, the material world, or even thought.

Realists tend to believe that whatever we believe now is only an approximation of reality and that every new observation brings us closer to understanding reality.[1] Realism is contrasted with anti-realism.

I agree with the above.

BUT a lot of misunderstanding can arise from the the word MIND. The statement does NOT specify A HUMAN MIND. It simply says MIND. I suspect the the philosophical realism guys probably wrongly assumes that this refers to a "human mind" and "human ideas." It does not. It speaks of MIND as one entity that encompasses all mind stuff, including the entire material universe that we call reality.

The One

The primeval Source of Being is the One and the Infinite, as opposed to the many and the finite. It is the source of all life, and therefore absolute causality and the only real existence. However, the important feature of it is that it is beyond all Being, although the source of it. Therefore, it cannot be known through reasoning or understanding, since only what is part of Being can be thus known according to Plato. Being beyond existence, it is the most real reality, source of less real things. It is, moreover, the Good, insofar as all finite things have their purpose in it, and ought to flow back to it. But one cannot attach moral attributes to the original Source of Being itself, because these would imply limitation. It has no attributes of any kind; it is being without magnitude, without life, without thought; in strict propriety, indeed, we ought not to speak of it as existing; it is "above existence," "above goodness." It is also active force without a substratum; as active force the primeval Source of Being is perpetually producing something else, without alteration, or motion, or diminution of itself. This production is not a physical process, but an emission of force; and, since the product has real existence only in virtue of the original existence working in it, Neoplatonism may be described as a species of dynamic pantheism. Directly or indirectly, everything is brought forth by the "One." In it all things, so far as they have being, are divine, and God is all in all. Derived existence, however, is not like the original Source of Being itself, but is subject to a law of diminishing completeness. It is indeed an image and reflection of the first Source of Being; but the further the line of successive projections is prolonged the smaller is its share in the true existence. The totality of being may thus be conceived as a series of concentric circles, fading away towards the verge of non-existence, the force of the original Being in the outermost circle being a vanishing quantity. Each lower stage of being is united with the "One" by all the higher stages, and receives its share of reality only by transmission through them. All derived existence, however, has a drift towards, a longing for, the higher, and bends towards it so far as its nature will permit. Plotinus' treatment of the substance or essence (ousia) of the one was to reconcile Plato and Aristotle. Where Aristotle treated the monad as a single entity made up of one substance (here as energeia). Plotinus reconciled Aristotle with Plato's "the good" by expressing the substance or essence of the one as potential or force.[3]

Neoplatonism

'


Both JB's ideas and Neoplatonism are both idealistic monism's.

Neoplatonists would agree with Abra, and JB.

I thought you might like that!

I liked your poem!

Wow Jeannie,

Just when I thought I seen everything on the websites you offer you surprise me again with poetry. You should submit them in to publish or make a complete book of poems. It would actually be a top seller. Each poem is wonderful. I must have spent a whole hour reading poems and contemplating. Very well thought out poems that hold truth in them.

The Matrix was great to read especially for me.

Thanks for sharing that

What do you think would be the tenents of Realistic Idealism?

I can’t help thinking that idealism and realism are rather philosophies based on the mindset we are born with.

For an example, I can’t see a person who is pessimistic by nature being an idealist.

On the other hand, I rarely see an optimist being a realist, more likely he would be an idealistic realist or an idealist.

Of course, there is no way for me to prove that it is so, and there are always exceptions.

It is rather a conclusion drawn from observing people.

What would they NOT see

I am not entirely sure that a "purist" of idealism is possible...

What would a Idealistic purist look like...what would they see in this world...or what would they NOT see...

That is an invasive question indeed. Would "they" know if they did not see?

If you 'see' something and you notice someone else who does not 'see' it, (or perhaps does not wish to see it) do you try to get them to see it? How successful are you in doing that? How are you improving their life by doing that?

I often see pessimistic people (and I have been there too) who love to preach their pessimistic view of the world to everyone and who view an optimist as a fool.

There is the extreme in either case. I have seen optimistic people who refuse to see the reality of the situation and plunge head first into disaster and wonder why. They, after all, were being positive and that alone is supposed to have saved them from their fate.