Well said.

Reality is truth. Truth can NOT be altered or manipulated to change to ones perception. Therefore if you can alter/manipulate it, than it is not truely reality. Your perception is NOT truth, it can be altered/manioulated.

Lets take drugs for example, they can certainly alter our perception of reality, but they do not alter reality itself. They can open us to different realms which we are normally seperated from, but they do not alter the truth.

So, you're saying those realms are not real?

That may or may not be "true". But all it really does is substitute the word "truth" for the word "reality". And so all the questions still remain: "Do we perceive 'truth'?" If so, do always or just sometimes perceive 'truth'? "How does one determine 'truth'?"

I don't know of anything that cannot be altered. Subatomic particles can be altered. Light waves can be altered. Atoms and molecules and chemicals and rocks and trees can be altered.

That doesn't seem like a very practical standard for determining reality to me. It would seem to result in the conclusion that nothing is real.

So, the final analysis is that we are operating here in a mutually agreed upon reality. But, that there are other realities that sometimes weave their way into our lives, creating different personal realities.

Yes?

That's a pretty fair statement of my own personal viewpoint, yes.

Well, after thinking about this for two days straight, I'd have to agree.

... In fact, I suspect we exist in a very obscure kind of reality -- limited by our still underdeveloped senses of perception...

Maybe, in time, when our senses develope to full capacity -- enabling us of altering reality with our THOUGHTS -- we will treat Reality in a slightly different manner!
* Then the difference between reality and imagination will become indistinquishable!!!

I think we already can do this.

perhaps well said. but dead wrong

Perhaps dead wrong, but that reply gives no reason to believe so.

No, I'm saying they are normaly hidden from us.

reality: perception. Hmm i have often considered this. my thoughts e is not the universe has a defined order of things a balance .My perceptions , my reality what matters it.I am not sure the power of it or influence of it or my thoughts in any event, for i will be gone , the universe will stay and other will continue for a season and a day analyzing the same thing

Welcome to the Sci&Phi forum Stars. Put on your thick skin and jump in.

Skye, this time you asked such an easy question.

We don't know if we perceive reality.

Other than perceiving our own existence, when we consider that we think and feel, and there was nothing to feel or think, then there would be no thought and feeling. Therefore a thinking or feeling being can be certain that it he she exists. But outside of this self everything could be reality and everything could be imagination or not even that. There is no surefire way of telling.

Therefore people choose to believe this and that, or this or that. And there is no way of arguing with them that they are wrong. Their belief -- if they keep their impressions and opinions to the belief sphere of knowledge -- is irrefutable. However, if they claim knowledge, you know they are wrong. They could be right, of course, if they are beings that are so constructed that they can perceive reality. But us, when we hear their claims, we don't know if they even exist.

It's much easier to put down a phantasm than to argue with someone who actually can perceive reality for sure.

This is the savior of mankind. We're so opinionated that if we were ever proven to our own selves, individually, in an irrefutable and necessarily internalized way, that we're wrong, then that would be the end of mankind and humanity. Our souls would simply perish with a pffft like a flame that's put out.

I hope somebody is &^%*^ing writing all this down.

What I get from that is that you believe there is no objective means of determining reality. That everything on which such a judgment would have to be based is subjective (i.e. perception).

If so, I agree with you completely.

You just did!

What would constitute a difference itself(of any kind and in any situation) being practical?



Are figments of the imagination to be considered 'real'? We all may agree upon something but that does not make something 'real'.

#1.)

#2.)

Number one is meaningful and can be objectively explored.

Number two is meaningless. There is no answer. Our methods do not determine reality. Our methods determine how well our beliefs correspond with reality.

Reality is the world as it is. I usually make a distinction between reality and actuality because of the overwhelmingly popular belief that perception is reality. That is held as true because of the real affects that one's perception has upon them, no matter if they are imagined(not real) or not. Perception has some basis in emotion as well.

Actuality does not care how you feel about it.

I would say: Being able to make use of the difference. For example. The difference between something that tastes good and something that does not. If one wanted to cause someone to throw up, one might feed them something that does not taste good. If they wanted that person to smile, they might feed them something that does taste good.

On the contrary, I think that is exactly what does make it real.

As far as I’m concerned, the two questions are semantically the same. The was the intent.

So it doesn’t really matter to me whether you want focus on the first one or the second one. I’m ok with focusing on the first one.

I’m fully aware of all that. So we can substitute the word “actuality” for “reality” if you wish.

jrbogie said:

Frankly, pal, you oughtta be ashamed of yourself!!!


That "intellectual purl" of your's is MUCH TOO DEEP for the rest of us, mere mortals, to comprehand!

We are reality.