What Is 'Real?'

[ChristineM]

So is subjectivity a part of the world, the universe, reality, everything or what ever you believe in? And how does work?

We have been here before, i won't be repeating for those who refuse to accept definition.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

We have been here before, i won't be repeating for those who refuse to accept definition.

Yeah, so subjectivity is real, because you know that I subjectively refuse your subjective belief in reality. How nice.

 

[QuestioningMind]

In another (non-debate) thread, it was asked what 'real' is. A response to that question was the Google dictionary definition, "actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed."

How can one be certain something is real given that definition? I'm fairly certain nearly everyone has had dreams that, while dreaming, they thought were real until they awoke.

What one perceives is merely a model resulting from sense organs that create electrical signals as interpreted by the brain. How can one trust that these are, indeed, real? How do you know you won't wake up from this reality into a 'real' one?

Ah yes... the old, what if we're all just existing in the Matrix or I am simply 'dreaming' all of reality dilemma. It's certainly possible that what we perceive as reality is just an elaborate video game or we're just having a dream that's indistinguishable from reality. But if that is indeed the case, we have no choice but to live our 'lives' according to whatever the 'rules' are for the particular game or dream we happen to be experiencing. In the case of whatever it is that we all believe we're experiencing right now, the 'rules' for what is real match the Google definition, in which you can distinguish between 'reality' and dreams, regardless of how real the dream felt while you were having it.

To attempt to do otherwise leads to madness.

 

[ChristineM]

Yeah, so subjectivity is real, because you know that I subjectively refuse your subjective belief in reality. How nice.

Whatever makes you happy, i don't really care. I will go by definition you go by subjectivity

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Ah yes... the old, what if we're all just existing in the Matrix or I am simply 'dreaming' all of reality dilemma. It's certainly possible that what we perceive as reality is just an elaborate video game or we're just having a dream that's indistinguishable from reality. But if that is indeed the case, we have no choice but to live our 'lives' according to whatever the 'rules' are for the particular game or dream we happen to be experiencing. In the case of whatever it is that we all believe we're experiencing right now, the 'rules' for what is real match the Google definition, in which you can distinguish between 'reality' and dreams, regardless of how real the dream felt while you were having it.

To attempt to do otherwise leads to madness.

No, reality is not as simple as that definition. It is a part of it, but not all. And it has nothing to religion or not. It is in effect as much as anything philosophy and the limit of knowledge and all those other cognitive words.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Whatever makes you happy, i don't really care. I will go by definition you go by subjectivity

Yeah, and the bold part is not subjective, though it is not objective by the definitions of objective.

 

[exchemist]

In another (non-debate) thread, it was asked what 'real' is. A response to that question was the Google dictionary definition, "actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed."

How can one be certain something is real given that definition? I'm fairly certain nearly everyone has had dreams that, while dreaming, they thought were real until they awoke.

What one perceives is merely a model resulting from sense organs that create electrical signals as interpreted by the brain. How can one trust that these are, indeed, real? How do you know you won't wake up from this reality into a 'real' one?

Objectivity.

What we call "real" is what we can agree seems to be the case, i.e. is a perception that people thought to be reliable share.

Obviously you can pick holes in that, but a consensus if basically it's what it comes down to. In science we consider reproducible observations real.

 

[ChristineM]

Yeah, and the bold part is not subjective, though it is not objective by the definitions of objective.

Correct. It is an agreed on description created with the idea of reducing confusion in language

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Objectivity.

What we call "real" is what we can agree seems to be the case, i.e. is a perception that people thought to be reliable share.

Obviously you can pick holes in that, but a consensus if basically it's what it comes down to. In science we consider reproducible observations real.

I don't agree with your "we" as for "real". Your "we" is not objective nor scientific as such. It is subjective in the end. Learn to check your words and thoughts.
The same for "consider". That is subjective and only "real" as for what you "consider real".

 

[bobhikes]

Things exist in my perceptions in my dream state. Are these real?

Yes they are forms that exist in your dream state. People can be frozen, stop breathing, fall, walk and die in their dream states. I believe you have to say if you are physically or mentally effected it is real as you are real. It's just more things are very subjective in your dreams if you realize your dreaming you can define the dream itself making it personally subjective.

 

[Polymath257]

Real: Whatever every minimal, predictive model based on observation agrees to.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Real: Whatever every minimal, predictive model based on observation agrees to.

Now turn that into a true model itself. You can't.

 

[Polymath257]

Now turn that into a true model itself. You can't.

Define 'true model'.

 

[Sw. Vandana Jyothi]

In another (non-debate) thread, it was asked what 'real' is. A response to that question was the Google dictionary definition, "actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed."

How can one be certain something is real given that definition? I'm fairly certain nearly everyone has had dreams that, while dreaming, they thought were real until they awoke.

What one perceives is merely a model resulting from sense organs that create electrical signals as interpreted by the brain. How can one trust that these are, indeed, real? How do you know you won't wake up from this reality into a 'real' one?

I really hope I awaken into Real real soon, Salixji.

 

[Terry Sampson]

How do you know you won't wake up from this reality into a 'real' one?

Actually, ... I'm kind of looking forward to it.

What one perceives is merely a model resulting from sense organs that create electrical signals as interpreted by the brain. How can one trust that these are, indeed, real?

We get a choice?
Let's ask Michael Hingson. The Wearables Giving Computer Vision to the Blind

 

[dybmh]

In another (non-debate) thread, it was asked what 'real' is. A response to that question was the Google dictionary definition, "actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed."

How can one be certain something is real given that definition? I'm fairly certain nearly everyone has had dreams that, while dreaming, they thought were real until they awoke.

What one perceives is merely a model resulting from sense organs that create electrical signals as interpreted by the brain. How can one trust that these are, indeed, real? How do you know you won't wake up from this reality into a 'real' one?

It takes at least 2 people to define reality.

Reality is the subjective experience of phenomenon where all involved parties overwhelmingly agree on the nature of a material object or phenomena.

One person dreaming cannot determine whether or not the dream is "real". However if two people have the same dream, then those two people can conclude that their dream is real.

If a 3rd person enters the conversation who did not have the dream, then doubt is introduced.

If a 4th person enters the conversation who had the same dream of the first two, then the doubt is diminished.

Continuing this pattern develops an internal visualization of reality as a cloud of possibilities where the likelihood ( odds ) of the dream being real ebbs and flows like a cloud being effected by the wind and/or temperature change.

All of this ^^ is from the human perspective.

Rising above that ( or deeper into that ), from a divine perspective, reality does not ebb and flow at all. The ebbing and flowing is part of the reality.

Because of that; the definition of reality needs two sides. The side from the perspective of a finite being, and also the side from the perspective as a divine being.

Trying to imagine reality and define it ( aka what is real ) is rather easy from both sides if taken individually. Either as the finite *or* as the infinite. But trying to imagine both at the same time ( which would be a more complete understanding ) gives me a massive headache. So I avoid it. I think it's a personal limitation on my own brain-power / intellect.

That's why when this question gets asked, I usually give my answer from the perspective of a finite being. But since you, salix, are not a finite being ( If I recall from your previous posts ), then I attempted to offer both sides of the coin to give a more complete answer.

------------------------------------------------------------

Regarding waking up from the dream, "How do you know you won't wake up from this reality into a 'real' one?"

For me, my opinion? I don't know that I won't wake up from this reality not a real one. I simply don't know that at all. It's just like not knowing when I'm going to die, or how. I know it may happen at any moment, and yet it doesn't bother me too much.

 

[Fool]

In another (non-debate) thread, it was asked what 'real' is. A response to that question was the Google dictionary definition, "actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact; not imagined or supposed."

How can one be certain something is real given that definition? I'm fairly certain nearly everyone has had dreams that, while dreaming, they thought were real until they awoke.

What one perceives is merely a model resulting from sense organs that create electrical signals as interpreted by the brain. How can one trust that these are, indeed, real? How do you know you won't wake up from this reality into a 'real' one?

are you trying to differentiate between temporarily real and eternally real?

 

[exchemist]

I don't agree with your "we" as for "real". Your "we" is not objective nor scientific as such. It is subjective in the end. Learn to check your words and thoughts.
The same for "consider". That is subjective and only "real" as for what you "consider real".

Aha, you're picking holes in it, just as I said you could. So I don't need check my words or my thoughts.

 

[Quintessence]

I don't ask the question.

Instead, I ask a different - how do I (or others that can communicate with me successfully) experience this?

Focusing on experience results in a more nuanced, less binary perspective. In human languages we already have a lot of other words to describe our experiences in a more accurate way than some simplistic binary anyway. It helps eschew pointless arguments and instead focus on the substance of human experience.

 

[Polymath257]

Now turn that into a true model itself. You can't.

I said nothing about having a 'true model'. I required a *minimal, predictive* model. And, furthermore, if there is more than one such model, then I only consider what all of them agree to.