Is there an objective world?

[goldisheavy]

So, whereas its true that all externals are mediated by internal subjective images, that in no way entails that there is therefore no objective, external reality.

 

How would you distinguish that which is merely internally mediated from that which is internally constructed?

 

Keep in mind also, that this is the exact argument that theists give for God, and atheists laugh at it. Just substitute "God" for "external reality". Just admit it -- you must take external reality on blind faith. There is no way external reality can be proven or demonstrated.

Edited January 2, 2010 by goldisheavy

[C T]

I had something semi or at least quasi profound to add but forgot what it was...

Is this not the essence of profundity? I mean, you have 'accidentally' arrived at a space of

absolute potential, vibrant with all possibilities.. Those who choose wisely, their actions create

no karma. In a sense, all Buddhas never remember anything.. in a sense, that is.

 

Well done, 3bob!!

 

(When the ripples are gone, the lake does not recreate them just for the heck of it....)

Edited January 2, 2010 by CowTao

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

In Taiji, there is the principle of 'Leading into Emptiness'.. where the defender supplies enough energy for the attacker to 'feel' connected, without revealing the center or resisting.. the attacker will follow the belief that they are 'connected' past their own ability to recover, then.. the slightest force uproots them.. but, when two forces actively oppose/resist each other, they waste energy and accomplish little..

 

Speak your truth softly, but clearly.. it will stand on its own merits. Arguements are comprised of attachments, judgments, and preconceptions.. Listen carefully, even vexing persons may have useful perspectives.. in all things, know that you are your own source of understanding, if you don't determine your own truths, others will do it for you..

 

Be well..

[Tao99]

Is this not the essence of profundity? I mean, you have 'accidentally' arrived at a space of

absolute potential, vibrant with all possibilities.. Those who choose wisely, their actions create

no karma. In a sense, all Buddhas never remember anything.. in a sense, that is.

 

Well done, 3bob!!

 

(When the ripples are gone, the lake does not recreate them just for the heck of it....)

 

How profound of you to ripple with that! I'm so glad you didn't forget it, but recreated it just for the heck of it!

Edited January 2, 2010 by Tao99

[C T]

How profound of you to ripple with that! I'm so glad you didn't forget it, but recreated it just for the heck of it!

Funny guy!!

[Tao99]

How would you distinguish that which is merely internally mediated from that which is internally constructed?

 

Keep in mind also, that this is the exact argument that theists give for God, and atheists laugh at it. Just substitute "God" for "external reality". Just admit it -- you must take external reality on blind faith. There is no way external reality can be proven or demonstrated.

A metaphor to another subject (God) doesn't make a counter argument.

 

Here is my proof of external reality, for your consideration:

1. 35 billion years ago the universe was created in the Big Bang, and there were no human subjective images of it.

 

2. 3 1/2 billion years ago the earth was formed, and there were no human subjective images of it.

 

3. 300 million years ago there were only fish on earth, and there were no human subjective images of them.

 

Thus external, objective reality clearly exists. (without us, subjective imagery of mind streams).

Edited January 2, 2010 by Tao99

[bobby]

the mind creates everything....

 

if it is not calm...

 

it will create confusion.....

[ralis]

the mind creates everything....

 

if it is not calm...

 

it will create confusion.....

 

The mind creates the cosmos?

 

 

ralis

[C T]

The mind creates the cosmos?

ralis

Hey Ralis if you can remember at what age you began to be aware of the cosmos, i would say that

thats the year your cosmos came into existence. Prior to that, as far as you were concerned, there

was no cosmos. So in a sense, you could say the cosmos and your initial awareness of it arose

together, and one day, will also subside together. Your cosmos, and an astrologer's cosmos, is

not the same one. Do you know why this is so? I am sure you do, and you would also know exactly

where this difference lie. Its pretty obvious isnt it? So again, one could re-pose the question -

where is your cosmos? Is it out there? Up there? Where?

[Tao99]

Hey Ralis if you can remember at what age you began to be aware of the cosmos, i would say that

thats the year your cosmos came into existence. Prior to that, as far as you were concerned, there

was no cosmos.

 

Prior to that there was no him, not no cosmos. Dinosaur bones in museums prove this.

 

His birth was just the year that he himself became aware - via his sensor images - that the cosmos exists.

 

So that was the year his awareness of the world came into existence, not the year the world came into existence.

[ralis]

Hey Ralis if you can remember at what age you began to be aware of the cosmos, i would say that

thats the year your cosmos came into existence. Prior to that, as far as you were concerned, there

was no cosmos. So in a sense, you could say the cosmos and your initial awareness of it arose

together, and one day, will also subside together. Your cosmos, and an astrologer's cosmos, is

not the same one. Do you know why this is so? I am sure you do, and you would also know exactly

where this difference lie. Its pretty obvious isnt it? So again, one could re-pose the question -

where is your cosmos? Is it out there? Up there? Where?

 

Still making untenable statements! Sound like the New Age ism of "you create your own reality".

[Tao99]

Your cosmos, and an astrologer's cosmos, is not the same one. Do you know why this is so? I am sure you do, and you would also know exactly where this difference lie. Its pretty obvious isnt it? So again, one could re-pose the question - where is your cosmos? Is it out there? Up there? Where?

 

Well my nose tip is 2 inches away, and the moon is 93 million miles away.

 

Self/Buddhist mind stream <==> ||Images from Sensors (eyes,etc)|| <==> {Objective Reality}

 

How about the difference is in the subjective imagery (sensory, thoughts) between them, not the objective, external world they are trying to "map". The moon is 93 million miles away for both equally.

Edited January 3, 2010 by Tao99

[goldisheavy]

A metaphor to another subject (God) doesn't make a counter argument.

 

Here is my proof of external reality, for your consideration:

1. 35 billion years ago the universe was created in the Big Bang, and there were no human subjective images of it.

 

This is an unsupported assertion. I guess I don't need to bother with steps 2 and 3.

 

Do you even know how proofs work? A proof begins with an axiomatic assertion that both parties agree on, either explicitly or implicitly. However, if that agreement is not in place, you need to find some common ground first, or you just can't prove anything at all. Another rule of proofs is that you cannot put something that is under dispute into the initial assertion in the proof. So if we dispute the existence of objective universe, and you want to prove that it does exist, you may not start your proof by saying "Objective universe was created X billion years ago."

 

 

 

Hey Ralis if you can remember at what age you began to be aware of the cosmos, i would say that

thats the year your cosmos came into existence. Prior to that, as far as you were concerned, there

was no cosmos. So in a sense, you could say the cosmos and your initial awareness of it arose

together, and one day, will also subside together. Your cosmos, and an astrologer's cosmos, is

not the same one. Do you know why this is so? I am sure you do, and you would also know exactly

where this difference lie. Its pretty obvious isnt it? So again, one could re-pose the question -

where is your cosmos? Is it out there? Up there? Where?

 

Still making untenable statements! Sound like the New Age ism of "you create your own reality".

 

Ralis, you're being a little lazy in my opinion. CowTao made a decent suggestion for examination. Now, if you don't want to reassess your memories, that's fine. But if you're not even going to bother performing the examination that CowTao suggests, you shouldn't say his statement is untenable.

 

Haven't we all seen entire universes appear in the blink of an eye during dreaming? So we know the mind can do this. There is no question as to whether or not the mind is capable of creating an entire universe in the blink of an eye, right? At least, not for me, since I've seen my own mind do it.

 

The only question that remains is, is this universe here mind created too? Just like the one in the dream? The question is not about whether or not it is possible, but whether or not that possibility is actualized right now.

[Marblehead]

Hey Ralis if you can remember at what age you began to be aware of the cosmos, i would say that

thats the year your cosmos came into existence. Prior to that, as far as you were concerned, there

was no cosmos. So in a sense, you could say the cosmos and your initial awareness of it arose

together, and one day, will also subside together. Your cosmos, and an astrologer's cosmos, is

not the same one. Do you know why this is so? I am sure you do, and you would also know exactly

where this difference lie. Its pretty obvious isnt it? So again, one could re-pose the question -

where is your cosmos? Is it out there? Up there? Where?

 

Interesting post and cause for me to make comment.

 

I have made mention here elsewhere in other threads that I have created my own reality here on my property. This reality does include a few delusions. I am very well aware of the delusions I hold to in order to have 'my world' "The best of all possible worlds".

 

However, when I leave 'my world' I leave my delusions at home. Unlike my credit cards, I never leave home with them (my delusions).

 

There is a purely objective world world out there. When I interact with that objective world I want my mind to be connected with that objective world. 'My world' has existed for only a short period of time - about 15 years. Prior to that there were different worlds (my different levels of awareness) and some of them were not very peaceful.

 

The universe exists objectively regardless of what we think. The human mind has absolutely nothing to do with the objective universe. However, our mind has a lot to do with our subjective world. How we interact with the objective universe is 'our subjective world'. We cannot change (in the most part) the objective universe. But we can change our subjective world. We can, through our brain and our attitude, create a subjective world that give us a reason to live our life to its fullest.

 

I understand that there are evil (in my opinion) things that happen in the objective universe. There are evil people who would do you harm if they had the opportunity to do so. It is up to us as to how we are going to act and react, or not, toward these things we consider 'evil'. This is part of our subjective world.

 

I feel it is important that we always remain aware of the objective world so that we can mold our subjective world into a state that affords us the maximum potential for a peaceful and contented (yes, even happy) life.

 

The objective world existed before I was born. Hey! my mother gave birth to me. (No, I was not hatched.) My subjective world began when I became 'aware'.

 

Peace & Love!

[Marblehead]

I would speak to this.

 

The only question that remains is, is this universe here mind created too?

 

No. The objective universe exists. There are so amny proofs supporting this that I will not even present any.

 

Just like the one in the dream?

 

Very different. When you wake up the 'dream universe' evaporates. However, the objective universe still remains. You roll out of the bed and place your feet on the floor. That is the objective universe. Yes, we can dream and imagine many things. But these are not objective things - they are subjective things and they exist only in our mind.

 

The question is not about whether or not it is possible, but whether or not that possibility is actualized right now.

 

It doesn't matter how hard we pretend that the objective universe doesn't exist, it still exists without any one of us. It doesn't matter how hard we imagine a baseball bat doesn't exist, when we get hit aside the head with it we are going to feel pain. That's objective.

 

 

Peace & Love!

[C T]

MH,

 

I typed a long response to your post, but upon reflection, i decided to drop it. Just wanted to let you know,

and to wish you a happy day!

[Marblehead]

MH,

 

I typed a long response to your post, but upon reflection, i decided to drop it. Just wanted to let you know,

and to wish you a happy day!

 

Thanks CowTao! You have a great day too.

 

Peace & Love!

[3bob]

who we "think" we are is in not what we more essentially are...and that was at the beginning of the cosmos and knew it.

[xabir2005]

[Marblehead]

who we "think" we are is in not what we more essentially are...and that was at the beginning of the cosmos and knew it.

 

Well, sure, Bob. If we go back to the beginning all was one and there was no objective universe.

 

Of course, we can also deny the passage of time and the movement of space and pretend that all is still One.

 

But then, I could also pretend that it is warm outside and go wading in my fish ponds but I think my physical, objectively existent body would object to that.

 

Peace & Love!

Edited January 3, 2010 by Marblehead

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

Of course there's an objective world.. that objective world is projected into our mental awareness through our sensory perception, so.. since we seldom have a 'complete' sensory experience that senses every nuance of the objective reality, our mental image is not complete.. One can focus on the fact that their mental images are incomplete and and not 'actually' the thing that they sense, or.. they can refune their sensory process to better define their relationships with existence.. students of Tao generally seek to refine their relationships with existence since the mental imagery is their link to their actual existence.. some other paths seem to reject their physical existence because they can't get the 'complete' sensory perception..

 

Be well..

[ralis]

Objectifying the world provides a practical and useful function. Without objectification, there would be no civilization, technology, health care etc. If I didn't objectify sex, I might be having sex with my tree in the backyard. I just wouldn't know the difference.

 

 

 

 

ralis

[Marblehead]

I'm not going to touch that last post Ralis. Hugging a tree I can understand but ...

 

 

Peace & Love!

[ralis]

I'm not going to touch that last post Ralis. Hugging a tree I can understand but ...

 

 

Peace & Love!

 

 

Just trying to show the absurdity of some of the arguments here!

 

ralis

[Marblehead]

Just trying to show the absurdity of some of the arguments here!

 

ralis

 

Hehehe. I was already aware without that mental image, thank you.

 

I think I'll go hug my tree now.

 

Peace & Love!