Objective reality

[Stosh]

My question for anyone who does think it exists, is How would you explain or describe objective reality to a simple farmer 3000 years ago? ,, assuming you want to. 

[Jetsun]

Objective reality is what's happening, ie its raining, the crops aren't growing, the wife has the Plague. Subjective reality is our thoughts and beliefs about it, ie God is displeased with me.

[Marblehead]

My question for anyone who does think it exists, is How would you explain or describe objective reality to a simple farmer 3000 years ago? ,, assuming you want to. 

Yeah, the farmer of 3000 years ago already had a pretty good understanding of objective reality.

 

It's just that when, as Jetsun referred to, he started adding his subjective opinions to what he observed did he begin to lose his objectivity.

[Apech]

Objective reality is what's happening, ie its raining, the crops aren't growing, the wife has the Plague. Subjective reality is our thoughts and beliefs about it, ie God is displeased with me.

 

 

Best wishes to the wife ... Get well soon

[Karl]

Yeah, the farmer of 3000 years ago already had a pretty good understanding of objective reality.

 

It's just that when, as Jetsun referred to, he started adding his subjective opinions to what he observed did he begin to lose his objectivity.

Yes. A beautiful flower for instance.

Beauty is subjective, flower is objective perceptual reality

 

However it is entirely objective to have known oneself to have the thought "this is a beautiful flower" this is internal objective perceptual subjectivity.

 

At this point the penny might drop ;-)

Edited July 28, 2015 by Karl

[Silent Answers]

Yes. A beautiful flower for instance.

Beauty is subjective, flower is objective perceptual reality

 

However it is entirely objective to have known oneself to have the thought "this is a beautiful flower" this is internal objective perceptual subjectivity.

 

At this point the penny might drop ;-)

That's the aim of the game

[Stosh]

That's the aim of the game

Nah, no catch , I'm just seeing what anyone else comes up with. 

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Objective reality is whatever is the case regardless of opinions about it. Whether or not someone is, or even can be, aware of it is a different matter. For example, only I can know what I'm thinking of in the present. However, it's an objective truth that I was thinking of _. If I'm thinking of apples but tell you I'm thinking of pears, your belief I'm thinking of pears doesn't change the fact that I'm thinking of apples. 

[Bud Jetsun]

For anything objective to arise, it would require omnipotence. 

 

Humans deal only in the illusion of objectivity, from which some arise delusions it was possible for objectivity to exist. 

 

I would tell the farmer he is alone with his consciousness in emptiness.  

 

The delusions/illusions of anything he has the illusion of 'knowing' of his reality arise from his minds thoughts fueled by perceptions, which can not exist in the Now and are universally non-real.

[Stosh]

For anything objective to arise, it would require omnipotence. 

 

Humans deal only in the illusion of objectivity, from which some arise delusions it was possible for objectivity to exist. 

 

I would tell the farmer he is alone with his consciousness in emptiness.  

 

The delusions/illusions of anything he has the illusion of 'knowing' of his reality arise from his minds thoughts fueled by perceptions, which can not exist in the Now and are universally non-real.

Do you suppose his brain will explode in parts, or all at the same time.

[Karl]

For anything objective to arise, it would require omnipotence. 

 

Humans deal only in the illusion of objectivity, from which some arise delusions it was possible for objectivity to exist. 

 

I would tell the farmer he is alone with his consciousness in emptiness.  

 

The delusions/illusions of anything he has the illusion of 'knowing' of his reality arise from his minds thoughts fueled by perceptions, which can not exist in the Now and are universally non-real.

 

Existence exists. The universe exists regardless of you being conscious of it. Things are things. Anything you argue is prefaced by existence or you could not argue it. You can have the belief that everything is illusion, but that thought must be framed objectively or how do you know your thought is not illusion and that thought is illusion etc etc ?

[Nikolai1]

Of course Karl that's not right - but disagreeing with you makes it right!

[Karl]

Of course Karl that's not right - but disagreeing with you makes it right!

 

Being capable of disagreement with me makes it right, regardless of statement of the disagreement which may be valid or not. It is entirely possible to make a valid statement-in the sense of inductive reasoning-but still be ignorant of why it is valid.

 

A thing is a thing and no other thing.

 

This was the reasons monks battered their students with sticks once they moved into subjective illusion and believed they had transcended mortality . It literally was 'to knock sense into them'. It's very hard to deny a stick is a stick, a body is a body and pain is pain.

 

We have one tool and that's logic. It is a birth right, but it can be abused and oppressed. Remembered knowledge is mistaken for true knowledge. We are losing the ability to use logic effectively. This is a modern world of skills and specialisation, in which the incredible progress afforded by the division of labour and the laws of comparative advantage have led to a situation in which logic has been largely usurped by the instantaneous nature of our lives. It has created a longing for a return to a simpler time, but without logic to guide our understanding, we have become attracted to a mash up of facts, pseudoscience, religion, mysticism, superstition and Magic. These things are entirely knowledge based-in effect it's another skill. If all we have to guide us is emotional intuition ( feelings ) then we are in danger.

 

If you don't know what a Tiger is, or if you dispute that it is a Tiger, or believe that it is nothing but an illusion of consciousness subjectivity-akin to a dream-then you are seeking to hide from reality. The legend of King Canute is a classical example of that mode of thinking. The Tiger will attack you if it is its intention to do so and the sea will advance.

 

It's been the case for many years that those prepared to shout truth from the rooftops usually get short shrift by the residents. If they are lucky it's only verbal abuse.

[Nikolai1]

Sorry Karl but you really have a lot to leanr in these matters. Perhaps it would help to reflect on the fact that logic requires predicates that are themselves not proven. Then it will be easy to see that any truth statement might be true or false depending on the predicate chosen. Next, apply this to what you call the objective world. All that is objective is also subjective. I wonder whether your fall out with the AYPers was in part due to your innocent belief in the truth of matters, and this led you into futile argumentation. This will ultimately hold you back in any yoga.

[Nikolai1]

But you are of course half right about the abuse of logic. There is a lot of flakiness out there. Just don't pendulum between the two.

[Karl]

Sorry Karl but you really have a lot to leanr in these matters. Perhaps it would help to reflect on the fact that logic requires predicates that are themselves not proven. Then it will be easy to see that any truth statement might be true or false depending on the predicate chosen. Next, apply this to what you call the objective world. All that is objective is also subjective. I wonder whether your fall out with the AYPers was in part due to your innocent belief in the truth of matters, and this led you into futile argumentation. This will ultimately hold you back in any yoga.

 

I'm pleased to see that you are also an advocate of logic and agree in totality that it is the only way to establish truth.

[Nikolai1]

My logic is the logic of non-logic. P is both P and not-P. It is both the highest logic and a travesty of logic.

[Karl]

My logic is the logic of non-logic. P is both P and not-P. It is both the highest logic and a travesty of logic.

This really is excellent, I can clearly see that you agree entitely in order that you offer that argument.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Karl

[Seeker of Wisdom]

[...] only I can know what I'm thinking of in the present. However, it's an objective truth that I was thinking of _. If I'm thinking of apples but tell you I'm thinking of pears, your belief I'm thinking of pears doesn't change the fact that I'm thinking of apples.

Along the same lines, there must be such a thing as objective truths or it wouldn't be possible for people to lie successfully and then confess later from guilt.

 

For example - I stole from you, you ask if it was me, I convince you it wasn't. Let's suppose there are now two parallel universes sprouting from this choice - one where I was truthful about stealing, one where I lied. In the universe sprouting from the lie, I still feel guilty, so I finally confess.

 

Consider - your opinion 'he didn't steal' didn't change the objective truth. We aren't aware of any cases of lies becoming true because of people believing them - but we are aware of lies remaining false. Therefore, whether or not someone is being truthful is an objective truth. And if this is objective, it's feasible for other things to be objective.

[Apech]

My logic is the logic of non-logic. P is both P and not-P. It is both the highest logic and a travesty of logic.

 

 

Time to move on to Q.

[Nikolai1]

Hi seeker,

 

We aren't aware of any cases of lies becoming true because of people believing them 

A good example, again, is the placebo effect in medicine.  Patients are routinely given dummy pills, which is a form of lie (and some ethicists question if they should be used at all because of the deception involved), but which acts on the patients body and heals as if it were objective truth.

 

I used to be a psychologist and I worked with cases where people were getting very upset about traumas that quite clearly didn't happen according to conventional understandings. Notice the operative term: 'convetional understanding'.  There comes a point where it is literally impossible to determine objective truth except by appeal to convention.  And groups of people, with group think mentalities, are no more reliable than individuals.  What is humanity if not another group?

 

All of this really hits home when we discern spiritual reality. This unspeakable truth is what both objective and subjective 'realities' attempt to simulate.  But this truth can't be spoken of.  In fact, the simulations aren't even simulations but are in fact it.  

 

When this is deeply understood, we start to notice that some stories bring expansion and peace whereas others bring contraction and despair.  The wise person skillfully discerns which of these lesser truths liberates.  To many people, to discover the illusion of objective reality is liberating...but if it means thinking everything is subjective then that liberation is short-lived and is just another prison.

[Karl]

Hi seeker,

 

 

A good example, again, is the placebo effect in medicine.  Patients are routinely given dummy pills, which is a form of lie (and some ethicists question if they should be used at all because of the deception involved), but which acts on the patients body and heals as if it were objective truth.

 

I used to be a psychologist and I worked with cases where people were getting very upset about traumas that quite clearly didn't happen according to conventional understandings. Notice the operative term: 'convetional understanding'.  There comes a point where it is literally impossible to determine objective truth except by appeal to convention.  And groups of people, with group think mentalities, are no more reliable than individuals.  What is humanity if not another group?

 

All of this really hits home when we discern spiritual reality. This unspeakable truth is what both objective and subjective 'realities' attempt to simulate.  But this truth can't be spoken of.  In fact, the simulations aren't even simulations but are in fact it.  

 

When this is deeply understood, we start to notice that some stories bring expansion and peace whereas others bring contraction and despair.  The wise person skillfully discerns which of these lesser truths liberates.  To many people, to discover the illusion of objective reality is liberating...but if it means thinking everything is subjective then that liberation is short-lived and is just another prison.

 

You say that this is true and yet you don't believe in objective reality Nikolai ?

 

I will demonstrate:

These are the things you believe right ?

 

If I said that you were wrong and that actually you didn't believe those things at all, you were just pretending to, then I guess your reply would be along the lines of "I absolutely do believe what I'm saying to be accurate, true and authentic"

 

Would that be reasonable? I'm not arguing here about your assertions themselves, only on your belief in those assertions.

 

So, now if I ask you to prove that you believe these things-not the things themselves, but just your beliefs in them. If I effectively called you an outright liar and asked you to prove to me that you did believe them, then how would you do it ?

 

You would say (I hallucinate here, because we aren't going to get very far at this rate) something like "I know what I believe, I believe what I believe so don't you dare call me a liar"

 

Now you see what you are really saying is 'a thing is a thing and nothing other' 'I believe what I believe and not something other than what I believe'

 

You assert that this is objective reality. QED

[Nikolai1]

Man, you're like some annoying yappy sixth former. Everything I argue of course I know to be complete nonsense, i don't need to be told it.  If you tell me its nonsense, though, the nonsense is yours alone.  

 

But though I know the nonsense of my own words, I can tell a mile off a person who has found the truth and is trying to explain it.  They speak nonsense, and it is confusing and paradoxical.  Your words have a very vulgar consistency.  You wrote a book with one half of the truth, and you have since repudiated it and write on these forums the other half of the truth.  Big wide pendulum swings, so wide that you are forgetting you are swinging and you thnk you are headed in a straight like towards the truth.

 

I want to see narrow little swings, within the space of a sentence I wish to see your confusion.  Then you'll be conscious of it yourself and consciousness of your confusion is itself the truth.

[Nikolai1]

When the awakened speak the truth they do so with irony.  The awakened auditor sees only the irony; the unawakened auditor hears the truth and agrees today, then diasagrees tomorrow.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Nikolai1

[Seeker of Wisdom]

A good example, again, is the placebo effect in medicine.  Patients are routinely given dummy pills, which is a form of lie (and some ethicists question if they should be used at all because of the deception involved), but which acts on the patients body and heals as if it were objective truth.[...]

But the placebo was still objectively a placebo. If you give someone a sugar pill and say it's aspirin, there won't be aspirin in their body. Just because the person believes it's aspirin, and their body responds as though it were, doesn't mean the pill contained aspirin.

 

Someone believing a lie can have a similar or identical effect to if the lie were true - but the lie is still a lie. Whether someone is being truthful or not is objective quite simply because it isn't a matter of opinion.

 

'Supernatural is a great TV show' - opinion, can't be right or wrong, subjective.

'Jensen Tackles is one of the actors' - objective truth.

'Sylvester Stallone plays Castiel' - objective falsehood.