Perceptions of Reality

reality is everything , even the unreal , even hallucinations , the issue with perceving reality is we are on the inside , part of the whole big lump that reality is , we are too close to be able to see what the picture is , let allow if it is naturalistic , impressionistic or abstract ..and we are very limited in the ways in which we interact with reality .What is needed is a well equiped observer outside of reality , then they could see what is there and tell us , IF they could constuct a language to pass meaningful ideas across .We humans do have such a high opition of ourselves , that we tend to assume things are here for us to understand , do we think if we were not here reality would be affected ?Edited by Admin, : Fix quote.

Anything outside of reality is not real.____

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

what do you mean by not real ?such an observer would have to be apart from reality to be able to view the whole , as i did say the would need to be well equiped .i agree if reality is everything there is ,then i can not see of any way to find such an observer . Even any god/gods would be part of reality .We with our very limited perceptive abilities have no hope of "seeing" what reality . (let alone what shade of blue it is )

Sure. My point exactly. I agree.Except that reality can't be any shade of blue because that would require light from outside reality to hit it so it can reflect the blue part of the spectrum and absorb the other colours. But if the light is outside reality it can't be real so there's no light to...Aw, skip it.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

You may be close to a self-revelation here, Rob. Before leaving your faux pas too quickly, consider the full implications of this comment.You say you were too 'caught in the drama'--too eager to award yourself an unearned last laugh and preachy exit line--to keep track of the comment's principal idea--even when it was clearly referenced at the top as a theme you introduced only hours before.This is an ongoing Rob problem. Too busy playing to those grandstands to focus even on the basics of the topic at hand. More often than not, the topic you abandon is one you raised.You've created a number of problems for yourself with this pattern. It's one reason you encounter growing lack of enthusiasm for promoting new topics you introduce. You can't frame a debate for toffee, to begin with, because of carelessness with detail. And everyone has learned by now that, as soon as any discussion you start gets at all interesting, you're likely to give up on it and start preaching to the peanut gallery.Focus. That's what you've been hearing from people. This recent mishap shows what good advice it is.Difficulty sustaining a conversation in a coherent, functional manner does not make one righteous, humble, persecuted, or any more likely to go to heaven than anyone else. That's just melodrama. What it makes you is a person who needs to pay more attention.As a great dramatist once put it:

More matter, please, with less art.

_____Edited by Archer Opterix, : to the barber's.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Archer:Yes... well... we all need to keep things in perspective right?Or is it just me?Wasn't it you, who talked about quotes being useless or something along those lines?I'll do my best to give more matter.That is... if you can fathom what matter actually is.

The wrappings are real (books, ekg waves) but the ideas are not (necessarily). And when they tell me what I am dreaming ... then I get worried

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

That a person has hallucinations is reality, but the "pink elephants" that they see in their hallucinations are not reality.Yes we are on the inside - not just of reality but of our individual perceptions of reality. To the person with the hallucinations the pink elephants are "real" because they are perceived in the same way that real things are perceived.The question is how we can differentiate between those perceptions that are hallucinations from those that are reality.We can test for the existence of pink elephants and see if the perception of pink elephants can be reproduced. If it can, then we look at the conditions under which it is reproduced and how the perceptions compare (are the elephants the same size, behave the same and have the same shade of pink). If one of the conditions involves the biochemical alteration of senses (ie - high levels of inebriation, hallucinogenic drugs etc.) then this brings into question the accuracy of those perceptions. If there is little correlation between the several perceptions of pink elephants then this brings into question the accuracy of the perceptions.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

oh but the pink elephants are "real" , and this can be shown by the fact we are talking about them , we have brought them into our reality , just beacuse they have no physical state , not everyone can see them , and you cannot "agree" that they can be reproduced , even by the original hallucinator , they have a exsistance because we have interacted with them . . . . reality is everything ,everywhere ,everywhen ..Now go extrapolate the above statement . . . . . . if you can prove the exsistance of rice pudding , income tax and god ( in what ever for she picks this week ) you are ...hmm 57.4% of the way to seeing the question ....now consider love , truth , justice , hate , evil , crime , rights ,...do they exsist , or are they mere products of the human mind interacting with other human minds ? ?are they real and part of our reality?

You've confused the concept of pink elephants with the reality of pink elephants.

sorry but i disagree , we are talking about very specific pink elephants , we can define them in "real" terms , we can say when they first where noticed , we can list the people who have been affected by them , we can say when and where they have not been , we can list who and who not has interacted with them ... or are you saying there are things outside of reality that can affect us directly and demonstaightably ??if reality is the inclusive whole and we are embeded in it all concepts that affect and effect us are real and a part of the said reality .We can produce as much reliable data on these pink elephants , including the fact that they are a hallucination effect ,as we can on say Stonehenge ... which seems to be made of very solid lumps of matter ... both are part of our reality , the fact that they are made of differing things is just the way reality is .

But that doesn't make it real. You are still talking about the concept, not the reality, of pink elephants. Do this independently with different people and you will see the difference. Different people will agree down to the finest detail of the artifacts of Stonehenge. They can compare pictures taken at different times by different people and see that the stones are the same. What will be the agreement on the shade of pink, the size and weight of pink elephants?The concept may exist in common literature about hallucinations, but outside of the concept there is no reality to pink elephants.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I think Ikabod is confusing objective reality with consensual reality. It's not the concept that he is claiming is real, but the experience. That people experience similar hallucinations is hardly surprising considering that we share similar tools and experience.

Stonehenge and hallucinations exist.
Hallucinations are made of the same thing as your perception of Stonehenge. That you experience the processing of sensory input, does not make the source real outside of that experience. That everyone else can share the experience of the source does. No one can share your perception of Stonehenge, but anyone can measure its size, and observe its shadow. The only person who can experience your pink elephant, or techno gnome, or insectoid ferris wheel or holy light, is you. That others claim similar experiences suggests to me that we share similarly faulty perception tools.Listing people who have interacted with pink elephants is like listing people who've had imaginary friends. I think you are confusing experience with reality, or denying that there is a difference.

not really what im doing is not splitting reality up into parts based on features of the "thing" .The whole issue is that the specific pink elephants we are talking about are part of the whole reality that is our reality . Then we can look at the issue of things that have no physical form and how the work in our reality . a points here , i am not talking about others experiencing the pink elephants , but they experience the people who have see the elephants , the "real" effect of the elephants is in how they have affected the people two or more steps away from the original vision.
ie the doctor treating the person for the hallucination .. his work is real ...his work is there because of the elepants , the doctors reality is shaped , partly by the elephants , and he the passes on the affect to the rest of the whole of reality . no , i am saying reality is everything , including experience , everything we experience IS within , and a part of , reality ..Edited by ikabod, : No reason given.