Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8951 total)
286 online now:
Coragyps, Diomedes, DrJones*, JonF, PaulK, RAZD, Theodoric (7 members, 279 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 866,675 Year: 21,711/19,786 Month: 274/1,834 Week: 274/315 Day: 30/77 Hour: 0/8


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is the world a construct of my imagination?
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 33 (356898)
10-16-2006 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Gospel Preacher
09-27-2006 9:29 PM


Epistemics
I am currently struggling with the objective concept of reality. I wish to believe that I am IN this world, and that other people like me exist, but when I come face to face with my own consciousness, all the evidence seems to point toward the notion that I am all that there is, and that reality is based entirley upon some component of my consciousness. It began when I realized that I could not imagine anyone else's consciousness but my own. Now, I do not mean that I can't imagine what they are feeling. I can do that, but in order to do that, I would have to use my own feeler to feel it. I cannot grasp the fact that they are conscious beings such as myself. It seems that there can only be one consciousness, and the notion of, "Why is my consciousness the one is the only consciousness" makes little sense, because consciousness is in itself, in my mind, essentially me. So no matter what, if a thing is conscious, that thing is me.

You're in the Matrix, dude... Nothing is real, not even the reality of reality. :eek:

Alright, in all seriousness...... Lets start at the beginning.

What predicates reality? What is, or what are, the defining principle(s) that constitute reality? This is quite possibly the apex of mankind’s endless questions listed high on the mental totem with the other biggie, ‘what is the meaning of life.’

I think we could justifiably say that reality is the quantitative summation of all things true. Reality is the totality of possessing or being all that is considered actual. But this doesn't really answer personal questions, just some philosophical musings. So lets look at from another angle. If I were standing in front of you speaking these very words, how would you deduce that I am real? What would the mechanism of my being ‘real’ constitute? Well, suffice it to say that reality is typically consummated by our five senses, separating the abstract from the actual. The brain receives messages through stimuli via bodily portals, such as the eyes, ears, and nose. But how are we to think that life is nothing more than biological functions? Does reality begin and end with our senses? Are we supposed to assume that the mechanisms of the body, alone, account for reality?

You asked the nihilistic question of whether or not anything else could be considered real apart from your own mind. If I were to die would reality, itself, cease to exist because I am no longer physically capable of receiving and discerning messages? {Not to make a mockery of his death, but to use him as an applicable basis for comparison), was RobinRohan not real because he is no longer with us? Is he only real if he is able to discern messages? Was he at one point real and now is longer real? Will the earth stop spinning because he is no longer an active participant in the affairs of the physical universe? Is it necessary that I perceive reality, in order for there to be, a reality? I think all the indicators would insinuate that this would not be the case. Even still we find philosophers spending themselves, engaged in deep conference of such questions.

It seems to me that some of its adherents are apt to over-complicate everything to the point of absurdity. For instance, ‘Nihilists’ believe that there is no justification for any knowledge claims. They believe that nothing can truly be known by any semblance of veracity. It shouldn't take long, however, to see the flaw in their basic premise. How can the Nihilist even purport such a claim if he hasn’t the ability to ‘know’ that knowledge is unattainable? If nothing can be truly verified then he should not offer any solutions, being that, it means nothing. What I mean to say is, if knowledge is unattainable altogether, then what gives him the reason to question my truth or anyone else's?

Similarly, the one who holds fast to the solipsist argument believes that the ‘self’ is the only thing that anyone could know. You've made similar notions. Ironically, however, solipsist proponents are often the same people who will argue with you for hours about reality, and what’s more, morality. But if they are only able to acquaint themselves with reality strictly through themselves, then what is their justification for criticizing anothers version of reality? If they do not know if there is even knowledge apart from themselves then what are they arguing about? It is this kind of illogic that unwittingly pits the philosopher against his own beliefs. The only viable option is that Truth exists. We may not be able to fully comprehend that truth, but philosophically is seems to be the only theory that doesn't cancel itself out with its own logic.


"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Gospel Preacher, posted 09-27-2006 9:29 PM Gospel Preacher has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Gospel Preacher, posted 10-17-2006 1:33 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

  
Gospel Preacher
Member
Posts: 549
From: n/a
Joined: 01-19-2004


Message 32 of 33 (357071)
10-17-2006 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Hyroglyphx
10-16-2006 4:23 PM


Re: Epistemics
Thank you so much. That really helps.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-16-2006 4:23 PM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-17-2006 1:45 PM Gospel Preacher has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 33 (357073)
10-17-2006 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Gospel Preacher
10-17-2006 1:33 PM


Re: Epistemics
Thank you so much. That really helps.

No worries. ;)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Gospel Preacher, posted 10-17-2006 1:33 PM Gospel Preacher has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019