objective/subjective truth?

[burnt]

How would objective reality be distinguished within subjective reality?
Would it be that we know/think something to be objective reality when it is something we agree on?
So in other words, is objective reality seen from a subjective framework, a (subjective) reality that is very consistent with other parts of that framework?
Any confirmation of any objective truth could only be perceived subjectively.

Hmm.

When I say subjective reality I am talking about our inner world. Whats going on in our head.

When I talk about objective reality I am talking about the stuff going on outside our head (which is also in our head).

I don't think it comes down to agreeing on anything.

Those two worlds are for sure linked. Our thinking self depends on all that matter out there making us up. Our thinking self can be said to "emerge" from the activity and structure of our brain. It doesn't need to be much else really. Its not some other reality its a property of organized matter. That doesn't mean that all self awareness is the same there is probably differenes such as those seen with other animals.

We can maybe speculate that some aspects of consciousness are beyond our material (matter and energy) self but that is rather speculative. We can say with as much certainty as is currently possible that aspects of our inner world depend 100% on the structure and activity going on in the brain. We know this from all kinds of studies of brain damage, mental illness, brain surgery, strokes, epilepsy, hallucinations, optical illusions the list goes on.

So why get hung up on the semantics? Consciousness appears to be an emergent property of organized matter and we happen to call it subjective experience because its a decent description.

When we make a word or use a word to describe something that's where the agreement comes in.

 

[kyrolima]

The thing is, that everybody can manifest certain illnesses in his body trough toughts.
So you see the power of the mind is great.
If you project that on the world you can say that every individual is capable of being what he wants to be in the physical world, because his thoughts seem to influence the matter!

There are even physically broken people who managed to heal themselves trough the power of thought.

Where's the boundary between inner and outer world if you view it from that direction?
I can't see a huge one!

So the whole objective/subjective thing disappears.
There is no object and no subject.

It simply IS.


Don't think im reciting somebody here

 

[burnt]

The thing is, that everybody can manifest certain illnesses in his body trough toughts.
So you see the power of the mind is great.
If you project that on the world you can say that every individual is capable of being what he wants to be in the physical world, because his thoughts seem to influence the matter!

There is a major difference between how your thoughts can generate illness and what you claim that your thoughts can influence the physical world outsides your body without action. By action I mean of course when you move around and do all the stuff that humans do you are influencing reality. But what your saying is that its the thoughts directly that influence reality?

Have you ever heard of phantom limb syndrome? This is when people who have lost a limb still feel it months or even years after the accident. Sometimes they can still feel the pain of losing the limb. But obviously the limb is not there. So the brain just hasn't "clicked" to realize its not there anymore. Surprisingly what works in a significant number of patients is to have them view their hand in a mirror and then the brain finally makes the connection and the pain and feeling goes away sometimes instantly.

So you see the brain is capable of causing a physical sensation like pain or feeling in the absence of a real stimulus. But its just a perception in your mind. This is why the placebo effect is real. This is why people can feel better just by thinking they are getting better. This is why people can think they are healing by homeopathy (which is 100% placebo), acupuncture, crystals and all this other nonsense. This kind of phenomenon completely explains:

There are even physically broken people who managed to heal themselves trough the power of thought.

Without using explanations like this:

If you project that on the world you can say that every individual is capable of being what he wants to be in the physical world, because his thoughts seem to influence the matter!

The reason thoughts can influence matter inside the body is because thinking is a physical process. When you think about things you cause things to happen in the brain. Many kinds of things happening are subconscious and you are not even aware of them. That's why people are so easily duped by the placebo effect as well. This is why a positive attitude is so beneficial for health and dealing with stress. Its not because thoughts are seperate from matter and influence matter through some mystical forces that we do not detect but because thoughts are a physical and computational process.

 

[kyrolima]

Burnt, you see this all too materialistic in my opinion.
Of course the immaterialisic can never be proven.
There are no physical instruments to measure them.

But i think you make it too easy.
The brain might be an important instrument, but I think we're much more!

 

[burnt]

Burnt, you see this all too materialistic in my opinion.
Of course the immaterialisic can never be proven.
There are no physical instruments to measure them.

But i think you make it too easy.
The brain might be an important instrument, but I think we're much more!

If this immaterial effects the material it is therefore measurable. That is the fallacy in your argument. Anything that interacts with normal matter is measurable. If it doesn't interact with matter in any way shape or form you will never experience it and you will never know anything about it.

You want to believe you are more then your brain. But there is no evidence that is the case.

 

[kyrolima]

As i said. No evidence can ever be provided.
Forget about the evidence!
We are intelligent.
We are a race before their breaktrough!
Look around, many people start meditating etc. etc.

Man is evolving spiritually.

That is evidence for me!

Under normal circumstances no animal is in search for higher states of conciousness in their inner being! There would be no logical reason for it: No benefit in surviving, no benefit in gathering food etc.

Why should man come up with such a useless thing as meditation!

 

[polytrip]

Back to the ubject on how subjective and objective reality relate. with what arguments would each of you (burnt and Mr_DMT)try to convince eachother of your perspective, considering that wour opponent would be completely willing to follow your line of thinking?

 

[kyrolima]

Thats a really expansive question.

I'll try.

My basic argument:

subjective and objective reality are inevitable togehter.
There is no reality without any perceiver, because the perceiver is needed.

If there is no "YOU" there is nobody who can claim something about reality. Therefore any intelligence perceiving reality has to BE there.
The individual to BE there is an absolute necessity! Otherwise nobody is there who can talk about it.

My next point:

reality is NOW and ONLY NOW!
Past is no reality, the future might come to reality but it IS NOT reality!

If you understand this completely there is no need for any thoughtmodel about reality, because it outdates as time progresses!
Therefore all science is just a conclusion from the past and an estimated outcome for future.

Math is something different... but let's not go into detail ^^

and my conclusion:

The matter is there, but there is also something else. Matter can't perceive itself! There has to be conciousness and this conciousness must be eternal, because it's not bound to the body!


Burnt is a very scientific person.
Science is just a tool by man to understand things better.
Conciousness is something a scientist can't grasp.
It slips trough his fingers. Therefore it's got to be not existent at all.
Science is a fake-God too. Many people think it's the truth. But it never can be..

 

[Citta]

I like your approach to all of these things Burnt, I really do. It is good with some healthy skepticism instead of blind superstition. But there comes a danger with going the skeptic and purely scientific way; one risks to become very narrow minded. Likewise it is dangerous to walk the pure superstitious way, not being skeptic at all and giving a shit about the facts. Lean too much to either of these sides and you've got yourself a problem. There is a big difference between the two of course, and there is no need to start telling me that science are based on the measurable stuff and bla bla this and bla bla that - that would be to start defending your case like you were the only one with the answers (just like new age mumbo jumbo people tend to do). But science is just a (VERY good) tool in the toolbox, not the whole box..


Science is a damn good and fascinating discipline, but I think you're making a mistake if you think this is the only tool available. You are basically just duplicating all the discoveries made by others in your own mind if you relate to science and science only at all times. I also see this kind of besserwesser attitude, a kind of arrogance, coming from alot of people who praise science above even their own goddamn thinking and experience (the same can go for the blind faithed one as well). I think I've noticed this a few times with you Burnt, but maybe I just overanalyze. You'll find fanatics at both sides of this coin, and there is no need to be on either of these sides. The best is to stay in the middle, staying open, with enough knowledge and skepticism to at least steer away from the really obvious misunderstandings and blind faiths.

The universe, reality, this crazy stuff we're apart of is too amazing and too extreme than to start claiming this and that for any of us. We don't really know shit. Yes, we know some laws of nature and so on, and they are of great value to practical and intellectual purposes. But let's not close the book yet eh? Be a little bit open minded, use philosophy, use experiences, use science, gain knowledge. Push yourself in several directions and seek. This will truly benefit you intellectually, spiritually maybe, scientifically, emotionally and enrichen your perspectives and your very experience of life. And experience is all you got...

Now Burnt, keep on doing what you do, but as I said be vary of moving too much in one direction. This goes for anyone in any direction. Just my 2 cents, no offense to anyone intended. With that said you are a very knowledgeable person Burnt, which is a great quality indeed, and I do agree with almost everything you point out =)

PS: I wrote this post as a general response to many of your posts in many threads Burnt, so I might as well have posted it somewhere else. Anyway, peace my friend.

 

[kyrolima]

I like your approach to all of these things Burnt, I really do. It is good with some healthy skepticism instead of blind superstition. But there comes a danger with going the skeptic and purely scientific way; one risks to become very narrow minded. Likewise it is dangerous to walk the pure superstitious way, not being skeptic at all and giving a shit about the facts. Lean too much to either of these sides and you've got yourself a problem. There is a big difference between the two of course, and there is no need to start telling me that science are based on the measurable stuff and bla bla this and bla bla that - that would be to start defending your case like you were the only one with the answers (just like new age mumbo jumbo people tend to do). But science is just a (VERY good) tool in the toolbox, not the whole box..


Science is a damn good and fascinating discipline, but I think you're making a mistake if you think this is the only tool available. You are basically just duplicating all the discoveries made by others in your own mind if you relate to science and science only at all times. I also see this kind of besserwesser attitude, a kind of arrogance, coming from alot of people who praise science above even their own goddamn thinking and experience (the same can go for the blind faithed one as well). I think I've noticed this a few times with you Burnt, but maybe I just overanalyze. You'll find fanatics at both sides of this coin, and there is no need to be on either of these sides. The best is to stay in the middle, staying open, with enough knowledge and skepticism to at least steer away from the really obvious misunderstandings and blind faiths.

The universe, reality, this crazy stuff we're apart of is too amazing and to extreme than to start claiming this and that for any of us. We don't really know shit. Yes, we know some laws of nature and so on, and they are of great value to practical and intellectual purposes. But let's not close the book yet eh? Keep a little bit open minded, use philosophy, use experiences, use science, gain knowledge. Push yourself in several directions and seek. This will truly benefit you intellectually, spiritually maybe, scientifically, emotionally and enrichen your perspectives and your very experience of life. And experience is all you got...

Now Burnt, keep on doing what you do, but as I said be vary of moving too much in one direction. This goes for anyone in any direction. Just my 2 cents, no offense to anyone intended. With that said you are a really knowledgeable person Burnt, which is a great quality indeed, and I do agree with almost everything you point out =)

PS: I wrote this post as a general response to many of your posts in many threads Burnt, so I might as well have posted it somewhere else. Anyway, peace my friend.

I can support this essay!