Is there an objective reality?
I have long existed under the realization that reality is subjective...meaning essentially that it is impossible for us to know the true nature of anything outside of ourselves. What one individual may be able to sense of their "surroundings" will inevitably differ in any number of ways from what the person standing next to them senses. I accept that there are universal laws of nature such as gravity and so on but those laws in and of themselves do not prove that reality is not subjective. If the way an individual experiences the passage of time is relative and/or subjective...then all laws of nature are.
A guy named Brian attended one of meetings a while back. He is one of the owners of The Black Cat Lounge, the bar where we held the meeting. He said some very interesting things in defense of the objectiveness of reality. And as much as I would like to comfort him and all of you...we are, in fact, like he said, ships without anchors...at least until we find those anchors within.
Brian says:
Objective reality is a leap of faith but a far more plausible, probable one because we can't conceive of something that doesn't exist as our physical brains are only capable of processing things that adhere to the laws of a possible reality.
As physical things our brains are subject to the laws of inertia meaning that they must be stimulated by an outside force in order to change.
That sounded really good and I even applauded him....but then I thought about it and I kept coming back to, "Objective reality is a leap of faith...." That, in and of itself, makes it subjective...does it not?
If our brains are like programmed computers, as Brian said, that are only capable of processing things that adhere to a "possible reality" then the truth of the matter is that any number of inconceivable things could be taking place around us but our brains are only able to receive or sense what has been programmed as a "possible reality". You are still taking it on faith that what you perceive is real because ultimately all you have to go on is what your senses tell you and the word of those who are sharing the experience.
I will agree that we must be stimulated by outside forces in order to change but there is no guarantee that those outside forces are what our senses perceive them to be and as we all process the stimuli with varied levels of precision...we depend upon the perceptions of others to help form our idea of reality....which gives us the impression of an objective reality but it's still an impression based upon many subjective perceptions. The Discovery Channel did a show on the Science of Babies that reveals how our brains are taught to process stimuli. Our neurological receptors begin like un-imprinted stem cells, able to receive all forms of stimuli. Imagine how confusing "reality" must be for an infant before they are taught to process it, focus on certain things and ignore, deny, or reject others.
I will admit...he talked a good talk but I consider myself a true skeptic. I am skeptical of skepticism and it is the subjective nature of reality that greases the wheel of this true skepticism as it turns in search of that anchor you spoke of. This is certainly not the most comfortable understanding of our situation but until someone or some form of nature itself can prove otherwise then this understanding is the foundation upon which all knowledge is built. Kinda scary, huh?
"All we know is that we don't know nothing."
---Op Ivy
and Socrates.
A guy named Brian attended one of meetings a while back. He is one of the owners of The Black Cat Lounge, the bar where we held the meeting. He said some very interesting things in defense of the objectiveness of reality. And as much as I would like to comfort him and all of you...we are, in fact, like he said, ships without anchors...at least until we find those anchors within.
Brian says:
Objective reality is a leap of faith but a far more plausible, probable one because we can't conceive of something that doesn't exist as our physical brains are only capable of processing things that adhere to the laws of a possible reality.
As physical things our brains are subject to the laws of inertia meaning that they must be stimulated by an outside force in order to change.
That sounded really good and I even applauded him....but then I thought about it and I kept coming back to, "Objective reality is a leap of faith...." That, in and of itself, makes it subjective...does it not?
If our brains are like programmed computers, as Brian said, that are only capable of processing things that adhere to a "possible reality" then the truth of the matter is that any number of inconceivable things could be taking place around us but our brains are only able to receive or sense what has been programmed as a "possible reality". You are still taking it on faith that what you perceive is real because ultimately all you have to go on is what your senses tell you and the word of those who are sharing the experience.
I will agree that we must be stimulated by outside forces in order to change but there is no guarantee that those outside forces are what our senses perceive them to be and as we all process the stimuli with varied levels of precision...we depend upon the perceptions of others to help form our idea of reality....which gives us the impression of an objective reality but it's still an impression based upon many subjective perceptions. The Discovery Channel did a show on the Science of Babies that reveals how our brains are taught to process stimuli. Our neurological receptors begin like un-imprinted stem cells, able to receive all forms of stimuli. Imagine how confusing "reality" must be for an infant before they are taught to process it, focus on certain things and ignore, deny, or reject others.
I will admit...he talked a good talk but I consider myself a true skeptic. I am skeptical of skepticism and it is the subjective nature of reality that greases the wheel of this true skepticism as it turns in search of that anchor you spoke of. This is certainly not the most comfortable understanding of our situation but until someone or some form of nature itself can prove otherwise then this understanding is the foundation upon which all knowledge is built. Kinda scary, huh?
"All we know is that we don't know nothing."
---Op Ivy
and Socrates.
Comments
Post a Comment