What is the correct measuring stick for distinguishing between real and unreal? Why is it that our dreams are considered 'unreal', for instance? Does the mere fact we can't contextually link the environments in which our dreams take place with the environments of the waking world mean that dreaming environments don't truly exist on some level? (How can one really know for sure?)
2006-09-09
20:20:04
·
16 answers
·
asked by
Lunarsight
5
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ Philosophy
Er - it should be "How does one distinguish between real and not real?". Pardon my grammatical snafu.
2006-09-09
20:21:23 ·
update #1
MaqAtak - See, here's the problem. If I get educated with a Bachelor Of Arts, how do I know the education or the BA are real? They could just be a figment of my imagination also. (Or somebody else's imagination, perhaps.)
2006-09-09
20:27:53 ·
update #2
Be Happy - Actually, that's not entirely true. In fact, lucid dreamers often use that question in a dream in order to make the dream lucid. They ask "Is this real or not?" There have been cases where I've become aware of the existence of the waking world within a dream. Once you do this, it empowers you, since you know there's no threat in the dream.
2006-09-10
04:58:40 ·
update #3
Eskaymenen - To play devil's advocate, I'd argue that within our dreams, we do get sensory inputs, even though it's not our sensory organs generating them. For instance, they find that when we 'see' something in a dream, it's the same part of our brain that is active as if we were seeing things externally with our eyes.
2006-09-10
12:13:10 ·
update #4
Argghh - There are a lot of good answers for this one. I think I'll leave it to a vote.
2006-09-11
11:35:58 ·
update #5
We believe in consciousness. Our awareness is thought to be when the brain is in this state, probably because we all share a basically similar reality, whereas dreams are too hard to make sense out of, which is what we humans try to do through logic.
Personally, I think you make a great point, maybe dreams reflect real environments and events SOMEWHERE or on some plane. What we call common sense can exclude possibilties that can't be disproven, and might very well end up being proven in years to come. They say we have parallel universes, so if some scientitst can allow for that possibility, why exclude the dream state, or worse, discount it as merely the illogical chaos of the subconscious?
I will say that dreams often seem like random unrelated events that happen and in places you wouldn't expect would be difficult for me to make sense out of as a reality. I mean why would a reality exist wherein things don't make sense. I know..maybe we just don't see the connection. could be.
So the next "hot" dream I have about some woman in my life, I'll tell her that I "did" her clone/twin/duplicate being, and that on that other level, she wanted me. Then she'll reply..."in your dreams!"
2006-09-09 20:40:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Kick it. If it hurts, it's real enough for practical purposes. Even if you're in a dream, if you kick it and it hurts, then you might as well take it for real, because it really did hurt.
Our whole existence is based on the concept. Because I sincerely doubt that this is all there is...in which case this is not "ultimate reality". When we are through this phase of our existence and looking back on it, we are likely to find that it is all a lot less real than we thought it was.
So kick it, if it makes you feel better.
2006-09-10 12:12:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by rabid_scientist 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I consider dreams as real. It actually is a matter of definition and language. We are so stuck in language that we cannot even imagine a reality which is no 3 dimensional. What is real? : The reality of which you cannot deny! Or to put it other way: ''What cannot be considered as non-existent must be real in some way'' Can you deny that your experience in a dream? if you were scared for example, can you deny that feeling? if you were scared in a dream, then you were REALLY scared. the experinece is real. And all we know about reality is our personal, subjective experience. SO if you experience something, it is real. Realness is not 3dimensional.
2006-09-10 06:15:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Zriah 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
if you're referring to objective reality, our sensory perception can be used as the tool. We could use some mechanical,technological, and optical tools to enhance our capability but the yardstick is still how it can be observable to us. but if you're referring to contextual reality then it is a completely different thing. Contextual reality is discursive, there is nothing you can use to measure its reality status, power often try to dictate what is real or what is not but, they try to produce reality, society tries the same thing, but in the end only the individual can decide what is real or not for him/her.
2006-09-10 10:24:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by jingleh4m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
In my opinion, there is no distinction between real and not.
As far as I'm concerned, experience is reality, and experience differs from person to person.
Take, for example, a person who walks down the street at night, and suddenly, to him, the buildings are looming overhead, leaning over the street, ready to collapse on him. Now, for most people, that would not be the case - those buildings do not move. Yet, for this person, they do - for him, that is his reality, and it is every bit as real as yours or mine.
It's sort of like the theory of relativity - or, the layman's (mine) explanation thereof - time passes differently for each person, depending on their experience of it. Time, our ultimate measure of reality, in this case, becomes flexible - and with it, reality.
2006-09-10 06:00:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I'm don't think that there is a perfect way to distinguish.
I believe that we consider things real if they show consistency with our past experiences.
If the laws of physics changed, if hundreds of women suddenly wanted me, or if something bizarrely catastrophic occurred, then it would probably not be real.
2006-09-10 07:12:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by Michael M 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
In reality (not when dreaming) we know it is reality because we can find the time and logical / rational thinking to ask the question is this a dream or reality. It can't be a dream if we ask that sort of question. In reality we are in control. in a dream we are at the mercy of unpredictable forces.
2006-09-10 05:32:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Subjective reality depends on how reasonable -- or skeptical -- the honest observer is.
Objective reality is phenomenal. It is usually testable by different direct physical examinations.
Both are usually required and therefore good enough for me.
2006-09-10 05:35:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by : ) 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
firstly dreams may be real or unreal.
dreams occur how do you behave in your social life
it means that how do you respond with your pals,family,society.
dreams are of several types
1}the dreams which which show your role in your life[real]
2}the dreams of things imaginary you think of
dreams may real in few cases which are very close to your heart
2006-09-10 03:39:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by avee 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Reality is a concept that has no factual basis. We cannot say that even our own mudane daily life experiences are real with any certainty.
2006-09-10 05:26:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Lady G 2
·
1⤊
1⤋