English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

in order for us to have a subjective reality. there must be something there in order to have a subjective reality. because if there isnt, then what is it that we base our ideas on?? and what is it that we perceive?? and if there is no objective reality then how is it that we created colors, sounds, touch, and smell if we have had no experience prior to them?? think of someone being born in a sensory deprivation tank, he would have no concept of a color so how could he create an illusion which consists of them along with the other senses??

but without subjective reality then there can be no objective reality. because if we dont have perceptions then there can be no objective reality to perceive.

so then do you beleive that this is all real?? or illusion?

2007-02-18 15:00:00 · 10 answers · asked by kill j 1 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

10 answers

This is more easily understandable if one considers the actual scale of the components of an atom. If one takes into account the fact that the neutrons, protons and electrons of an atom actually have huge spaces between them it becomes clear that the atoms that make up seemingly solid objects are made up of 99+ percent empty space.

This alone does not seem too important till you add the idea that the atoms that make up seemingly solid objects are more of a loose conglomeration that share a similar attraction but never really touch each other.

At first glance this does not really seem relevant, but closer analysis reveals that this adds a tremendous amount of empty space to solid objects that are already made up of atoms that are 99 percent space. When so-called solid objects are seen in this light it becomes apparent that they can in no way be the seemingly solid objects they appear to be.

We ourselves are not exceptions to this phenomenon.

These seemingly solid objects are more like ghostly images that we interpret as solid objects based on our perceptual conclusions.

From this we must conclude that Perception is some sort of a trick that helps us to take these ghostly images and turn them into a world we can associate and interact with. This clever device seems to be a creation of our intellect that enables us to interact with each other in what appears to be a three dimensional reality.

I hope that helps to answered your question.

Love and blessings Don

2007-02-19 06:58:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You should be careful in saying that with no subjective reality there could be no objective reality. I think what you mean is that there would be an objective reality (from some god's eye point of view) but that there would be nobody around to experience it.

Ok, with that out of the way I'm not sure that this is a problem which should worry you. I think it is a mistake to try and separate "objective" and "subjective" reality because all that we will ever be able to experience is, by definition, subjective reality. This is what you mean when you said that objective reality relies on subjective reality. But the situation is even worse than you imply because all reality we experience is subjective. Not only does an objective reality require a subjective reality to be perceived, this subjective perception is all that the subject will ever be able to have. It does seem likely that this reality corresponds to some reality outside of our experiences. But since we never will be able to experience that reality, only the perceived subjective reality, it doesn't really make any sense to talk about it. In other words, to talk of some "objective" reality only makes sense if you can go beyond subjective perception (as perhaps god could).

To speak of that objective reality would be pointless because it would be an unexperienced reality and so the words used to describe that reality would not refer to anything. It would be like, for example, trying to speak about the mating habits of a species in a galaxy millions of light years away: these habits are not anything you perceive or know about. Of course it is possible that that species exists and how you describe them is 100% accurate. Nonetheless, since you do not really have anything in your own experience to refer to when you talk about those habits, your words are empty. As you yourself said, how can there be any experience prior to perception? Trying to talk about an unexperienced objective reality makes as little sense as the person in the sensory deprivation tank talking about sunsets. They may accurately describe a sunset, but only out of pure luck, not because their words refer to anything. You cannot use your words to refer to an experience which you have never had. So stop worrying. :)

By the way, very good question.

2007-02-18 23:59:38 · answer #2 · answered by student_of_life 6 · 0 0

Sounds like you're in the midst of a solipsistic epiphany.

Samuel Johnson answered the subjectivist argument, "I refute it THUS" (kicking a rock).

Personally, I see subjective vs. objective as an artifical binary opposition imposed on what is actually a continuum of belief. A more interesting question is how different beliefs about this issue affect individual behaviour.

If reality is illusion, why travel or get to know people? Why waste your time familiarizing yourself with the details of an enormous fraud? Better to focus inward and decide what is important and what isn't for yourself.

If the subjective is completely dependent on and driven totally by exterior phenomena, why bother to listen to your 'inner voice'? Self is the illusion; seeking isolation and contemplation is a complete waste of time.

I believe that what matters is what YOU decide is important.

My personal experience is that sometimes I am outwardly oriented and seek truth from my senses and experiences, other times I am inwardly directed and try to figure out my own identity and purpose.

Thanks for the interesting question!

2007-02-18 23:22:03 · answer #3 · answered by Eclectic_N 4 · 0 0

Calm down. Subjective "reality" is simply your take on what you perceive with your senses - whether you have personally experienced the smell, taste, sound or feel, or have been TOLD of the existence of something, and you believe it exists. You will organize all that data according to its usefulness, placing the data that ensures your survival in one area of your mind, socializing info in another, and so on. Your "reality" is unique, since you created it from your perspective (only you are in your place right now). And NO, you cannot successfully imagine a color if you have never seen one. Imagine being blind. If you want to get a better understanding of how we create our worlds and the relationship of our world to the ones created by others, go visit the blind. And NEVER try to imagine NOTHING - you'll go nuts.

2007-02-18 23:15:32 · answer #4 · answered by Miz Teri 3 · 0 0

This is the objective part of all of what is subjective--the statement "I do not know"

The following objective statement means that there is a reality.

If the illusion is the reality, if the reality is that we are only dreams and apparitions from which to define this supposed existence, and if the reality bears no objectiveness, there is our very objectiveness from which we use to define the subjectivity of it.

2007-02-18 23:10:39 · answer #5 · answered by Mayonaise 6 · 0 0

I think you are putting the cart before the horse...
Objective reality is simply that which is around us, that which is objects and encompasses many people.
Subjective reality is that which is unique to each of us and is what we are subject to. It includes the intangibles such as parenting, amount of money our parents have, level of popularity in high school...
IF you were isolated in a sensory deprivation tank at birth, then that would be your objective AND subjective reality.

Quit trying to read so much into something.

2007-02-18 23:10:25 · answer #6 · answered by wi_saint 6 · 1 0

To answer this, I will tell you a small story (Actually a real incident). There was this guy going crazy with his philisophical thoughts. He thought why these things were called with those names. He thought of naming the objects differently. He started calling food as clock, clock as bed, bed as flower, flower as chair, chair as flower pot, flower pot as cigarette and so on. He himself started framing sentences using his new names. For ex., he thought "After eating the clock, I water the bed and ensure that it is properly sitting in the cigarette, then relax for sometime in the flower pot and then go to sleep on flower." He went on and started deriving an unknown pleasure. After a week, he was found dead in his apartment.

These are all objective realities, collective standards set by societies. To understand it better, imagine a 2 - year kid and think how he would perceive the things, what effects his perception and how it goes as he becomes part of the society.

2007-02-18 23:15:54 · answer #7 · answered by sdbskrl 2 · 1 0

Hm. This reminds me of the old story of a person who is born blind; someone is trying to explain a rainbow to him. And, for all the scientific theory and research that is available, the blind person still can't see the rainbow.

This may not be much of an answer, but perhaps all this IS real - to US. But to others, it may not be. I, however, think that will change over the course of time. I mean, the fact that I'm reading your question makes it real, doesn't it?

2007-02-18 23:12:50 · answer #8 · answered by knight2001us 6 · 0 0

just relax, take a deep breath, calm down. people who have too much time on their hands start to doubt everything and wonder WHY humans preceive the world as we do. everything is real. the blue that i see is the same blue that you see. what? you want proof? ok. retinal implants allow blind people to see basic shapes. a blind person has the same vision that a sighted person does, through artificial means. if nobody could see the same way, then the blind person wouldn't be able to associate the shape presented to his brain as anything at all. dont try too hard find a belief about life. just live it and go to a hockey game.

2007-02-18 23:20:14 · answer #9 · answered by wilrycar 4 · 0 0

You have the two confused.

2007-02-18 23:09:36 · answer #10 · answered by Single Dad 3 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers