what is reality?

[jjamo]

I think I believe reality to be only one's outlook, as each individual has there own. Reality also , i believe should not be judged upon each others perspective but respected and trying to uinderstand each others. As really whose reality is the "correct reality"
My reality on many occasions has been the furthest from anyone elses,,,lol
Thats a good question , as i think in each moment, my reality may differ.
UGHHHH

Reality here.... I have an organization I am suppose to be creating from nothing, as well as a 5-10 page research paper and i am procrastinating into the world of (my own reality)!!!!!!
I love the escape!!!! !

[seekinghga]

thanks for your input Seekinghga, i appreciate it very much.
first i would like to apologize, i understand, rereading, how i seem deemed a fatalist. however i am no such thing 
i instead prefer a mix of free will and the "path" of our impossible to see reality, which, is possibly influential and not set as per fatalist views. reality as thus is a collective, of awareness, and possibly a sense of wordly events, which i do believe can be influenced (to clarify). so i suppose my initial statement was misleading...
also, the term nirvana i did use rather lightly and improperly, again i must apologize. (although i must defend myself that i got called into work on a whim before i could fully proofread my post lol)
i also agree upon the belief of humans having free will, i am not religious or affixed to any beliefs so to speak, thusly i like to think that we are all on an equal level with awareness creating our realities, and our realities being our own. not the subject of some divine decision. this also ties in with the possibility of altering the future as we go about our lives.
i love the quote by the way, it works quite suitably. 

You are quite welcome.  Never a need to apologize as we are all students learning and evolving in the classroom of life.  I myself did not mean to imply that you were a fatalist, just that your views seemed close or at least parallel to such.  You cleared it all up.

I think that not being attached to a particular religion can be a good thing, so long as one possesses a certain degree of latitudinarianism when it comes to others.  Mix and match, pick and choose - they all strive for the same thing.  Even atheism is a way of seeking a personal truth and, ipso facto, can be considered a "religion" in its own right.  (Atheists turn the shirt inside out as it were, and replace the notion of "god" with "no god"; merely a clever sleight of hand.)

Glad you liked the quote.  Peace to you.

[Farsight]

I'm a physicist, so maybe I can chip in with something useful here in return for some psychology advice I'm looking for. Reality is what's actually ontologically out there. Our perceptions of reality might differ, but that's just qualia, a , not how they are. We perceive this reality via the thing we call our consciousness, and whilst this is the only thing that's real to us, it weighs nothing, and has no size, shape, or colour. It's only in your head, it's imaginary, it's as real as a dream, and there is no scientific evidence we can find to separate it from an illusion.

when we remember that modern phsyics is recogising the impact of the observer on the observed. what does this tell us about the realities that we live in.  can one observe reality without effecting it. can our beliefs alter the perspective from which we observe reality and what influence might such obseravtions have on the reality.

That's the Copenhagen Interpretation SWM, dating back to 1927. It's still considered to be a conjecture, and many (if not most) physicists remain unhappy with it. I'm hoping some very modern physics will finally lay it to rest, essentially saying the wave function is a real aspect of space rather than mere probability. To volunteer some answers to your questions:

We can't quite observe reality without affecting it, because we're part of that reality, and to observe it we have to interact with it. But the interaction associated with observation is minimal until we get down to the level of the individual photon, where to observe it we must absorb it. That tree in the forest falls whether you're looking at it or not. 

Yes, our beliefs alter the perspective from which we observe reality, because that perspective is our own attribute. But our beliefs don't alter the underlying reality. 

[seekinghga]

I'm a physicist, so maybe I can chip in with something useful here in return for some psychology advice I'm looking for. Reality is what's actually ontologically out there. Our perceptions of reality might differ, but that's just qualia, a , not how they are. We perceive this reality via the thing we call our consciousness, and whilst this is the only thing that's real to us, it weighs nothing, and has no size, shape, or colour. It's only in your head, it's imaginary, it's as real as a dream, and there is no scientific evidence we can find to separate it from an illusion.

We can't quite observe reality without affecting it, because we're part of that reality, and to observe it we have to interact with it. But the interaction associated with observation is minimal until we get down to the level of the individual photon, where to observe it we must absorb it. That tree in the forest falls whether you're looking at it or not. 

Yes, our beliefs alter the perspective from which we observe reality, because that perspective is our own attribute. But our beliefs don't alter the underlying reality. 

I like the way you think.

EGO consciousness is an illusion and its reality is dependent on itself.  It is like a self-igniting, self-preserving flame that goes out when it runs out of fuel (read: the brain can no longer function).  People attempt to find solace in God or Heaven or the fact that they have an "eternal soul" (or whatever), but such things are merely abstract extensions of the subject and/or object of the transient EGO consciousness.  They only have meaning in relation to that EGO.  That's my un-physicistical (a new word, lol) take on the matter.

Hey, have you ever read 'The Tao of Physics' by Fritjof Capra?  Just wondering because I was thinking of reading it.  If you haven't then don't worry about it.  It's good to have a physicist around, your insights should be valuable in our search for answers.

Regards.

[Farsight]

Thanks seekinghga. I've got the Tao of Physics. But I confess I started to read it, then put it down. I don't go a bundle on mysticism, and there was a lot of it early on. But I've just eked it out (Flamingo 3rd edition 1982) and it fell open at page 225, where I read a little about particles and thought yep. So I've put it on my pile under The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas Kuhn. As for whether I've got insights, go to amazon.co.uk then search on relativity+, and that's me. We'll see if I really do, but right now this psychology of belief problem seems to be acting as a Morton's Demon blocker for some. I guess I kind of share your view on "EGO" consciousness. I think in terms of an emergent property, like heat is an emergent property of motion, along with some kind of  feedback as per Naturalizing consciousness: A theoretical framework by Gerald M. Edelman. That means an artificial intelligence would be every bit as conscious as you or I. And talking of religion, I was at a wedding the other day, in a church. The hymns seemed more indoctrinal than ever, and I found all the praise thee oh lord prayers just so expletive trite. I suppose I find all that eternal soul stuff rather sad in a mad bad snake-oil kind of way. Mind you, I wouldn't say I'm a total atheist, because I do like this philosophy joke:

Q: Is the universe conscious and self-aware
A: No. It only thinks it is.   

Anyhow, I think neuroscience illusions can teach us something about how we perceive reality. I think the Pacman illusion is just a cracker:

http://www.planetperplex.com/en/img.php?id=295

[SWM]

But our beliefs don't alter the underlying reality. 

is this a belief or something that has been proven?

if belief does alter the underlying reality, then people who believe that belief does not alter reality will find evidence that supports their belief. because every action will come from the position that reality is rigid and unaffected by belief.

not sure i have explained that very well. hope you can see the paradox.

[Farsight]

An observation. Wish that mountain away, and it just isn't going to happen. But I can't prove it, and I'm happy enough with things like you make your own luck in this world. And if somebody then discovers the mountain is made of bauxite, before you know it it's getting levelled and carried away. Then what do I say? Yes, I see the paradox. I'm very cautious about what I believe.   

[SWM]

An observation. Wish that mountain away, and it just isn't going to happen. But I can't prove it, and I'm happy enough with things like you make your own luck in this world. And if somebody then discovers the mountain is made of bauxite, before you know it it's getting levelled and carried away. Then what do I say? Yes, I see the paradox. I'm very cautious about what I believe.  

wishes are an altogether different breed of thought form. i am not a christian but your comments remind me of the words of jesus in the gospels...
Mark 11:23 "For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith."

how would a person achieve that level of belief. that is another question for psychology. this level of belief held with conviction can be observed in instance of mental illness, where people do create for themselves another reality. i would also suggest that in many cases it is not their alternate reality which makes them ill, but it is the contamination of their reality by the reality of other people around them.

[seekinghga]

wishes are an altogether different breed of thought form. i am not a christian but your comments remind me of the words of jesus in the gospels...
Mark 11:23 "For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith."

how would a person achieve that level of belief. that is another question for psychology. this level of belief held with conviction can be observed in instance of mental illness, where people do create for themselves another reality. i would also suggest that in many cases it is not their alternate reality which makes them ill, but it is the contamination of their reality by the reality of other people around them.

Very true SWM, and well spoken.  My hat's off to you sir.

I just wanted to say one thing, not to anyone here.  Just because one finds the reality to false or non-existent from a scientific or philosophical point of view, it will do no good to throw the baby out with the bath water.  It is what it is.  It is like looking at the night sky and one person says it's "dark" and the other says it's "black" and yet another says it's "endlessly starry".  All three have their opinion as to how to describe or explain it, but ultimately it is the night sky and there can be no denying it.  (Forgive such a poor example, I am a bit tired today.)

[Farsight]

wishes are an altogether different breed of thought form. i am not a christian but your comments remind me of the words of jesus in the gospels...
Mark 11:23 "For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith."

I'm not a Christian either. I dislike this example. If you want that mountain gone, get determined and organise people to do something about it. Sitting idly on your hands waiting for your wish to come true is not something I find favour with. But like I said, I'm cautious about what I believe, so I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand without looking at the evidence. 

how would a person achieve that level of belief. that is another question for psychology. this level of belief held with conviction can be observed in instance of mental illness, where people do create for themselves another reality. i would also suggest that in many cases it is not their alternate reality which makes them ill, but it is the contamination of their reality by the reality of other people around them.

In my experience we see conviction in religion, ideology, and even within things like science and fashion. It appears to be fairly common. Rather than describe it as a mental illness, IMHO it seems to be something to do with the way our brains works.

[seekinghga]

After some meditation on the subject I have deduced the following (levied at myself as well as anyone else):
To rely upon scientific "facts" to prove that existence is illusory is not the most wholesome philosophy.  For if this life is but a mirage, then how can you depend an entire system of belief upon these "facts" that are gathered by the very same device which you wish to denounce (consciousness)?  It is same thing that I said about atheists, only now one is simply exchanging "God" for "factual evidence", this being so, by necessity, in the context of the mind (illusory or not).  How are we to know that chemistry, physics, quantum mechanics, etc. are real?  Evidence?  What is that?  Fact?  Perhaps these too, like the consciousness appears to be, are a grand deception.  How is one to say that THIS is real and it proves that THIS is not?  This solves nothing, it only creates another unsolvable equation.  One is now saying "A=B and not A=C".   All fact and conjecture that we as humans are possible of is subject to our knowledge.  Feel free to check out my short essay on knowledge:
http://psychologyforum.us/religion-and-spirituality/on-knowledge/

[Enigma]

Reality is anything that is possible in the universe.

[seekinghga]

Reality is anything that is possible in the universe.

While I do agree with this succinct definition, I feel that one could enter the caveat of: anything possible "within the confines of the conditions of one's existence".  I only say this because while it is most certainly possible that I could have a 3-way with Megan Fox and Lucy Pinder, it has not happened nor do I think that it would happen, and thus would not be reality as it is commonly understood.

[SWM]

After some meditation on the subject I have deduced the following (levied at myself as well as anyone else):
To rely upon scientific "facts" to prove that existence is illusory is not the most wholesome philosophy.  For if this life is but a mirage, then how can you depend an entire system of belief upon these "facts" that are gathered by the very same device which you wish to denounce (consciousness)?  It is same thing that I said about atheists, only now one is simply exchanging "God" for "factual evidence", this being so, by necessity, in the context of the mind (illusory or not).  How are we to know that chemistry, physics, quantum mechanics, etc. are real?  Evidence?  What is that?  Fact?  Perhaps these too, like the consciousness appears to be, are a grand deception.  How is one to say that THIS is real and it proves that THIS is not?  This solves nothing, it only creates another unsolvable equation.  One is now saying "A=B and not A=C".   All fact and conjecture that we as humans are possible of is subject to our knowledge.  Feel free to check out my short essay on knowledge:
http://psychologyforum.us/religion-and-spirituality/on-knowledge/

indeed, to take this further, relying on anything to prove anything is unsound philosophy. as all thing may or may not be real or illusory. there is nothing that we can know for certain other than the cogitations and experiences of our own consciousness.

descartes says, cogito ergo sum, some transalation have this as "i think, therfore i am"

my interpretation of descartes is "i am conscious and that is all i can know".

[Enigma]

While I do agree with this succinct definition, I feel that one could enter the caveat of: anything possible "within the confines of the conditions of one's existence".  I only say this because while it is most certainly possible that I could have a 3-way with Megan Fox and Lucy Pinder, it has not happened nor do I think that it would happen, and thus would not be reality as it is commonly understood.

But the thought of the 3-way exists in your head.  If it is able to exist in your head, then it somehow must have a physical presence in the universe.  If it exists in the universe, then it must be part of reality. 

[seekinghga]

But the thought of the 3-way exists in your head.  If it is able to exist in your head, then it somehow must have a physical presence in the universe.  If it exists in the universe, then it must be part of reality. 

While I will not even pretend to see any semblance of truth in the sentence that I have highlighted, I at least know where you are coming from.  Peace to you.

[seekinghga]

descartes says, cogito ergo sum, some transalation have this as "i think, therfore i am"

my interpretation of descartes is "i am conscious and that is all i can know".

That sums it up.  "Cogito, ergo sum."  lol

With regards to Enigma, I may have spoken in haste.  Check this out:

"Visulization and mental imagery are great psychological enigmas.  We know relatively little about the mind's little pictures, yet the power of mental imagery has been known for centuries.  The ancient Egyptians believed that images held in the mind could materially affect the physical universe and that on could bring about a desired event merely by visualizing it.  Hermetic magic, which developed around the philosophy and occult teachings of the Egyptian teacher Hermes Trismegistus, contended that thoughts contained physical properties and that, by manipulating them, one could control the world.  It was also believed that spiritual development was inherently related to mental imagery and the uses one could make of it."  - D. Scott Rogo, "Leaving The Body."

Though, if you were to take the "Physical" out of your premise, you would be most right.   As you well know there are many things which exist, but are not constructed of physical matter.  The thoughts, emotions, while possibly depending on a neuro-biological hypostasis, exist somewhere and are most certainly REAL, in the ecumenical sense of the word.  This is where one could go out on a limb and propose that there are more subtle states of reality than the physical aspect.  These states could be said to exist as "finer vibrational frequencies," if you will.  I am not talking about other dimensions or any such nonsense.  I am inferring a division based upon the Eastern models of the division of the human consciousness.  These are not extra-terrestrial locales, or the abodes of denizens such as bogey men and trolls, or such rubbish; these are juxtaposed realities that become apparent when the apparatus which apprehends the current state is subdued, so that one can view the more subtle "realities."  Our thoughts exist, as much as we need them to, yes?  But where?  Where our thoughts exist, as tangible things, there is your answer.  Where is that?  Psychedelic drugs can show you these things, but they are for the most part illegal, and are not to be desirable.  There is also yoga.  I leave the reader with these thoughts and this site:
http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/vivekananda/complete_works.htm

[Enigma]

I recommend the psychedelic drug route.  Read anything by Stanislav Grof and you will see that they are in fact highly desirable. 

[seekinghga]

I recommend the psychedelic drug route.  Read anything by Stanislav Grof and you will see that they are in fact highly desirable. 

Personally, I liken psychedelic drugs to training wheels on a bicycle.  True, you could rely on the training wheels your entire life, but your peers, who no longer need such additions to their device, may begin to see them as an object of ridicule.  I am in no way denigrating the use of psychedelics.  If they work for you, beyond the stage of preliminary aid, then so be it.  History, however, shows that such ones are those who tend toward megalomania and/or dementia.  The human mind has no need of such drugs to realize its full potential.  This is why shamanism, for the most part, is isolated to the uncivilized cultures of the world.  Beyond this, man has discovered that the key to alternate realities lies within, and is not dependent on an outside source.  This is coming from a guy who, in his earlier years, was called the "Tripmaster," and has done enough drugs and entheogens to intoxicate a small continent.

I apologize to SWM and others for deviating from the topic:
What is reality?

[wolschulze]

what is reality?

i have some complex thoughts around reality. not so much what reality is but how it is.

i wanted to throw this question to see what are other peoples thoughts about reality. how do you know your experiences are real? what is real?

I'm sure that there is a lack of place in the forum to answer to this complex question. But in a short words, I think that reality is a thing in which you believe.

[liza123]

what is reality?

i have some complex thoughts around reality. not so much what reality is but how it is.

i wanted to throw this question to see what are other peoples thoughts about reality. how do you know your experiences are real? what is real?

what i perceive to be real is reality. but, in truth, what i percieve to be real could not be reality, it could just be an illusion

[docjp]

what is reality?

i have some complex thoughts around reality. not so much what reality is but how it is.

i wanted to throw this question to see what are other peoples thoughts about reality. how do you know your experiences are real? what is real?

There two realities, not just one.  One is what ones physical senses, and brain can perceive.  And most people believe this is the only reality there is, and the MIND reinforces these thoughts.

The other Reality [capital "R" Reality] is a series of vibrational dimensions that include two such dimensions comprising the MIND, and the Spiritual dimension, which is the only Absolute Reality.  There are four simultaneously existing, and yet entirely separate vibrational dimensions that comprise the "whole" of Man.  The brain can perceive only one of these dimensions, the physical dimension, and the MIND comprises two of the four, but the dimensions of the MIND are Esoteric [incapable of being perceived by physical means].   One job of the MIND is  to keep itself hidden from the cognitive [physical] awareness of Man, and the MIND reinforces the belief that the only reality is that which one can "think" about.  The MIND does this via what I refer to as "DM=SI" [Defense Mechanism equals Subtle Insanity], which is discussed http://about-psychology.com/DM-SI.html.

It is possible to discover how to perceive ones MIND, but this takes very special study with someone who has discovered how to experience ones MIND.    Of course such study has not been part of the training of those trained in BS&bp http://about-psychology.com/BS-bp.html for a long time.

To discover how to explore ones own MIND, and thus the MINDs of clients/patients, requires substantial personal psychotherapy under the guidance of a fully competent psychotherapist trained in Esochology [study of the Esoteric dimensions of Man].  And since this seems unnecessary to those suffering from the Malady of Intellectualism, or M-I [discussed http://about-psychology.com/M-I.html it is not thought necessary by BS&bp.[/size]