Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Metaphysics: Reality

  1. #1
    Member Maverick's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    51

    Metaphysics: Reality

    My Thoughts on the Nature of Reality


    Note:

    ~This has no basis in traditional theories of Metaphysics that I know. Or at least I formed these opinions without regard to them.


    ~In no way, shape, or form am I suggesting that this is completely accurate, or correct, or right or that anything else is wrong.


    ~Feel free to comment with criticism, support, your own opinions and the like.



    Reality emerges from the self and is relative to each individual observer, therefore it is in constant flux. The mind manipulates an objective reality then experiences the world through the senses. The self is what makes all realities significant. The self is programmed in such a way that it perceives order in an otherwise chaotic world. It is this distorted reality that the self perceives that makes even an objective reality significant. An objective reality can only be considered significant in this indirect manner, despite being the fundamental basis of all realities, because its existence and meaning can only be captured through the subjective lenses of the self. An objective reality, by definition, is without an observer, that is the self, that which makes all that is outside of the self significant. The truth of a purely objective reality cannot be known and the truth of our subjective reality can only be realized by the self after piecing together its familiar realities. Dissection of those familiar realities will always provide mere glimpses of truth. No matter how much they are broken down, they will remain subjective and ultimately yield partial, relative truths. These truths amidst chaos can be revealed and accessed only after uniting the clues discovered by the self from its established order.


    The self experiences the world first and foremost through the senses. The senses are a means of maneuvering the Subjective Reality. The self has three means of interpreting the senses: a literal reality, a scientific reality and a supernatural reality. These three realities together constitute the Subjective Reality of the self. Consider following (simplified) scenario:


    Sensational experience: You insert a (straight) stick into water.

    Literal interpretation: The water bends the stick.

    Scientific interpretation: The stick appears to bend in the water, but does not.

    Spiritual interpretation: The River Spirit is angry. The stick bent under the pressure of its rage.



    The self intrinsically seeks order to facilitate comfort in an otherwise chaotic world. A literal reality yields to those illusory components at the core of the Subjective Reality which need not be challenged, or may not be challenged in the interest of maintaining order . A scientific reality serves helps the self interpret and understand its sensations (mainly mathematics). Where no order is perceived, the unknown--not to be confused with the unknown of an objective reality--so rather, where the absence of order is perceived, the self attempts to formulate an ideal reality of what lies beyond through faith (mainly theology). A spiritual reality attempts to answer questions regarding sensational experiences that the scientific reality cannot.

    Language is used to communicate the self's reality to other selves. A confirmed reality strengthens the self's bond and comfort within the Subjective Reality. But when extremely differing realities collide they fall back upon themselves and lapse into chaos where truth becomes uncertain. Too much focus on any one interpretation, the direct literal reality, or the underlying scientific reality, or the fabled spiritual reality, and the self will become out of touch with the others and fail to attain the truth of the Subjective Reality. To attain said truth, the self must manage to tolerate, welcome, and incorporate advances made by all interpretations. The self that can readily adapt to its ever changing reality and effectively synthesize them will attain truth in an otherwise chaotic world. The purpose of the self is to give meaning to everything else, but the purpose of identity, that which distinguishes the self, is unique; each individual self must find internal meaning in its own distinct presence.
    Last edited by Maverick; 03-14-2016 at 10:04 PM.

  2. #2
    Utisz's Avatar
    Type
    INxP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Ayer
    Posts
    2,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick View Post
    My Thoughts on the Nature of Reality
    I'm curious on a more meta-meta-level. Like why are you interested in meta-physics and how did you arrive at these thoughts on reality?

    Like as an example, I'm curious why you think the self has three interpretations of the senses, and not say four, or two, or seventeen.

  3. #3
    -
    Type
    xxxx
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    5,101

  4. #4
    Member Maverick's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Utisz View Post
    I'm curious on a more meta-meta-level. Like why are you interested in meta-physics and how did you arrive at these thoughts on reality?

    Like as an example, I'm curious why you think the self has three interpretations of the senses, and not say four, or two, or seventeen.
    Well, I wrote this about half a year ago I think. I was starting to look into philosophy, but I wanted to take my own stab at it before learning about other theories for comparison. I wrote something on causality and free will as well, but those aren't as developed.

    Those here interpretations seem to be the dominant ones at least. Though, we realize from time to time that our literal perceptions are faulty and seek a higher explanation, some more satisfied with religion, some for satisfied with science. They more or less share the same function, to interpret, but when those interpretations differ there lies a divergence.

    Of course, I only touched on that first layer of the Subjective Reality regarding the senses, and the interpretations of that layer. But you'll notice interpretations upon interpretations, layers upon layesr, distortions upon distortions, and the interpretations may broaden out with each consecutive layer. For example: the figural interpretation.

    Do think "spiritual reality" is more appropriate over "supernatural reality"? I originally had "theological reality" but that seemed to broad.
    Last edited by Maverick; 03-13-2016 at 05:04 PM.

  5. #5
    igKnight Hephaestus's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    9,142
    I think your conception of scientific interpretation of sensory input needs a lot more fleshing out.

    Also, your metaphysics needs some metaphysics as it doesn't account for the sensory experience of self beyond what our obvious physical senses observe. The layer of reality that to the best of our knowledge only exists subjectively, like the sound of thought, or the sights and sensations of imagination. It's important because they can filter, influence and exist within the stream of input gathered by our sensory devices from the presumed objective reality.
    --Mention of these things is so taboo, they aren't even allowed a name for the prohibition. It is just not done.

  6. #6
    Sysop Ptah's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    4,032
    Realitiy: what is, as against what is not. See also: causal as against acausal, as against correlation, etc. All as against: imagination, delusion, etc.

  7. #7
    Member Maverick's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Hephaestus View Post
    I think your conception of scientific interpretation of sensory input needs a lot more fleshing out.

    Also, your metaphysics needs some metaphysics as it doesn't account for the sensory experience of self beyond what our obvious physical senses observe. The layer of reality that to the best of our knowledge only exists subjectively, like the sound of thought, or the sights and sensations of imagination. It's important because they can filter, influence and exist within the stream of input gathered by our sensory devices from the presumed objective reality.
    Yes, I tried to keep it concise at the consequence of being vague. I'll go on to develop it more, think of this as an outline or first draft

    The mind distorts reality. The senses experience it. Then we interpret the sensual experience of the distorted reality.
    Our sensory input is not of the Objective Reality. It's all an elaborate illusion.
    See here: http://science.xscholars.com/mind-br...we-look-at-it/
    So on the contrary, I do account for imagination and thoughts, in fact, I hold that they are the basis of everything. This is the premise stated at the very beginning of my essay: "Reality emerges from the self ".

  8. #8
    Amen P-O's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    664
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick View Post
    literal reality, a scientific reality and a supernatural reality. These three realities together constitute the Subjective Reality of the self. Consider following (simplified) scenario:


    Sensational experience: You insert a (straight) stick into water.

    Literal interpretation: The water bends the stick.

    Scientific interpretation: The stick appears to bend in the water, but does not.

    Spiritual interpretation: The River Spirit is angry. The stick bent under the pressure of its rage.

    .
    I think you're wrong in categorizing these 3 interpretations as fundamentally different things.

    They're all scientific interpretations, it's just that only one of them happens to be correct.

    It COULD be that the stick actually bends when you put it into the water.
    It COULD be that there is a mind that controls what happens when the stick goes into the river.

    The interpretations aren't unscientific, they're just misinformed.
    Violence is never the right answer, unless used against heathens and monsters.

  9. #9
    Member Maverick's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    51
    Ah, that may indeed be the case, but... each interpretation creates a different reality of that same experience for the observer. A dogmatic spiritual interpretation for example, might very well say that the other interpretations are misinformed.

  10. #10
    Elitist Hipster Snake Champion Grape Jelly's Avatar
    Type
    INTP
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,520




    ÜAHHHH
    Chocolate ding dong

Similar Threads

  1. objective reality?
    By msg_v2 in forum Philosophy & Spirituality
    Replies: 101
    Last Post: 12-02-2014, 07:12 PM
  2. Need direction/reality check
    By username in forum Academics & Careers
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 05-31-2014, 08:15 PM
  3. Reality TV
    By waybeyondfedup in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-19-2014, 10:41 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •