reality is in material

This is a discussion on reality is in material within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; I try to avoid discussing religion, unregged, but yes, there is truth that exists outside of perception....

  1. #16
    Evil Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    638
    I try to avoid discussing religion, unregged, but yes, there is truth that exists outside of perception.

  2. #17
    Disagreeably Disagreeable
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    711
    >I try to avoid discussing religion, unregged, but yes, there is truth that exists outside of perception.<

    I agree. For instance, "I exist." is true when you read that statement, is it not? It cannot be disproved, and it is surely proven by itself.

    From that, you can say that "I perceive." and "I think." All of these are absolute truths which exist outside of perception. That is, if you agree thinking and the likes is not the same as perception, but that's an argument in itself...

  3. #18
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "Is there always a 100% objectiv truth that will always stand? I don't think so"

    What? Stand?

    Is every percieved situation neccesarily real? No.

    Is there an objective truth? Yes.

    Do we "percieve" the objective truth? No.

  4. #19
    Disagreeably Disagreeable
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    711
    Interesting answers, Clyde. Now, how did you come to those conclusions?

    >Is every percieved situation neccesarily real? No.<

    This really depends on your definition of real. I go with the notion that real is everything that we experience, both external and internal.

  5. #20
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "Interesting answers, Clyde. Now, how did you come to those conclusions? "

    Basic reasoning.

    "This really depends on your definition of real. I go with the notion that real is everything that we experience, both external and internal."

    By real i was refering to based on some external truth, IE. halucinations are not "real", but non-halucinations are.

    Both may seem equally vivid to us, but one is based on reality (hence real), and the other is not.
    Last edited by Clyde; 05-16-2002 at 05:40 PM.

  6. #21
    Disagreeably Disagreeable
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    711
    >Basic reasoning.<

    Not fair enough. Share your reasoning with us.

    >By real i was refering to based on some external truth, IE. halucinations are not "real", but non-halucinations are.<

    Well, see, this is where I would argue otherwise. I would say that what I perceived during this hypothetical hallucination was in fact real (to me, the perceiver, anyway - and that's all that really matters), but whether or not it [what was perceived] truly existed is something of a different sort.

  7. #22
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "Not fair enough. Share your reasoning with us. "

    ok....

    "Is every percieved situation neccesarily real? No. "

    - People can halucinate.

    "Is there an objective truth? Yes. "

    - Since different people in different places can measure a given propertiy and get the exact same result, there must be an objective reality (the idea that there isn't is ludicrous anyway).

    "Do we "percieve" the objective truth? No."

    - What we percieve with our 5 senses, is not in any-way an accurate description of the universe around us. How i see a table and how the table "is" are two very different things; all i "see" is an image made up by the brain based on how light of 400-700 nm bounces off the table.

    "Well, see, this is where I would argue otherwise. I would say that what I perceived during this hypothetical hallucination was in fact real (to me, the perceiver, anyway - and that's all that really matters), but whether or not it [what was perceived] truly existed is something of a different sort."

    Fair enough, though we are only differing in our definition of real. That's just semantics, my point was merely that some percieved scenarios are based on an external reality and others are not.
    Last edited by Clyde; 05-16-2002 at 05:56 PM.

  8. #23
    Linguistic Engineer... doubleanti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    2,459
    about that... what's interesting to note is that physics is strickly only based on what we can observe... there is no true, only that of what we observe... and some old greek guy said that too, i forget who he was, but that our only reality is what we percieve... so... about that... it's funny you should mention about the wavelengths, since that fact is something we've reached, you guessed it, through observance...
    hasafraggin shizigishin oppashigger...

  9. #24
    Registered User Aran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,301
    you don't know what is happening behind your back. You have blind faith that everything didn't turn into a ham behind you while you weren't look just to turn back into what was there last time you checked when you turn around.


    no one knows what's happening when there's no one there to say what is.

  10. #25
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "you don't know what is happening behind your back. You have blind faith that everything didn't turn into a ham behind you while you weren't look just to turn back into what was there last time you checked when you turn around. "

    What drivel. Faith? Faith!? For heavens sake do you people actually THINK before speaking? Eh?

    Faith is an irrational belief in the improbable.

    Belief that the universe does not suddenly change when i turn my back is BASIC LOGIC; everyone elses observations do not change when i turn 90 degrees.

    There is no logical reason to believe that anything magical happens when we are not directly observing a situation, everything we know about the universe points to the opposite.

    It would be faith to believe that everything turned to ham, not the other way round.
    Last edited by Clyde; 05-17-2002 at 04:28 AM.

  11. #26
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "about that... what's interesting to note is that physics is strickly only based on what we can observe... "

    Our observations are not limited, by our senses, so that does not pose a problem.

    "and some old greek guy said that too, i forget who he was, but that our only reality is what we percieve"

    We create reality in our heads, based on external stimuli. Those stimuli are based on real phenomenon, objective phonomenon.

    " it's funny you should mention about the wavelengths, since that fact is something we've reached, you guessed it, through observance... "

    Maybe so but there are plenty of conclusions we have reached by derivation.
    Last edited by Clyde; 05-17-2002 at 08:49 AM.

  12. #27
    Registered User Aran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,301
    Clyde:

    Do YOU speak before thinking? you have no idea what is happening behind your back. You have faith that the laws of physics don't change when you aren't watching. it's blind faith, there's no other words that are appropriate for it.



    i think the reason why we get nowhere when we talk of reality is because we have drastically different reference frames on the matter. It's not worth argueing, because niether side will get anywhere.
    Last edited by Aran; 05-17-2002 at 05:32 AM.

  13. #28
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    "Do YOU speak before thinking? "

    No....

    "You have faith that the laws of physics don't change when you aren't watching. it's blind faith, there's no other words that are appropriate for it. "

    No... I have EVIDENCE, and Theory supported by EVIDENCE. Hence LOGIC. Faith is an irrational belief in the improbable, believing the laws of physics do not change when i turn around is neither irrational nor improbable, it is not faith. Believeing they DO change would be faith (and utterly rediculous).

    " think the reason why we get nowhere when we talk of reality is because we have drastically different reference frames on the matter. It's not worth argueing, because niether side will get anywhere."

    We get nowhere because you are fundamentally ignorant of how and why the universe works, hence you imagine that there is no basis for believeing the laws of physics are consistant when in-fact nothing could be further from the truth.

    There are lots of stupid questions, or rather questions that are stupid in-light of what we know today:

    What sound does a 1 handed man clapping make? - 1 handed men cannot clap.

    Does a tree falling in the forrest make a sound, if no one is around to hear it? - the mechanism by which sound is created has nothing whatsoever to do with the person hearing it, so yes.
    Last edited by Clyde; 05-17-2002 at 08:38 AM.

  14. #29
    Linguistic Engineer... doubleanti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    2,459
    >believeing the laws of physics are consistant when in-fact nothing could be further from the truth.

    touche... clyde one... aran, still questioning the number system...
    hasafraggin shizigishin oppashigger...

  15. #30
    Disagreeably Disagreeable
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    711
    >It's not worth argueing, because niether side will get anywhere.<

    Why is this so? It's so because neither side out-wieghs the other. When you get down to it, thinking everything turns to ham when you turn away from it is no more absurd than thinking everything doesn't turn into ham when you turn away. Is the idea of "life" logical? No way...

    >We get nowhere because you are fundamentally ignorant of how and why the universe works<

    I don't see how you know how the universe works. None of us can possibly comprehend how the universe works, or at least I see no way.

    >Does a tree falling in the forrest make a sound, if no one is around to hear it? - the mechanism by which sound is created has nothing whatsoever to do with the person hearing it, so yes.<

    I understand completely where you're coming from, but understand that you're not the one to say that because you aren't there to hear it. Sure, your reasoning is logical, but it cannot be proved if you are not there to hear it. Forget that, it cannot be proved anyway as it has been established it's impossible to prove anything, unless you are the person to whom you are trying to prove something to.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. [C] GDI: how to erase material drawn at an entire screen DC
    By pc2-brazil in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-24-2009, 06:24 PM
  2. More material like this?
    By cboard_member in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-13-2007, 07:57 PM
  3. Critique my lighting model.
    By psychopath in forum Game Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-12-2006, 06:23 PM
  4. api reference material
    By eth0 in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-16-2006, 05:26 PM
  5. Virtual reality head sets?
    By gicio in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-12-2003, 01:46 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21