|
pineninja
Dream Weaver



Registered: 08/17/14
Posts: 12,468
Loc: South
|
|
-------------------- Just a fool on the hill.
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,342
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 17 hours, 14 minutes
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: laughingdog]
#23712158 - 10/06/16 05:32 AM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: Also amusing to consider that rocket scientists and mathematicians can calculate how to send a rocket to the moon, but can't throw a fast ball.
Whereas a pro baseball pitcher can throw a 90 mile an hour ball, and control it's placement within inches, but can't do calculus. So how does the pitcher do it?
Or course if you asked either to tell you what muscles they used to, for example, do something as simple as walk; and in what order, all those muscles need to contract and let go, they wouldn't have the faintest inkling, and neither would a guru or quantum physicist. Same goes for even moving a finger, or talking, or chewing, - no one knows. (Although,of course few biologists and animators have studied the human gait, etc.) But if anybody tried to consciously maintain their bodily functions that equal life, they would be dead within minutes. Respiration, digestion, nerve signal transmission, and the brain are all individually complex beyond imagination, let alone synchronized, or the even subtler cellular machinery, and 3-D protein folding it’s all based on. + So it's easy to say it's 'all mind', but as no one can say definitively what the mind is, that seems rather uninformative - and certainly as pointed out above, most of it is unconscious, so saying it's (reality/aka the cosmos etc.) 'all consciousness', also strikes me as glib.
I don't know about any genius physicists or rocket scientists being great athletes. One of the founders of symbolic interactionism, Herbert Blumer, was a football star at the University of Chicago. But almost nobody cares about microsociology, or cares about when the University of Chicago had a football team in the Big 10 in the 1930's. I think they won the conference.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Quote:
wolfiewolfie said: I tend to entertain the idea of subjective more so than objective. I can personally validate subjective reality as I am experiencing it first hand 24/7, however I can not 'conclusively' prove the existence of an objective reality. That is not to say it doesn't exist, it just seems logical to adhere to a framework that can be verified.
Belief's and choices also play a big role here. We all have the choice to believe in whatever we want so why not choose beliefs that will have a positive effect on our experience? From my perspective believing in a subjective reality benefits me personally more than the alternative, which seems sort of restrictive and limiting. You can experience an objective reality subjectively, getting the best of both worlds but you can not experience a subjective reality objectively.
Just my 2 cents.
Interesting points.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
phio


Registered: 10/07/16
Posts: 369
|
|
Objectivity reality exists beyond your subjective experience of it. The reasoning holds easily. You don't have to stretch your mind that far. Subjective reality is the only thing you can experience while maintaining free-will. You cannot experience objective reality subjectively as you must surrender your will to be objective which halts your subjectivity.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: phio]
#23717948 - 10/07/16 09:57 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Maybe your subjective will and the objective are one and the same?
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
Cory Duchesne
tabernacle


Registered: 10/05/16
Posts: 915
Loc: Nova Scotia
Last seen: 4 days, 8 hours
|
|
What is real is comprised of things that are unreal. Appearances are not scientific, and yet, appearances are all we ever know. Therefore, through science we are introduced to more sophisticated appearances, but those sophisticated forms of thought have the same roots that we started with, namely tautological categories of thought that cannot be proven or disproven. Appearances cannot be doubted or confirmed, but are always subject to change.
-------------------- C.G. Jung: "Please remember, it is what you are that heals, not what you know." "I shall not commit the fashionable stupidity of regarding everything I cannot explain as a fraud." - Carl Jung Krishna, as his friends called him, freely admitted his compulsive lying. He blamed it on simple fear of having his deceptions detected." NOTES OF A FRINGE-WATCHER MARTIN GARDNER on J Krishnamurti "All your questions are born out of the answers you already have. Any answer anybody gives should put an end to your questions. But it does not." [UG-K]
Edited by Cory Duchesne (10/10/16 01:21 PM)
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
Excellent.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
|
|
let us say that
- 100% of our experience is subjective (S.E.),
- we have dreams which include other people as part of our S.E.,
- we meet people in the world and that also is S.E.
- and these people also are living 100% in S.E.
Interestingly the other people and various aspects of the outer world, may be inferred to have existence outside of our S.E. since, when we talk to these people about events that are happening in the outer world, their S.E. about the outer world aligns closely if not exactly with our own S.E. (This is not likely to be a conspiracy of collective subjectivity).
That alignment or consensus suggests that Objective Existence (O.E.) actually is happening and O.E. has a large impact upon our S.E. individually and collectively.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
|
I like Cory's reply for its elegance, but I agree with you rgv. Reality is real, at least as far as we're concerned.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Post deleted by laughingdog
Reason for deletion: .
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: laughingdog]
#23726946 - 10/10/16 10:32 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: I like Cory's reply for its elegance, but I agree with you rgv. Reality is real, at least as far as we're concerned.
but as you already know: 1) no one perceives reality 2) & on top of that people have many contradictory beliefs about reality, (which they probably tend to forget, most of the time, unless they're anthropologists). 3) conceptual reality is not the reality of present time experiencing 4) psychological studies reveal many further sand traps, biases, self deceptions, rationalizations, defense mechanisms, we are all prone to... etc. ...
so the reality is it's hard to be definitive about 'reality' !
It's extremely hard to be definitive about reality. But I think eventually we have to take the commonsense approach and agree with our peers that we are experiencing the world, and that it is not, as rgv said, some kind of conspiracy.
But I don't really need to tell you that. Some people could benefit from it, though. Solipsism around these parts can be ferocious.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
|
Post deleted by laughingdog
Reason for deletion: .
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: laughingdog]
#23727052 - 10/10/16 11:07 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah it's spectacular down there.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,539
|
|
irl
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
phio


Registered: 10/07/16
Posts: 369
|
|
Quote:
pineninja said: For what its worth my close friend is a leading Qauntum physicist he is also religious and very much into eastern philosophy. Our concepts of conciousness, time and dimensions all have alot to do not only the sciences we study but also the way we approach them.
May you expand upon your concepts of consciousness and space-time?
|
pineninja
Dream Weaver



Registered: 08/17/14
Posts: 12,468
Loc: South
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: phio]
#23728987 - 10/11/16 05:53 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
The links are endless and grey. I suggest you do a bit of study into perception and the way it affects the way we approach and decipher time. If you are trying to draw me on the fact that you see space time as objective it aint going to happen.
-------------------- Just a fool on the hill.
|
phio


Registered: 10/07/16
Posts: 369
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: pineninja]
#23729024 - 10/11/16 06:07 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
pineninja said: The links are endless and grey. I suggest you do a bit of study into perception and the way it affects the way we approach and decipher time. If you are trying to draw me on the fact that you see space time as objective it aint going to happen.
I already have my answers, work, and a firm understanding of quantum physics. I was just curious, given the reference, what yours was...
Could of had an interesting conversation on the Delayed choice Quantum eraser experiment and things deeper. I guess I will take my toys and go home ..
|
pineninja
Dream Weaver



Registered: 08/17/14
Posts: 12,468
Loc: South
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: phio]
#23729065 - 10/11/16 06:20 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Sorry bud I am a little overly sensitve and defensive atm. I think that the missing link in the DS experiment is the potential of another dimension or a misunderstanding of the ones we think we have identified. I personally think that the way things seem to operate at a quantum level has direct relevance to the fundamental nature of the inner AND outer reaches of our conciousness/Universe. What we may be seeing is a similar process where by a multiverse could exist ie max is hit and the new seemingly pops into existence from nowhere. I am far from an expert just ask my mate.
-------------------- Just a fool on the hill.
|
phio


Registered: 10/07/16
Posts: 369
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: pineninja]
#23729147 - 10/11/16 06:51 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
pineninja said: Sorry bud I am a little overly sensitve and defensive atm.

Quote:
pineninja said: I think that the missing link in the DS experiment is the potential of another dimension or a misunderstanding of the ones we think we have identified. I personally think that the way things seem to operate at a quantum level has direct relevance to the fundamental nature of the inner AND outer reaches of our conciousness/Universe. What we may be seeing is a similar process where by a multiverse could exist ie max is hit and the new seemingly pops into existence from nowhere.
That or it could be that people fail to 'see' the underpinnings of a free-willed conscious Universe that is very much self-contained. Nothing suggests that there is multi-verse or a 'hidden' dimension. Rather, what is being shown is that there is a purposely functional domain at a certain scale that behaves unlike other scales and does so for fundamental and supportive reasons....
The missing link in this experiment and the series of experiments related to it is a lack of testing of the transitional behavior from a probabilistic state to a finite end-state and an incorrect understanding of what mechanism(s) cause it.
Quote:
pineninja said: I am far from an expert just ask my mate.
I was hoping to get at what you and your mate believe and why.... It seems those closest to the topic of the (quantum domain) are incapable of the right perceptions to interpret it which is why it has remained an enigma for so long. Was wondering if your mate was an exception and had unknowingly cracked it... Alas, multi-verse.
Standing waves are seemingly a tricky concept....
 (The wetting of a tongue)
|
pineninja
Dream Weaver



Registered: 08/17/14
Posts: 12,468
Loc: South
|
Re: subjective vs. objective [Re: phio]
#23729176 - 10/11/16 06:58 PM (7 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
What do you percieve to be the reasons? Are you suggesting a guiding hand? Multiverse is mine not his. There are peer reviewed credible sources that would argue both sides of the multiverse arguement this is after all quantum THEORY. Edit:Pose a direct question and I will run it by him.
-------------------- Just a fool on the hill.
|
|