Is reality and truth objective or subjective? If some forms of reality and truth are subjective and others are objective, which are which and why?
You have to understand how the mind operates before you can answer the questions. The mind is basically a calculating machine. It gathers evidence, and then weighs one thing against another in order to determine value. Both reality and truth have no benchmarks to the mind itself, because it will always be based on the evidence it has within it's grasp. Reality is what you make it. Truth is whatever you believe at that moment. In order to know absolute truth and absolute reality, you have to move beyond the mind altogther. The mind itself cannot contain it. x
reality is what exists whether we want it to, or even have any inkling of its existence, or not. generally speaking, and for the most part, we don't. truth is what the coerciveness of human society overwhelmingly discourages anyone from recognizing, let alone acknowledging, should they ever happen to stumble upon any of it. beliefs are, for the most part, no more nor less, guilty or innocent, then any other of the myriad parts and proccessess by which it does so. =^^= .../\...
Reality is as real as the experiencer experiences it...none can define reality empirically because all experience is subjective. The empirical value of Truth depends on the question asked....is a photon a particle or a wave for example? If you ask wave like questions you get wave form answers, if you ask particle questions you get particle form answers...
I believe that there is one objective reality, but people are too tied up with their own delusions to comprehend it. So for the individual, reality and truth is subjective, but for the enlightened, reality is objective. Peace and love
you don't need to see everything from a god's eye view to be correct about what you see from a limited "human sensory system" view. the only thing about seeing reality in slices and not as a whole is that you can never know if what you see is the true (or more appropriately, full) version of reality. but this is just an uncertainty not an automatic cause to believe youre flat out wrong. just because one doesn't know everything is not a cause to think that one doesn't at least know some things. this is necessarily true.
The mind itself is what limits you. It cannot go beyond the small physical reality that it creates around itself. As long as the mind is your master, it will hold you to the world it made for you. Personal identity. To move beyond mind, is to give up personal identity and the perceptions that are fed to it via the senses. You still have an awareness of the personal self, but you are no longer tied to it as others are. In moving outside the box, you are now aware of how confined your abilities to "see" truely were. You now see the interconnectivity of all things. You can see for miles. Divine identity. An enlightened person is a citizen of both worlds. x
If you define reality as what exists out there in the word, then it is objective. If you define reality as the sum of your experiences, then it's subjective. I define it as the former. Truth is nothing more than a function of language. It is inter-subjective, which some folks call objective. I'm not sure it is a meaningful distinction.
if you want a pretty safe bet, for something that IS real and true: all that we ever know, will never be all there is TO know. not just any one of us, but all of us togather, even if you extend that us to include everything anywhere that has the slightest awairness of its own existence, even whatever god or gods there might be, included. and personally, i happen to think that's pretty cool. because even if you were an all ultimate everything of a god, you could still find something not already familiar to explore. even if you created everything, if you made it complex and diverse enough that you were able to have forgetten parts of it. =^^= .../\...
. is philosophy rooted in the essence of human or the essence of mind ? pure humanism is less inclusive . it doesn't acknowledge , for example , the mind of mouse . by damn and damn god , it's our human language that discusses this and our reality and truth is defined by that language . too bad . and those who claim to embrace a universal essence of mind all the while maintaining humanity is next to godliness ? huh ? mouse says that's stupid also , and i think ... truth must be the foundation of language itself . all of life speaks . . .
The One reality would rip your mind in half if you were somehow able to grasp it without first preparing yourself, through many lifetimes, for it. God is ever new bliss, but God also destroys. Nature is beautiful and painful at the same time, and nature's laws are very pale in comparison to the heaven's. Maybe you dont believe that Jesus died for our sins (I dont believe it in the generally accepted sense, either.) but if you were to know what it feels like to die and have your soul go through the purification of the accumlated sins (negative, or bad, karma) then you would not be alive today. We are not ready to receive Oneness, we can only love and stay strong and prepare ourselves for death. When you die, just remember as you feel that you are going mad, the pain DOES stop. God will take you in. Take this or leave it as you will. -
Here is what I have to say on the matter .... The answer to your first question is 'yes'. Reality/Truth is objective or subjective. That much is obvious. The answer to your second question is not as simple. There is a wonderful discussion to be had if the right questions are asked. For example, we ought to consider if ideas, memories, feelings, precepts, and senses are the objects of which we are aware, or by which we are aware. Most seem to have assumed that our ideas, etc. are the objects 'of' which we are aware. Thus denying objective existence. What they fail to do is address the reduction of absurdity that ultimately makes that premise false.
. yaya , a philosophy of feeling can address the basic objective/subjective question . i see a purely objective feeling as having no symbols attached to it . simply being cold is objective where-as cold and miserable could be just an idea imposed on you by a moron tv weatherman . sometimes i get memories from early childhood , from that time before thinking in words , a time of pure feeling ... no symbols attached . inevitably , this changes . symbols are natural to human intelligence . attaching incongruent symbols to a feeling , though , is not . from thus arises the subjective reality ? .
mind is the tool the entity interfaces with the other entities and surroundings. in no reality youll be able to function and perceive without existence of the mind, mind always be existent. my proposal is that you need to also move up WITH your mind. mind is something that can also evolve and develop. a good balance of spirit with the mind, is what you need. and body too, if you can.
Any "reality" that you perceive, and affects you somehow, or you dont perceive and affects you somehow, is reality for you.
I have to disagree with you on a couple points. The mind is limited, it can only function with psychological time, ie. creating a persona based upon events that took place in the past or projected events in the future. The past and the future is not real. It is a figment of our mind's imagination, to give the mind support that it is real. What is real is the NOW. This the divine "I" is aware to. I have a severe mental disorder that fucks with my mind. A lot. Why does it do that? Because there is an imbalance of chemicals in my brain, which triggers different neurons to fire incorrectly and creates fucked up thoughts. These thoughts are nothing but the disorder coming out. "I" observe these thoughts and the only way to stay sane is to disidentify with the thoughts. In other words, the thoughts are not me. "I" the observer is just watching these thoughts go by, created by a fucked up mind. The mind is controlled by the brain, but the "I" is divine, is part of "god". Peace and love
and whence did it come from ? you are talking about cause-effect relationship here it seems, that definitely incorporates the concept of time. lets go back into very basics, to the point of plain logic : time is the measurement of the change of relative positions of entities within space. if there is no change, nothing moves or changes, there is no time in that reality. mind is not tied to time. its perception, ie in the most basic definition, it is the ability to perceive your and other object's relative position to each other. so even if there is no time - ie change, mind can still function, because it is the perception of positioning. and when change happens, ie - things move relative to each other, mind can act in the way you described - it can perceive the vector(s) of the change and deduce what the new positionings of the entities in the immediate surrounding are going to be. this blunt and plain definition of time and space seems to be in the root of any stuff thats in existence. the past, and the future are as real as now. positionings of entities/concepts/realities in any given point in constant change are as real as reality can be. after some change happens, it is not real anymore, and it feels like it never happened. however it did, for the reality you are now in wouldnt come to realization if the entities/concepts had not changed their relative 'positions' and their interrelations in an earlier 'time' in reality (which means a point in space and time combo). thoughts are real too. yet, they are as real as the air around you. your thing was not about reality, now i understand. the thoughts occuring within your mind are real, however their weight on the overall 'realness' of the reality you occupy as of now (our current world, what you term as 'now') is very light. ie - maybe like air compared to the desk in front of you. your position seems to be one requiring one to train himself/herself for precise perception of the reality one is in, and relative weight of different situations and subrealities within it. which seems to be what you are doing, and that is perfect.
I think mind can move beyond simply calculating evidence and take a new role entirely. And a One Enternal Truth=God which contains all subjectivity as part of it, making it not necessarily subjective, but I hesitate to say objective.
