People create their own realities. What is reality for one, is not reality for another. Reality is really just opinion. We all create our own little worlds containing comfort zones that we can hide in when the need arises. When people discover that their "reality" is similar to another's then relationships start, or if someone sees that your comfort zones are more comfortable than their own, they naturally want to gravitate towards you. Hence friendships, hence religions.

When the act of the tree falling is measured and recorded scientifically, we know that in the future all similar events will occur within known boundaries. We do not have to witness every tree falling in every forest, to know that sound will result.

I think that is one of the themes of the Lovecraft books. Actually, strike that - reverse it. His theme was that seeing more reality was what drove people insane.

"""""quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by lumberjim
i read something once that opined that humans can percieve about 6 or 7 percent of actual reality. Insane people see 8 or 9 pct.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that is one of the themes of the Lovecraft books. Actually, strike that - reverse it. His theme was that seeing more reality was what drove people insane. """"




Imagine how I feel. :3eye:

There is an important reality here that has been overlooked... :rolleyes:

If reality exists independent of perception, then none of us know what we're talking about! We are merely reflecting our inaccurate and fundamentally subjective opinions, which mean NOTHING. If what we think equates to nothing, how can our thoughts determine an objective reality? The assumption that reality is tangible is a human assumption and is therefore a misrepresentation in itself. Ultimately this means the question was a waste of time because none of us will ever be able to answer it.

I'm going to go and drink what I think is water but may well be cheese.

ah yes. and thus we have the first 200 chapters of kant (at least it reads like 200 chapters …)

There is the thing-in-itself, the noumena, which exists apart from our perception of it. Then there is the phenomena, the thing-as-we-perceive, which is the perception in our mind, which applies our rational categories to it (cause and effect, movement through time, essential properties, etc.)

The rational mind can only make logically demonstrable statements about the phenomena, the thing-as-we-perceive, or about pure reason ideas. Reason cannot make any claims on the noumena, the thing-in-itself. It cannot export its findings and claims regarding the phenomena and say with certainty that they attach to the noumena.

This is the critique of pure reason – it can only deal with the perception of the thing. Therefore, we can only operate as solely rational beings within the world of the phenomena, not the world of the noumena.

Kant makes the argument, however, that there is correlation between the two worlds – and I’ll make it when I get a minute.

-sm

noumena. I like that word.

There are certain schools of metaphysical thought - Buddhism is the one that I am the most familiar with - that believe it is possible for a person to actually see reality. The Buddhist's call this state "enlightenment" and believe there are enlightened beings. One of the premises of Buddhist philosophy is that the "self" as most people experience it is a delusion. There is only the greater "Self" or consciousness of which we are all a part. By letting go of one's small self, one also lets go of the self's life experiences and "sees clearly with eyes unclouded by longing."

Buddhists teach that in order to reach that level, you must completely let go of the "self". Which essentially means to remove all of the tint on the glass of your window of perception.

But the size of your window to look at reality is still limited. It is impossible for anyone (including the "enlightened") to see all of reality though if there truly were enlightened people, they would see actual reality but the amount of reality they could see would still be limited to the size of their window of perception.

But in the end there is only one reality and that reality is independent of perception. Imagine you are at a peep show with those windows that open and close. You can only see what is within the view of your window. And while there are windows all around the show inside giving different angles, the view in the window is not what is happening in the showroom anymore than a painting of a puppy is a puppy.

The glass in our booth is tinted, and our window opens and closes for a short time (in this case for as long as our money lasts) because our life is limited in length. So even if our perception (window) were not tinted, we still couldn't see things from all angles, and we'd still miss the parts of the show before and after our window was opened.

I like that, mar, but once a person reaches enlightenment, don;t they then move to the next phase of existence in a different reality altogether?

that might have been what i was thinking about, monkey, but it was a long time ago.

"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid isle of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age."

H.P Lovecraft, Call fo Cthulhu

Well, in the realm of Buddhism, I am the smallest grasshopper, but this is what I understand: A person who attains enlightenment remains in this world, in this existance. There's a Buddhist saying, "Before enlightenment you chop the wood and carry the water. AFTER enlightenment, you chop the wood and carry the water." An enlightened being remains right here with the rest of us, s/he is simply now AWAKE, as the Buddha put it. To be enlightened would be to see both the percieved realty and the actual realty, knowing the difference and not feeling disturbed at it because one has let go of all attachments to ego or a particular set of beliefs.

Some branches of Buddhism teach that those who attain true enlightenment are not required to endure the continual cycle of being born again into this life and the suffering which life brings. Instead, the enlightened being has the option of going to heaven (nirvana) after s/he dies which would be the next phase of existance, I suppose.

However, Buddhist belief has it that many enlightened beings take what is called the Bodisattva Vow, where they make a sacred pledge to return to this life in order to help all other beings attain perfect enlightenment. A Bodisattva vows to keep coming back until even the lowest house fly, even me, even Radar attains perfect enlightenment and all suffering is then at end. Those Bodisattva's got their work cut out for them!;)

Are there any living bodisattva's? are there any that have acheived enlightenment alive today? is the dali lama enlightened?

Buddhist's believe that there are. In theory it could be possible for even you or I to attain enlightenment through serious Buddhist practice and under the guidance of an enlightened teacher. I have met a Buddhist monk who was SOMETHING, enlightened, whatever. He did not run around claiming enlightenment or acting like he was better than everybody, nor was he on drugs or something. He was extremely spiritual, extremely devout, and he radiated the most incredible PRESENCE. I am a skeptic by nature and dislike organized religion of any sort. But there was something about that Buddhist monk that I have never seen in another person. He emanated complete tranquility and the greatest compassion. Was that enlightenment? I don't know, but I would love to attain his outlook, I can tell you that.

As for the Dali Lama, many Buddhist's believe that he is enlightened. Perhaps he is, I don't know enough to form an opinion one way or the other.