Levels of reality

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Levels of reality

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Here's the scenario. I'm watching a movie on TV whose main character is called Big Dreamer. Big Dreamer doesn't exist in the real world so he's unreal. Now according to the story, Big Dreamer dreams about people so from his perspective, the people he dreams about are unreal while he regards himself as real (based on the story). And based on my perspective, both Big Dreamer and the people he dreams about are equally unreal.

So on the one hand, both Big Dreamer and the people he dreams about are equally unreal while on the other hand, the dreamt up people are even more unreal based on the story. Is there a resolution to this?

PhilX
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by surreptitious57 »

You could say there are levels of reality but I think it more accurate to think of it as a spectrum. Levels imply nice neat lines of demarcation
but there is much randomness and chaos within reality which belies the notion of perfect order. Levels also imply some degree of separation
but there are no actual gaps in reality. Even virtual particles which are created from nothing are still part of reality namely quantum reality
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Levels of reality

Post by commonsense »

The Big Dreamer and his dreamt up people are not equally unreal at all.

On the one hand, reality is absolute. One thing cannot be more real than another. We cannot say that one coconut is more real than another coconut, even though both are real. For that matter, a coconut cannot be more real than a pineapple. There may be different realities--coconuts are real and pineapples are real--however there is no way to compare the respective realities. These realities are different in kind but not in degree.

Unreality is a different story. An astronaut, her deceased uncle and her shiny automobile can each be real or dreamt up. In the case that any are real, the conditions above would apply. However, were these to be imaginary or dreamt up, their unreal characteristics could be compared and sorted into imaginary categories such as levels or a spectrum. The imaginary astronaut is imaginarily alive; the imaginary uncle was at one time imaginarily alive but is no longer; the automobile is, biologically speaking, an inanimate object, neither alive presently nor ever was. These states of unreality may be different in degree without being different in kind. Comparisons can now be made based on the criteria, for example, of how much imaginary life an imaginary entity possesses. Unreal death, with respect to the degree of unreal life it possesses, may be more, or less, unreal than unreal life. In that regard, an unreal astronaut may be more or less unreal than an unreal automobile.

With enormous thanks to surreptitious57, Philosopher Explorer has provided a topic not at all as trivial as it may seem on first inspection. I am certain that my argument can be worn down given sufficient critical thinking, and I look forward to encountering such analysis soon.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:Here's the scenario. I'm watching a movie on TV whose main character is called Big Dreamer. Big Dreamer doesn't exist in the real world so he's unreal. Now according to the story, Big Dreamer dreams about people so from his perspective, the people he dreams about are unreal while he regards himself as real (based on the story). And based on my perspective, both Big Dreamer and the people he dreams about are equally unreal.

So on the one hand, both Big Dreamer and the people he dreams about are equally unreal while on the other hand, the dreamt up people are even more unreal based on the story. Is there a resolution to this?

PhilX
For there to be a resolution you have to state a problem.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

commonsense wrote: Unreality is a different story. An astronaut, her deceased uncle and her shiny automobile can each be real or dreamt up. In the case that any are real, the conditions above would apply. However, were these to be imaginary or dreamt up, their unreal characteristics could be compared and sorted into imaginary categories such as levels or a spectrum. The imaginary astronaut is imaginarily alive; the imaginary uncle was at one time imaginarily alive but is no longer; the automobile is, biologically speaking, an inanimate object, neither alive presently nor ever was. These states of unreality may be different in degree without being different in kind. Comparisons can now be made based on the criteria, for example, of how much imaginary life an imaginary entity possesses. Unreal death, with respect to the degree of unreal life it possesses, may be more, or less, unreal than unreal life. In that regard, an unreal astronaut may be more or less unreal than an unreal automobile..
It is perfectly common and reasonable to talk about levels of realism. A documentary about WW2 could be accurate or less so, spin issues that are more or less relevant to the narrative. You cannot include everything, and some accounts will more closely match a person's experience of WW2, whereas others (that might attempt more objectivity) might see to be far off the mark. We are talking about representations, and ultimately your own sense experience is a partial representation, however real it might seem.
commonsense
Posts: 5116
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2017 6:38 pm

Re: Levels of reality

Post by commonsense »

Hobbes' Choice wrote: It is perfectly common and reasonable to talk about levels of realism. A documentary about WW2 could be accurate or less so, spin issues that are more or less relevant to the narrative. You cannot include everything, and some accounts will more closely match a person's experience of WW2, whereas others (that might attempt more objectivity) might see to be far off the mark. We are talking about representations, and ultimately your own sense experience is a partial representation, however real it might seem.
Good one. This post made me think about a few more questions for further examination. Are you saying that realism is a portrayal of reality? Is it the case that realism and reality are two different names for the same thing? Does that mean that reality has levels because portrayals of reality can have levels? Please expand or defend your position. What if I choose to separate representations (internal experiences derived from external occurrences) from actual external occurrences--where would I be then? Would the same arguments apply if we were to change the topic to levels of truth? Are truth and accuracy the same thing? And what about experience, in all this?
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Greta »

I think this comes from the idea that we are holograms in a simulation. If so, congratulations to the makers for their ability to bring avatars to life, but no thanks for making life so often such a shitfight.

I'm not convinced that creating fully-functional, living, feeling, self aware simulations is possible.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

Greta wrote:I think this comes from the idea that we are holograms in a simulation. If so, congratulations to the makers for their ability to bring avatars to life, but no thanks for making life so often such a shitfight.

I'm not convinced that creating fully-functional, living, feeling, self aware simulations is possible.
To you, no. I don't know the level of your scientific training.
I do know that within the scientific community, there is an acceptance that we are holograms. And I know that scientists would rigorously test out this idea to whatever extent possible. Maybe this is a new religion for the scientific community. I have a feeling this is one of those mysteries of science that's only going to deepen as time moves along.

PhilX
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Levels of reality

Post by thedoc »

I like the idea of a spectrum of reality rather than discrete levels of reality. I would also add that each individual might experience different levels at different times, so our perception of reality might change over time. Also everyone might not experience the same level of reality in that one person might spend much of their time more to one end of the spectrum than the other, and each individual might experience a portion of the spectrum that is a different range than the portion that another individual experiences.
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Greta »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
Greta wrote:I think this comes from the idea that we are holograms in a simulation. If so, congratulations to the makers for their ability to bring avatars to life, but no thanks for making life so often such a shitfight.

I'm not convinced that creating fully-functional, living, feeling, self aware simulations is possible.
To you, no. I don't know the level of your scientific training.
I do know that within the scientific community, there is an acceptance that we are holograms. And I know that scientists would rigorously test out this idea to whatever extent possible. Maybe this is a new religion for the scientific community. I have a feeling this is one of those mysteries of science that's only going to deepen as time moves along.
Maybe we are holograms living on the event horizon of a humongous black or white hole. Who knows for sure? Still, that's quite a different proposition to being the product of holographic simulation software (although attractive metaphors of that ilk are often made).
User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4389
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Greta »

thedoc wrote:I like the idea of a spectrum of reality rather than discrete levels of reality.
I do too, but in nature it's always a matter of spectra between discrete levels. That's what emergence is - where gradual changes continue until they no longer can, when a threshold is reached and something "breaks". A bit like like blowing up a balloon - the process can only remain gradual for so long.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

I checked my online dictionary on the term "spectrum" which doesn't suggest blending so I don't go along with the term.

If we "blend" yellow with blue, we get green, but the process is reversible and we can get back to yellow and blue so this case suggests the two colors maintain their reality. I would request, Surreptitious57, that you provide a specific example that clearly shows that reality can go altogether out of existence.

Now for HC's question. The problem is whether the dreamt up people are real or unreal? From my perspective,
they're unreal. From Big Dreamer's perspective, they may be real or unreal depending on the story. Let's alter the scenario to add Nicki Minaj to the scene (live). Now from my perspective, Nicki Minaj is real, but for Big Dreamer, may be real or unreal depending on the story and these are levels of reality because this is all part of my TV screen.

PhilX
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Levels of reality

Post by thedoc »

Philosophy Explorer wrote: I checked my online dictionary on the term "spectrum" which doesn't suggest blending so I don't go along with the term.

If we "blend" yellow with blue, we get green, but the process is reversible and we can get back to yellow and blue so this case suggests the two colors maintain their reality. I would request, Surreptitious57, that you provide a specific example that clearly shows that reality can go altogether out of existence.
PhilX
The spectrum does not mix 2 colors to get a 3rd color as in mixing blue and yellow pigments to get green, the green is a separate frequency of light from blue and yellow. So all colors maintain their reality. At the smallest scales, (atomic scale) colors may come at discrete levels, but at the scale humans see in everyday life, the spectrum is continuous, and each color is a distinct frequency.
Philosophy Explorer
Posts: 5621
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 7:39 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by Philosophy Explorer »

thedoc wrote:
Philosophy Explorer wrote: I checked my online dictionary on the term "spectrum" which doesn't suggest blending so I don't go along with the term.

If we "blend" yellow with blue, we get green, but the process is reversible and we can get back to yellow and blue so this case suggests the two colors maintain their reality. I would request, Surreptitious57, that you provide a specific example that clearly shows that reality can go altogether out of existence.
PhilX
The spectrum does not mix 2 colors to get a 3rd color as in mixing blue and yellow pigments to get green, the green is a separate frequency of light from blue and yellow. So all colors maintain their reality. At the smallest scales, (atomic scale) colors may come at discrete levels, but at the scale humans see in everyday life, the spectrum is continuous, and each color is a distinct frequency.
To add to this discussion, a "blend" of all the colors would be white. But, technically speaking, white isn't a color even though it may have a distinct frequency. Is green a color?
Normally it is regarded as a color even though it may be produced from two distinct colors. So it's an interesting question, technically speaking, why green is treated as a color while white isn't?

PhilX
surreptitious57
Posts: 4257
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Levels of reality

Post by surreptitious57 »

Philosophy Explorer wrote:
I would request surreptitious57 that you provide a specific example that clearly shows that reality can go altogether out of existence
I never said or implied any such thing and have no idea why you are asking me this. But reality can be defined as all that exists so even
were it possible for it to cease to exist then that state of non existence would be the new reality. And so while the physical state may
change the definition remains the same. Whatever exists is reality even if it is nothing at all and so non existence can also be reality
Although it is not physically possible for it violates the laws of physics so saying so purely for the sake of argument and nothing else
Locked