Ultimate Reality

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Ultimate Reality

Post by RCSaunders » Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:12 pm

There is in all religion and mysticism, as well as most philosophy and science, a premise that assumes there is something behind, or underneath the reality of the world as it is directly perceived (seen, heard, felt, smelled, or tasted) that is in some way more real than the world directly perceived. That view, in all its forms, is wrong.

Reality is all there is, the way it is, whether or not anyone is conscious of or knows the nature of that reality. There are two aspects of reality that make it knowable. The first aspect that makes reality knowable is the physical nature of reality which is all that can be directly perceived, that is, seen, heard, tasted, smelled, and felt. It is physical attributes that are perceived. The second aspect of reality that makes it knowable are those attributes of reality that make perception of it possible, life, consciousness, and the unique consciousness of the human mind.

These three attributes of reality are in addition to the physical attributes in that very small number of entities called organisms. Life, consciousness, and human minds do not exist independently of the organisms they are the life, consciousness, or minds of. These attributes exist only in physical entities (organisms), but they are not physical attributes because they cannot be directly perceived (seen, heard, tasted, smelled, or felt). They are perfectly natural attributes (not supernatural) just as the physical attributes are, and do not conflict in any way with the physical attributes.

[Though we cannot directly perceive our life, or consciousness, or even our minds, we know we are conscious because we are. We know it in the same way we know we can see, not by seeing our seeing (or hearing, feeling, smelling or tasting it), but by seeing.]

The physical attributes, life attributes, consciousness attributes, and human mind attributes are material attributes and constitute material existence. The physical is a subset of the material. Though life, consciousness, and mind, are not themselves physical attributes, and are not caused by or arise from the physical, they do not exist (or have any meaning) independent of physical entities (organisms).

It is obvious that material existence is not all that exists, but everything else that exists (the non-material) only exists as the product of the human mind, that is, psychologically or epistemologically. Reality includes everything that exists materially and non-materially. Knowledge, mathematics, science, history, philosophy, language, and literature all really exist, but not materially. The books or other physical ways these are recorded are material (physical), but any "meaning" they have is psychological (non-material).

The material reality we perceive and know is the ultimate reality. There is nothing, "more real," or behind it and it is not contingent on anything else.
Last edited by RCSaunders on Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3082
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:36 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
material existence is not all that exists but everything else that exists ( the non material ) only exists as the product of the human mind
Thoughts are only regarded as non material because of the subjective interpretation of what constitutes material
In reality there is no such distinction because anything that can actually be experienced is material by definition

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by RCSaunders » Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:44 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:36 pm
RCSaunders wrote: material existence is not all that exists but everything else that exists ( the non material ) only exists as the product of the human mind
Thoughts are only regarded as non material because of the subjective interpretation of what constitutes material
In reality there is no such distinction because anything that can actually be experienced is material by definition
If you mean by experience, conscious experience, and by, material, the physical, I agree.

In subtle way I would even agree that our consciousness of thoughts are consciousness of the physical because we can only be conscious of concepts by means of the perceivable words (with physical properties that can be heard or seen) that are the symbols for those concepts, but I don't think you meant anything so subtle.

I make a distinction between the material and the physical, but I do agree that the physical is all that one can consciously perceive. Nevertheless, the perception itself, or the "experience," as you say, is not perceived (or experienced), though it certainly exists.

However, it was not, "thoughts," I had in mind as that which only exist as the product of the human mind. I meant things like language, logic, mathematics, and the sciences. They certainly exist but have no material existence.
Last edited by RCSaunders on Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Skepdick
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by Skepdick » Tue Jun 25, 2019 9:52 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:44 pm
I meant things like language, logic, mathematics, and the sciences. They certainly exist but have no material existence.
Programming languages (which capture human intention and procedural knowledge in logic/mathematics) have a physical/material existence. If they didn't the internet wouldn't exist, computers wouldn't work and you wouldn't be reading this very sentence right now.

AlexW
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by AlexW » Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:27 am

RCSaunders wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:12 pm
It is obvious that material existence is not all that exists, but everything else that exists (the non-material) only exists as the product of the human mind
How do you know this is not also true for "material existence"?
Have you ever directly experienced matter? Or is there simply, what we call the "sensation of touch"?
Does the sensation itself tell you that it is "matter" that is being experienced? That this thing that is being experienced is separate from another thing called "I"? Or is it only the mind/thought that splits the sensation into two halves and then states that there is an experiencer experiencing matter?

If you actually investigate you will find that its always only thought that states something about experience - it even tells you that there is something like "experience" at all. Without mind/thought you couldn't say anything about "reality" at all (or about anything else).
The questions is: Is thought right..? Maybe... Maybe not... But as long as you are only relying on the mind/thought to come up with an answer it will of course tell you "I am right! Matter exists! I am a separate individual that experiences a material universe!"
That's what you have learned and what you believe in... ...now can keep believing it... or you can investigate and find out if its actually true.

AlexW
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by AlexW » Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:51 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:36 pm
Thoughts are only regarded as non material because of the subjective interpretation of what constitutes material
Agree
But this is true not only for thought, it is true for everything (material / non-material included) - its always only "subjective interpretation"
surreptitious57 wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:36 pm
In reality there is no such distinction because anything that can actually be experienced is material by definition
Or its the opposite... maybe its all non-material... or its both... or neither...
Maybe "reality" has no attributes at all... and maybe this means that even "reality" is not more than an idea...
If something has no attributes, does it exist?

surreptitious57
Posts: 3082
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by surreptitious57 » Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:32 am

Reality must have some attributes even if they cannot be defined because it is all that exists
Now what the actual nature of it is is another matter entirely but it has to exist in some form

AlexW
Posts: 386
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by AlexW » Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:55 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:32 am
Reality must have some attributes even if they cannot be defined because it is all that exists
Now what the actual nature of it is is another matter entirely but it has to exist in some form
Well, yes, agree, "something" exists...
But aren't all attributes only a conceptual interpretation of this existence/of what is here now?
They don't do anything, they don't change anything - they are just descriptions. Descriptions are not necessary for this presence to be.
They are an attempt of limiting this presence, to give it objective form - the attributes we award experience objectifies it - thus we believe objects are real while in fact the whole process is not more than a mental exercise.

In a night time dream you seem to experience objects - they aren't real, right? They are "mind made" - what if its the same with waking "reality"?
What proof do we have that it isn't?

User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 6122
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by Dontaskme » Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:04 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:32 am
Reality must have some attributes even if they cannot be defined because it is all that exists
Reality exists as a conceptual attribute by denfinition. Reality also does not exist as a conceptual attribute because every definition is conceptual, there does not exist a non-conceptual definition. Concepts are known by defintion but not by the concept it self. All concepts can be negated but the source of all concepts can never be negated for there is no definition for the source of all denfintion. And that source is who you are. Who you are in essence cannot be defined. You are the undefined source aka the definer of every concept known.

The conceptual can only define other concepts, it cannot define the non-conceptual source.
So in reality there is no conceptual thing existing, there is no conceptual thing being the mind. Every thing is an apparitional appearance, aka the mirror image of the imageless conceiver aka thought...source unknown.

Does that make sense?



.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by RCSaunders » Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:03 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 9:52 pm
RCSaunders wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:44 pm
I meant things like language, logic, mathematics, and the sciences. They certainly exist but have no material existence.
Programming languages (which capture human intention and procedural knowledge in logic/mathematics) have a physical/material existence. If they didn't the internet wouldn't exist, computers wouldn't work and you wouldn't be reading this very sentence right now.
Programs are physical as implemented in physical memory and digital logic, but the programming language only has meaning to human consciousness. The books or on-line versions of a programming language from which one learns one are physical, but the content (the meaning recorded in the books and on-line versions is not physical.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by RCSaunders » Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:15 pm

AlexW wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:27 am
RCSaunders wrote:
Tue Jun 25, 2019 7:12 pm
It is obvious that material existence is not all that exists, but everything else that exists (the non-material) only exists as the product of the human mind
How do you know this is not also true for "material existence"?
If you are a solipsist you wouldn't. I'm not a solipsist.
AlexW wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:27 am
Have you ever directly experienced matter?
Yes! every conscious perception I have is the conscious experience of matter. There is nothing else to perceive.
AlexW wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 1:27 am
Does the sensation itself tell you that it is "matter" that is being experienced? That this thing that is being experienced is separate from another thing called "I"? Or is it only the mind/thought that splits the sensation into two halves and then states that there is an experiencer experiencing matter?

If you actually investigate you will find that its always only thought that states something about experience - it even tells you that there is something like "experience" at all. Without mind/thought you couldn't say anything about "reality" at all (or about anything else).
The questions is: Is thought right..? Maybe... Maybe not... But as long as you are only relying on the mind/thought to come up with an answer it will of course tell you "I am right! Matter exists! I am a separate individual that experiences a material universe!"
That's what you have learned and what you believe in... ...now can keep believing it... or you can investigate and find out if its actually true.
The rest of all you ask is epistemological: "how do we know ...". The article only addresses the ontolgical nature of existence that makes it knowable. I'll address the kind of questions you have in another article dealing with epistemology.

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by RCSaunders » Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:18 pm

surreptitious57 wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:32 am
Reality must have some attributes even if they cannot be defined because it is all that exists
That's correct. It is the very heart of a correct ontology, which my next article will introduce.
surreptitious57 wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 4:32 am
Now what the actual nature of it is is another matter entirely but it has to exist in some form
That's right and the whole purpose of ontology is to identify exactly what exists and what its nature must be.

Skepdick
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by Skepdick » Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:53 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:03 pm
Programs are physical as implemented in physical memory and digital logic, but the programming language only has meaning to human consciousness.
That can't be true. I just told my home automation system to turn on the lights in my living room.

It understood exactly what I mean. So my words have a consequential/empirically verifiable effect on reality.

That's like - real. Or something?

Skepdick
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by Skepdick » Wed Jun 26, 2019 6:02 pm

RCSaunders wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 5:18 pm
That's right and the whole purpose of ontology is to identify exactly what exists and what its nature must be.
So then. Language exists. Language is physical/real and independent of human minds (as demonstrated by my home automation system).

This sure begs an ontological question. What is the nature of language?

User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Ultimate Reality

Post by RCSaunders » Wed Jun 26, 2019 6:47 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Jun 26, 2019 6:02 pm
This sure begs an ontological question. What is the nature of language?
"What is the nature of language?" is an epistemological question. Logic, mathematics, and language do not exist ontologically (materially or physically). They can be described, illustrated, and used in physical books or other kinds of physical representations, but in themselves do not exist physically. They are epistemological methods. Even such physical representations of them that do exist must be created by human beings.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests