Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Atla
Posts: 6712
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by Atla »

AlexW wrote: Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:54 pm Yes, agree, its perfectly fine to say "there is the moon up there, its beautiful, isn't it..." - how else should we communicate?
But when discussing topics like "reality" and whatever else falls into the non-dual category things become a little tricky... maybe non-dual concepts shouldn't even be discussed using language as it makes no sense using tools shaped for duality to describe the non-dual... its like changing a light bulb with a hammer...

By the way:
You never perceive the "moon", you only conceptualise an experience as "moon" - the direct experience is never of an object. Objects are created when conceptual thought gets hold of the flow of experience - which is non-dual - and then introduces duality where initially there is none.
Yes, but didn't I agree with this like 3 times already?
That's not my point, my point is that, from an absolutist point of view, even though reality is non-dual, and there are no separations, there is still a Moon (or whatever) "out there" and a perception/concept of the Moon "in my head". There are these two (territory/map).
Last edited by Atla on Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by TimeSeeker »

Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:35 am That's not my point, my point is that, from an absolutist point of view, even though reality is non-dual, and there are no separations, there is still a Moon (or whatever) "out there" and a perception/concept of the Moon "in my head". There are these two.
To separate "The Moon" from "The Universe" is to do the exact same thing as to individuate yourself.

That is a dualist conception! All categorisation is artificial. Any categorisation produces dualism!

Even the true/false dichotomy!

It is binary classification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_classification
Atla
Posts: 6712
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by Atla »

TimeSeeker wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:38 am
Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:35 am That's not my point, my point is that, from an absolutist point of view, even though reality is non-dual, and there are no separations, there is still a Moon (or whatever) "out there" and a perception/concept of the Moon "in my head". There are these two.
To separate "The Moon" from "The Universe" is to do the exact same thing as to individuate yourself.

That is a dualist conception! All categorisation is artificial. Any categorisation produces dualism!

Even the true/false dichotomy!

It is binary classification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_classification
You haven't understood a single comment I wrote in this topic, as usual.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by TimeSeeker »

Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:41 am
TimeSeeker wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:38 am
Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:35 am That's not my point, my point is that, from an absolutist point of view, even though reality is non-dual, and there are no separations, there is still a Moon (or whatever) "out there" and a perception/concept of the Moon "in my head". There are these two.
To separate "The Moon" from "The Universe" is to do the exact same thing as to individuate yourself.

That is a dualist conception! All categorisation is artificial. Any categorisation produces dualism!

Even the true/false dichotomy!

It is binary classification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_classification
You haven't understood a single comment I wrote in this topic, as usual.
Or I have understood every comment you have said better than you understand it.

To say "The Moon (or whatever) is out there" is already evidence of dualistic (even pluralistic!) thought!

ANY individuation of objects from the whole (The Universe) is the process of Discretization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discretization
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by TimeSeeker »

Even the utterance "The universe is out there" is dualistic!

In here vs out there!

The universe is. Monism.
Atla
Posts: 6712
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by Atla »

TimeSeeker wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:42 am
Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:41 am
TimeSeeker wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:38 am
To separate "The Moon" from "The Universe" is to do the exact same thing as to individuate yourself.

That is a dualist conception! All categorisation is artificial. Any categorisation produces dualism!

Even the true/false dichotomy!

It is binary classification: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_classification
You haven't understood a single comment I wrote in this topic, as usual.
Or I have understood every comment you have said better than you understand it.

To say "The Moon (or whatever) is out there" is already evidence of dualistic (even pluralistic!) thought!

ANY individuation of objects from the whole (The Universe) is the process of Discretization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discretization
Yes you're right, it's a dualistic statement. If you can't process more than one sentence at the time, that is.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by TimeSeeker »

Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:47 am Yes you're right, it's a dualistic statement. If you can't process more than one sentence at the time, that is.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So two sentences? Dualism :)

The Universe does not require neither a narrative nor a narrator. It just is (and even that is going too far).

To ascribe it any properties whatsoever (shape, finiteness) - even categories (like galaxies) is human conception. It's inseparable from the human form and human condition.

The only way to really get to any sort of an answer here is to encounter another form of consciousness, learn to communicate (if that is even possible!) and compare notes.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

"I have no intention to lecture"

Yeah, with a fresh head I see that. With a tired head I'm dumb, cranky, and suspicious (as I say, I know myself well).
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

"If I include different smaller circles like '"henry quirk" and 'apple'. They will appear independent of each other but note they are interdependent [connected] in terms of the main set Universe. Therefore in this case, interdependent overrides independent."

No. Me and the apple, in a room together, are not overridden or superseded by the room. My distinctiveness, my discreteness, the apple's distinctiveness, its discreteness, don't dissolve cuz we're surrounded by walls. Again, it's a matter of scale and (with surrounding walls) opacity.

#

"If each twin in a mother's womb can open their eyes, they will see the other twin is independent of itself. But the reality they are interdependent on the mother and in certain sense of each other."

Yeah, but temporary biological neccessity isn't what we're talkin' about here. Unless I misunderstand in a large way, you assert, for example, the thing I call 'moon' does not exist independent of me, that some how that thing I call moon would cease to be if I weren't present to note it.

This is nonsensical to me.
AlexW
Posts: 852
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:53 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by AlexW »

Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:35 am Yes, but didn't I agree with this like 3 times already?
Maybe our way of expressing one and the same thing simply differ in the concepts we employ to talk about them and the misunderstanding is simply based on semantics... :-)
Atla
Posts: 6712
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:27 am

Re: Major Premise: Reality Interdependent with Humans

Post by Atla »

AlexW wrote: Fri Nov 30, 2018 1:01 am
Atla wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 6:35 am Yes, but didn't I agree with this like 3 times already?
Maybe our way of expressing one and the same thing simply differ in the concepts we employ to talk about them and the misunderstanding is simply based on semantics... :-)
Yeah, in that other topic a few months back, I also pretty much agreed with everything you wrote (which is a first on a philosophy forum). :)

After my nondual/non-separateness "realization" (and seeing through the illusory nature of the I etc.), after a while I decided to re-adopt the pre-realization state as much as possible. (Or rather: it so happened that the "I" was partially reconstructed, and now I pretend that I'm autonomous again, it's all rather circular.)

I re-adopted the prior state, but this time it's based on a deeper nondual understanding. Because why not, I think it's the optimal solution, the best of both worlds. It's hard to keep functioning in society without this anyway, which is what Western neo-Advaitins tend to miss for example.

So I may come across like someone who doesn't understand that there are no objects, things, that there is no-thing-ness. And believes to be an autonomous I etc. I think the best way to address these questions is by being as technical as possible. Same goes for how to solve the Western hard problem of consciousness.

Having said that, I still don't know what "reality interdependent with humans" means. By "reality", the OP seems to mean the direct experience in our head, but "reality" usually means all there is, or the nature of all there is.
Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12402
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re:

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Nov 29, 2018 3:43 pm "If I include different smaller circles like '"henry quirk" and 'apple'. They will appear independent of each other but note they are interdependent [connected] in terms of the main set Universe. Therefore in this case, interdependent overrides independent."

No. Me and the apple, in a room together, are not overridden or superseded by the room. My distinctiveness, my discreteness, the apple's distinctiveness, its discreteness, don't dissolve cuz we're surrounded by walls. Again, it's a matter of scale and (with surrounding walls) opacity.
'room' is too narrow as an example.
Note 'you' and everything emerged from stardust within a cranking 'universe' as interconnected or interdependently. Without the whole background of things and activity, the seemingly independent "you" Atla, apples would not have emerged.

Note the interdependence of the Butterfly Effect, i.e. a flap of the butterfly's wing in North Africa cause a hurricane in Florida.


"If each twin in a mother's womb can open their eyes, they will see the other twin is independent of itself. But the reality they are interdependent on the mother and in certain sense of each other."

Yeah, but temporary biological neccessity isn't what we're talkin' about here. Unless I misunderstand in a large way, you assert, for example, the thing I call 'moon' does not exist independent of me, that some how that thing I call moon would cease to be if I weren't present to note it.

This is nonsensical to me.
From the common sense and conventional perspective it is definitely nonsensical.
To understand more refined truths you need to shift perspective which is not easy.

This is like the Necker cube.
Conventionally you can only see one cube.
You will not know there are two cubes unless someone tell you there are two.
Even then it is not easy to see the two cubes.

Image

It is not easy to understand the other perspective of how the moon is interdependent with the human conditions.
But note there is a ton of philosophical theories to justify this view of interdependence, i.e. from the range of Philosophical Anti-Realists.
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re: Re:

Post by TimeSeeker »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Fri Nov 30, 2018 7:04 am This is like the Necker cube.
Conventionally you can only see one cube.
You will not know there are two cubes unless someone tell you there are two.
Even then it is not easy to see the two cubes.

Image
Actually, there are 6 cubes in that diagram ;)

The person who told there are only 2 was narrow-minded.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Post by henry quirk »

"Note the interdependence of the Butterfly Effect, i.e. a flap of the butterfly's wing in North Africa cause a hurricane in Florida.

That's not 'interdependence', that's 'cause & effect'.

#

"more refined truths"

jeez... :|
TimeSeeker
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:42 am

Re:

Post by TimeSeeker »

henry quirk wrote: Fri Nov 30, 2018 3:47 pm "Note the interdependence of the Butterfly Effect, i.e. a flap of the butterfly's wing in North Africa cause a hurricane in Florida.

That's not 'interdependence', that's 'cause & effect'.

#

"more refined truths"

jeez... :|
Good ol' Harry doesn't like complex thinkin' it seems.

Systems theory and positive feedback loops are too tasking on his brain so he is just going to keep calling it "cause and effect".
Post Reply