Does anyone agree with the above, i.e. there is no reality-Gap between what really-real and what is perceived-as-real or is supposedly real?Conde Lucanor wrote: ↑Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:22 am No sound argument has been advanced to attest the truth of a supposed "reality gap", which is a clumsy misunderstading of a irrelevant delay in sense-impressions.
As I explained, the issue in question is the casual relation, but the acknowledgement of such delay implies precisely that causal relation between the object and its perception that the anti-realist wants to deny.
And so I asked how could you explain the delay if the interaction between objects and its perception was not real?
And the answer was in the vicinity of: "I conditioned my belief in the delay to the assumptions of my relativistic framework", in other words, there's no real delay in itself, caused by anything in itself.
Here are some examples to Illustrate the existence of a reality-Gap.
1. Now that we have the Olympics and there are live telecasts of the Games to all parts of the world.
It is obvious there is a reality-Gap [time] between what really happened in Tokyo [t1] and what is observed on the TV screen by various audiences around the world [t2]. The fact that what is captured in the camera has to be transported through a medium to the audiences automatically implied a reality-Gap.
2. The fact that light or energy takes time to travel also implied there is a Reality-Gap between the Sun, Moon, galaxies and stars in real time and what is observed in the skies or via a telescope by observers.
3. While the reality-Gap related to the above physical things are very obvious, the point is even if the things you see within 3 feet, 1 feet, 1 inch away, there is still a gap of distance between the observer and the observed.
As such the apple on a table you perceived 3 feet away is never real in real time, but merely a historical apple albeit, in nano-seconds old. As such there is still a reality-gap between things 3 feet away from the observers.
4. Now even, if a person is pressing against something which seeming there is no physical distance, but there is still a distance between the nerves on the hand or body and the brain. Because of such distances and nano-seconds there is a reality-gap between the sensor and what-is-sensed.
The above illustration is the confirmation that a reality-Gap exists.
Agree or Disagree.
The point with causal relation in this case is irrelevant.
The light and energy from the TV screens caused the perception of the observers but there is no deny there is a reality-Gap between what really happened in Tokyo and by the time it is observed historically on the TV screen.
Whilst there is a reality gap between t1 [reality] and t2 [realization of t1], the question is whether what exists at t1 is really real or not?
Philosophical [critical] realists claim whatever is at t1 is an objective reality that exists absolutely independent of human conditions.
- Realists tend to believe that whatever we believe now is only an approximation of reality but that the accuracy and fullness of understanding can be improved.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_realism
Therefore the philosophical realists are merely speculating and presuppose what is at t1 is really real and is an independent objective reality.
They are in fact chasing an illusion that is merely speculated and presupposed.