What is 'objective reality'?

Really now? "be·lieve (b-lv)v. be·lieved, be·liev·ing, be·lieves
v.tr.1. To accept as true or real: "

 

If you ask me it's ridiculous to say "objective reality." Reality cannot be biased so it cannot be objective. It's just reality. It's like saying a foot shoe or hand glove.

 

Then I must ask... what is 'reality'? However I agree with you that there is no need for the addition of an adjective that does not place any further special meaning or significance on the term 'reality' when 'reality' is not fully understood anyway.

 

I think I've said this before but here it is again.

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?PhysicsAndMathematicsAsAbstractionOrReality

Reality is just another mathematical abstraction and you are nothing but an equation, get used to it.

 

If that is what you care to consider yourself as, then by all means do so. However, don't try projecting or pushing that mindset onto others who are not so willing to accept that assertion as true.

BTW: Your link is appreciated as it does focus primarily on the point that I have been attempting to stress. Thanks for that link.

 

reality is what we collectively accept it to be.

 

Only if there is agreement amongst the 'collective'.

 

Correct. We collectively agree that thoughts are electromagnetic impulses, we however do not collectively agree that they were designed.

 

I'm on the same page with you, but perhaps in a different paragraph. I believe there is room for a little tweaking in perspective.. not sure if it would be mine or yours.

 

I am just throwing this out there.

 

Well...not really.

There is what we PERCEIVE.

And then there is REALITY.

Example....when you look at an object.....you PERCEIVE you actually see the object but instead the REALITY is that light reflects off the object....is picked up by the cones in rods in your eyes.....a signal is sent to your brain and your eyes can only see the Photons reflecting off the object not the object itself as well you can only see a small amount of the Electromagnetic Spectrum of Light thus much of what is REALITY Human's cannot see at all.

Is there a GOD....well....if there is the Probability dictates it much higher that such a GOD would not exist in any manner, shape or form as is described in any Ancient Religious Texts.

As well....the Probability that a GOD existing in the manner of any written Ancient Human Text dictates at all is INFINTESSIMILY SMALL.....but not zero.

I got into Physics and Cosmology and Astronomy because I yearned to discover what else REALITY had to offer and what existed.

Well...in the year 2014 AD if you are Christian....we can SEE all the way back in time to within about 279,000 Light Years of the Big Bang....as this Big Bang created Cosmic Background Radiation which exists at a distance of about 13.4 Billion Light Years away in all directions and thus we are looking back in time 13.4 Billion Years Ago!!!

I would have to say....let's all stop arguing about whether a GOD exists or not and enjoy the ride!!

AboveAlpha

 

According to what? The magic number program?

 

lol, this kind of question doesn't belong in a philosophy forum. Attempting to shift the burden of proof onto others is fallacious.

And and objective and spiritual aren't diametric. The two are like Germany and the USS Enterprise, you don't compare them. Compare objective to subjective. Subjective reality is how you view the world, whereas objective reality is how the world actually is. No person can strip themselves entirely of their subjectivity, so viewing "pure" subjective reality isn't possible.

 

You say it is fallacious, yet you and the others have not been able to successfully refute what I have stated. As for the comparison... I am not the only one who makes such comparisons between objective and spiritual. You might want to examine some of the postings made by non-theists in that regard.

 

How can a person REFUTE a question that has no logical basis?

It is like you are saying.....SEE!!!! NO ONE CAN'T PROVE 3 BILLION YEARS AGO A GUY NAMED DOUG SMOKED SOME WEED AND LIT UP BY A VOLCANO!!!

Can this be definitively disproven?

No.

Could some Future Time Traveler Idiot Stoner named Doug posssibly have become too stoned and instead of decades hit the button for Billions of Years? Posssible.....Highly Unlikely in the Extreme.

THAT....is akin to what you are talking about.

AboveAlpha

 

You can't prove me wrong" is not an argument in favor of ANYTHING.

The notion of an objective reality has turned out to be a very useful model. It's also turned out to enjoy a near-universal amount of intersubjective validation - that is, different people can agree on most observations. In general, those truly determined to pretend reality doesn't exist would have very short lifespans.

 

Soperception is reality, I agree.

Btw, lightyear is a unit of distance, not time...exactly

 

It is both.

The TIME it takes Light to Travel approx. 6 Trillion Miles is One Year.

The Distance Light Travels in One Year is approx. 6 Trillion Miles.

Thus it is easier to say....4 Light Years away rather than over 24 Trillion Miles away.

AboveAlpha

 

Yes, physically speaking movement is time.

 

Basically that is how we determine passage of time but in a One Dimensional State....all points are the same point thus since we have at a minimum 10-D or 11 to maybe 26-D Universe....all Geometric Aspects are reflected by Universal Natural PhysicalLaws.

Gravity is an expression of 1-D.

No distance....thus no Time....but add the rest in and you realise Time is not really Linear but rather Concurrent.

AboveAlpha

 

More fantasies I see. Can you show tangible proof of claim? No? I do believe that you cannot.

 

Then you admit that your system of logic is not infallible and as a consequent, you are admitting that you cannot refute my statements. How novel.

 

Then show PROOF that I am wrong.

"The notion of an objective reality"???? Like that is an admission if I have never seen one before. Objective reality just a 'notion' and as a result has no essence in the physical realm. Thank you for admitting that the foundation of the scientific method is an illusion.. a creature of the mind... a fantasy.

- - - Updated - - -

Buy the younguns books, send them to school, and they still get things wrong... AMAZING.

Now back to the topic.

 

Now you are a bit over my head. I am a fan of this sort of stuff but I am not a player id you get my drift.

 

Now back to the topic of the thread. What is objective reality? Some say that there is no 'objective reality' others have expressed differing points of view, but it seems that no-one can provide an adequate definition for the term 'objective reality'.