Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Reality and the Power of the Mind

crackofdawn_Jr
Posts: 1,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2009 4:07:23 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
I just read the book, 1984, and I can't stop thinking about one of the ideas presented in the book.

Imagine, if you will, that babies were taken from their mothers at birth and raised inside a secluded room. They were told that humans could fly and nothing about the laws of gravity. Then, an adult comes in and flys (using some type of special effect to trick them) so that they believe it's really true. Then, a child believes he can fly and someone else believes he can fly and they're put in a secluded room.

If the child A believes he's flying and child B believes child A is flying then child A is flying. Now if we could make a society of people that believed all this then we could change reality and break all the laws of everything and that society could do whatever they wanted.

I know this idea's really abstract. But reality is all in the mind, if the mind believes something is happening, then it's happening. If someone else enters this person reality, then we've created a new reality which can do anything the two people believe they can do and believe can be done.

Just looking for some stimulating thoughts, let me know if you think this is even remotely possible.
There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics"
-Mark Twain

"If at first you don't succeed, redefine success"

"Therefore love moderately. Long love doth so.
Too swift arrives as tardy as too slow."
- William Shakespeare

"There must be no majority decisions, but only responsible persons, and the word 'council' must be restored to its original meaning. Surely every man will have advisers by his side, but the decision will be made by one man."
- Adolf Hitler
leet4A1
Posts: 1,986
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2009 4:13:22 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
"If the child A believes he's flying and child B believes child A is flying then child A is flying."

This is the part I disagree with. If child A believes he's flying, and child B believes child A is flying, but child A is not flying, then both children are incorrect. That's how I see it. The "reality" created by the brainwashing is no reality at all, or the brainwashing wouldn't have been necessary.

Excellent book though, I must go back and read that.
"Let me tell you the truth. The truth is, 'what is'. And 'what should be' is a fantasy, a terrible terrible lie that someone gave to the people long ago. The 'what should be' never did exist, but people keep trying to live up to it. There is no 'what should be,' there is only what is." - Lenny Bruce

"Satan goes to church, did you know that?" - Godsands

"And Genisis 1 does match modern science... you just have to try really hard." - GR33K FR33K5
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2009 4:22:09 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
It depends on how they define reality.

How we define reality depends on our experience with the world around us. Having been exposed to the world, and *not* having been reaised in a secluded room, we have a certain view of reality.

However, if these boys were raised without notions of gravity and boy A could fly whenever he so chose in that special secluded room, what reason would they have to believe that a world even exists outside that room, or that there are other people in existence besides the ones they have seen?

For all intents and purposes, the reality is that people can fly. It's just that the sample set on which these notions are based, are small to US.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2009 7:37:26 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/15/2009 4:07:23 PM, crackofdawn_Jr wrote:
I just read the book, 1984, and I can't stop thinking about one of the ideas presented in the book.

Imagine, if you will, that babies were taken from their mothers at birth and raised inside a secluded room. They were told that humans could fly and nothing about the laws of gravity. Then, an adult comes in and flys (using some type of special effect to trick them) so that they believe it's really true. Then, a child believes he can fly and someone else believes he can fly and they're put in a secluded room.

If the child A believes he's flying and child B believes child A is flying then child A is flying. Now if we could make a society of people that believed all this then we could change reality and break all the laws of everything and that society could do whatever they wanted.

I know this idea's really abstract. But reality is all in the mind, if the mind believes something is happening, then it's happening. If someone else enters this person reality, then we've created a new reality which can do anything the two people believe they can do and believe can be done.

Just looking for some stimulating thoughts, let me know if you think this is even remotely possible.

If you teach a child to call walking, "Flying", youll get the same result. But whats the point, we already have a word for walking.
crackofdawn_Jr
Posts: 1,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2009 2:26:46 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/16/2009 7:37:26 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 10/15/2009 4:07:23 PM, crackofdawn_Jr wrote:
I just read the book, 1984, and I can't stop thinking about one of the ideas presented in the book.

Imagine, if you will, that babies were taken from their mothers at birth and raised inside a secluded room. They were told that humans could fly and nothing about the laws of gravity. Then, an adult comes in and flys (using some type of special effect to trick them) so that they believe it's really true. Then, a child believes he can fly and someone else believes he can fly and they're put in a secluded room.

If the child A believes he's flying and child B believes child A is flying then child A is flying. Now if we could make a society of people that believed all this then we could change reality and break all the laws of everything and that society could do whatever they wanted.

I know this idea's really abstract. But reality is all in the mind, if the mind believes something is happening, then it's happening. If someone else enters this person reality, then we've created a new reality which can do anything the two people believe they can do and believe can be done.

Just looking for some stimulating thoughts, let me know if you think this is even remotely possible.

If you teach a child to call walking, "Flying", youll get the same result. But whats the point, we already have a word for walking.

No, the point is that "we can't" fly because we are raised to believe so. If someone thinks he's flying, but someone else can clearly see he isn't, then he isn't flying. However, if someone believes he's flying and someone else believes he's flying then he IS flying. It would take someone to come in and know they're not flying for their reality not to be correct.
There are three types of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics"
-Mark Twain

"If at first you don't succeed, redefine success"

"Therefore love moderately. Long love doth so.
Too swift arrives as tardy as too slow."
- William Shakespeare

"There must be no majority decisions, but only responsible persons, and the word 'council' must be restored to its original meaning. Surely every man will have advisers by his side, but the decision will be made by one man."
- Adolf Hitler
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/16/2009 3:14:11 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
He isn't wrong, in a way. If the shared perception is that the individual is "flying," then that is what is going on. The idea that they're not flying is tied down to whether or not the subjective meaning behind words is tied down to the objective reality outside of our minds - and it isn't, because words are subjective and relative only to the individual's perception of those words.

So it is entirely possible for them to be flying - they just have a different idea of what flying is, compared to most other individuals. They subjectively define the word "flying" to mean whatever it is they're perceiving - it could be walking, for all we know. That doesn't make it any more or less correct, except in the face of what others perceive flying to be.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 3:44:54 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/15/2009 4:07:23 PM, crackofdawn_Jr wrote:
But reality is all in the mind

No it isn't. Reality is what is outside your mind.

Just looking for some stimulating thoughts, let me know if you think this is even remotely possible.

Answer: No.
So prove me wrong, then.
regebro
Posts: 1,152
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 3:50:05 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/16/2009 3:14:11 PM, Volkov wrote:
He isn't wrong, in a way. If the shared perception is that the individual is "flying," then that is what is going on.

If you define flying as "people believing that you are flying", yes. But flying is usually defined not as the perception being airborne but the actuality of being airborne.

That doesn't mean society doesn't have a sort of "communal hallucination", that is that society in general believe X when X is in fact false. That is pretty common. But that communal hallucination does not change reality. Communism is one of these communal hallucinations, and that communal hallucination has every time lead to disaster and poverty, because reality doesn't budge. You can hallucinate that communism works, you can hallucinate that all the problems is because of anti-communists, you can hallucinate that its' a great idea to socialize farming, etc, but in the end reality will not budge, and communism will fail.

Just as an example.
So prove me wrong, then.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 8:09:19 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 3:50:05 AM, regebro wrote:
At 10/16/2009 3:14:11 PM, Volkov wrote:
He isn't wrong, in a way. If the shared perception is that the individual is "flying," then that is what is going on.

If you define flying as "people believing that you are flying", yes. But flying is usually defined not as the perception being airborne but the actuality of being airborne.

The point is that it depends on whatever "flying" is to the two subjects. What they perceive "flying" to be, is what flying is, and what "flying" is to them, is "walking" to us.

I'm not arguing that it is a shared hallucination - I'm arguing that it is a shared perception of what is occurring. Until someone comes in that does not agree with what that perception is, then one of the subjects using their two feet to move on the ground is "flying."
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 8:22:44 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
I understand the idea presented here - How do we know what is fact from fiction if a common idea is accepted as true when it is in fact false. Let's put it this way - Cameras don't lie :D
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 9:30:50 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/15/2009 4:07:23 PM, crackofdawn_Jr wrote:
I just read the book, 1984, and I can't stop thinking about one of the ideas presented in the book.

Imagine, if you will, that babies were taken from their mothers at birth and raised inside a secluded room. They were told that humans could fly and nothing about the laws of gravity. Then, an adult comes in and flys (using some type of special effect to trick them) so that they believe it's really true. Then, a child believes he can fly and someone else believes he can fly and they're put in a secluded room.

If the child A believes he's flying and child B believes child A is flying then child A is flying. Now if we could make a society of people that believed all this then we could change reality and break all the laws of everything and that society could do whatever they wanted.

I know this idea's really abstract. But reality is all in the mind, if the mind believes something is happening, then it's happening. If someone else enters this person reality, then we've created a new reality which can do anything the two people believe they can do and believe can be done.

Just looking for some stimulating thoughts, let me know if you think this is even remotely possible.

Here's where you make your mistake, Crackofdawn:

You say, "Then, an adult comes in and flys (using some type of special effect to trick them) so that they believe it's really true."

Now, this statement presents the idea that the children have actually watched someone preform this action - therefore, they know what flying looks like.

So, in the second situation, the child who believes he is flying is *not* flying - he believes he *can* fly, but he isn't flying - so you can not form the syllogism:

If the child A believes he's flying and child B believes child A is flying then child A is flying.

The children would not believe A is flying because A is not flying (from what they've seen flying to be) - only that they *can* fly, which is in fact a illusion. This doesn't mean that humans have changed reality - it as much changes reality as people thinking the world is flat - it isn't. When the child steps outside (if he is ever permitted) and attempts to jump off a building and fly (along with most of society), then his broken bones, and other's dead bodies, will prove that reality is not as it seems.

In the other cases some are presenting where if the child perceives and calls walking "flying", it doesn't make walking flying. It just exchanges the world "walking" for "flying." It doesn't mean they are flying..... It's like me calling toasters elephants. It's just a word swap. Reality remains the same. And obviously the traits that apply to flying are not present in walking, so the definition of flying would also have to be "changed" leaving it exactly as I just mentioned: a name change.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 9:43:50 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 9:30:50 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
In the other cases some are presenting where if the child perceives and calls walking "flying", it doesn't make walking flying. It just exchanges the world "walking" for "flying." It doesn't mean they are flying..... It's like me calling toasters elephants. It's just a word swap. Reality remains the same.

In a way, yes. "Reality" remains the same - that is to say, the objective reality outside of our heads remains the same. But since we don't technically live within that objective reality - where up is up, because down is down, for example - and instead, our realities are based on our perceptions - where up is up because we perceive up to be up - which means that when you start to perceive "up" as "down," the fundamentals of reality have changed for you.

Which is why I said crackofdawn is technically correct - based on the different perception of what "flying" is, reality has in fact been manipulated. Perception is key to everything.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 10:41:40 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
He isn't wrong, in a way.
I expected nothing else from you, Volkov.

But since we don't technically live within that objective reality
I don't know about you. But I DO live in it. If the world were merely a matter of altering perceptions to make things true, I wouldn't have to BOTHER criticizing a government, it wouldn't exist.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 11:19:04 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 9:43:50 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 10/18/2009 9:30:50 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
In the other cases some are presenting where if the child perceives and calls walking "flying", it doesn't make walking flying. It just exchanges the world "walking" for "flying." It doesn't mean they are flying..... It's like me calling toasters elephants. It's just a word swap. Reality remains the same.

In a way, yes. "Reality" remains the same - that is to say, the objective reality outside of our heads remains the same. But since we don't technically live within that objective reality - where up is up, because down is down, for example - and instead, our realities are based on our perceptions - where up is up because we perceive up to be up - which means that when you start to perceive "up" as "down," the fundamentals of reality have changed for you.

Which is why I said crackofdawn is technically correct - based on the different perception of what "flying" is, reality has in fact been manipulated. Perception is key to everything.

How can the children perceive they are flying if after they witnessed the adult flying (and are told/shown what flying is), nothing they do resembles it?
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 11:38:28 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 10:41:40 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
I expected nothing else from you, Volkov.

I don't know whether or not this is a good thing.

I don't know about you. But I DO live in it. If the world were merely a matter of altering perceptions to make things true, I wouldn't have to BOTHER criticizing a government, it wouldn't exist.

You perceive an objective reality - you don't live in it. So as long as you still perceive the government, it still exists. You perceive it because you've grown up with it, have given it a label, and have seen it in action. Until you no longer perceive the government, it won't exist.

Unfortunately for you, you're already conditioned to its existence. But for someone who isn't, you ask them what the government is and they won't know what you're talking about, because it doesn't exist to them. It isn't within their reality. When you show them exactly what it is, you've altered their perception, and their reality.

Vi_Veri said:
How can the children perceive they are flying if after they witnessed the adult flying (and are told/shown what flying is), nothing they do resembles it?

It depends on exactly what the adult did, which is really the unknown variable in all of this.

Its like a math problem. Find 'x', x being what the action is being performed. We know some things; it is called "flying," it must be able to demonstrate to the children, and the children must be able to do it themselves, without any help. The conclusion I came up with is that 'x' is in fact what you and I know as 'walking.'

Therefore if the children are able to 'walk' in our eyes, they'll be able to 'fly' in theirs. Perceptions are changed, because the word, and the action, is subjective.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 11:47:39 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 11:38:28 AM, Volkov wrote:
At 10/18/2009 10:41:40 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
I expected nothing else from you, Volkov.

I don't know whether or not this is a good thing.

I don't know about you. But I DO live in it. If the world were merely a matter of altering perceptions to make things true, I wouldn't have to BOTHER criticizing a government, it wouldn't exist.

You perceive an objective reality - you don't live in it. So as long as you still perceive the government, it still exists. You perceive it because you've grown up with it, have given it a label, and have seen it in action. Until you no longer perceive the government, it won't exist.

Unfortunately for you, you're already conditioned to its existence. But for someone who isn't, you ask them what the government is and they won't know what you're talking about, because it doesn't exist to them. It isn't within their reality. When you show them exactly what it is, you've altered their perception, and their reality.

Vi_Veri said:
How can the children perceive they are flying if after they witnessed the adult flying (and are told/shown what flying is), nothing they do resembles it?

It depends on exactly what the adult did, which is really the unknown variable in all of this.

Its like a math problem. Find 'x', x being what the action is being performed. We know some things; it is called "flying," it must be able to demonstrate to the children, and the children must be able to do it themselves, without any help. The conclusion I came up with is that 'x' is in fact what you and I know as 'walking.'

Therefore if the children are able to 'walk' in our eyes, they'll be able to 'fly' in theirs. Perceptions are changed, because the word, and the action, is subjective.

.... a person not knowing what government is doesn't make government anything different. Government still exists in reality, and still controls a person's life. I'd like to see the person not believing in a jail cell the government can put them in. They would just be witnessing an illusion inside their head if they believed it wasn't there. We call these people schizophrenics.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 11:53:39 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 11:47:39 AM, Vi_Veri wrote:
.... a person not knowing what government is doesn't make government anything different. Government still exists in reality, and still controls a person's life. I'd like to see the person not believing in a jail cell the government can put them in. They would just be witnessing an illusion inside their head if they believed it wasn't there. We call these people schizophrenics.

That would be almost impossible unless they had no senses, or were schizophrenics. They'll perceive the jail cell when they're going into it - therefore, it exists.

Most are forgetting that there is an objective reality outside of our heads. How we come into contact with that reality is because we perceive it. Until we perceive it though, we cannot come into contact with it, and if we cannot be in contact with it, it cannot exist to us.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 12:05:22 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
Ok, Volkov, let's look at the experiment in detail....

Imagine, if you will, that babies were taken from their mothers at birth and raised inside a secluded room. They were told that humans could fly and nothing about the laws of gravity. :

Ok, so the children are taught nothing about gravity, but they are always experiencing gravity - therefore intrinsically knowing it. All they know is that humans have this ability to fly... even though they are on the ground 24/7. So, they are taught nothing about gravity, but they do experience it - because it is reality, and it's really happening, and they can't deny that their feet are flat on the ground (just like our ancestors couldn't deny gravity though they probably know nothing about it - like cats and dogs and snakes and whatever else does). Again, if the adults teach them that walking is flying - that is just changing the word "walking" to "flying." They are not up in the air flying, but down on the ground- nor can they perceive walking as we perceive flying because it doesn't look the same. Especially after crackofdawn presents the following...

Then, an adult comes in and flys (using some type of special effect to trick them) so that they believe it's really true. Then, a child believes he can fly and someone else believes he can fly and they're put in a secluded room. :

How crackofdawn presents flying is how flying is - as he says "using some type of special effect to trick them" - so he's referring to being in the air. So, the child sees this, and believes that humans can fly from the demonstration. So, two different children who have gone through the same mental training are then put into a room....

If the child A believes he's flying and child B believes child A is flying then child A is flying. Now if we could make a society of people that believed all this then we could change reality and break all the laws of everything and that society could do whatever they wanted.


They didn't change the reality of anything. We still have bodies that are subject to gravity (the objective reality that we live in). The children will find out that they can't fly when the other child does not see the first child doing what the adult did as a demonstration.

Just like when the sailors finally sailed around the world, their wrong assumptions are brought to light by reality. They can't fly. They aren't doing what the adult did in the room. They can jump off any building they so choose and can't do what the adult did. They'll figure it out eventually - all that's wrong is that they are being lied to. We can't change the law of gravity by believing it's not there.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 12:25:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 12:05:22 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
Then, an adult comes in and flys (using some type of special effect to trick them) so that they believe it's really true. Then, a child believes he can fly and someone else believes he can fly and they're put in a secluded room. :

How crackofdawn presents flying is how flying is - as he says "using some type of special effect to trick them" - so he's referring to being in the air.

Stop right there. There is no proof of this - it maybe implies to you that the demonstrator is up in the air, but that doesn't mean he was. It could very simply be that he came in walking - maybe there is no special effects, and that this meant to throw you off. The point is, it isn't specific enough to claim that the man was flying.

As well, the part about gravity isn't necessarily true either - the children may be unable to walk, and may be immobile in this regard. But that being said, they will still experience gravity even if immobile, as long as they realize that something is keeping them down. There really isn't any specifics in this regard.

They didn't change the reality of anything. We still have bodies that are subject to gravity (the objective reality that we live in). The children will find out that they can't fly when the other child does not see the first child doing what the adult did as a demonstration.

Just like when the sailors finally sailed around the world, their wrong assumptions are brought to light by reality. They can't fly. They aren't doing what the adult did in the room. They can jump off any building they so choose and can't do what the adult did. They'll figure it out eventually - all that's wrong is that they are being lied to. We can't change the law of gravity by believing it's not there.

You're again assuming from the wrong point here. I've never said that you can willfully change the objective reality around you - but what you perceive can change.

So depending upon what the children are perceiving the adult did, is what 'flying' will be. If the adult walked, then walking is 'flying,' and I am right. If the adult actually flew, then flying is 'flying,' and you're right - something I didn't deny, because obviously if you jump off a building and expect to fly, you'll perceive a new feeling called 'falling.'

But, we'll go a step further, and we'll assume that maybe the children are having a shared hallucination. There is a reason something is called a hallucination - it is perceiving something that isn't really there. But just because it isn't really there, does it make the hallucination any less real to the children until something happens that doesn't fit with it? No, it doesn't - if it did, then hallucinations wouldn't exist, and clearly hallucinations do.

Until something or someone comes in and breaks that hallucination down, what they're perceiving is real - even if it isn't actually happening in an objective reality. That is why its called a hallucination.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 12:42:49 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
All in all, Volkov, you are saying that the children can perceive walking as flying.

Again, this is just a word swap. The adults could call "walking" "flying", but that doesn't change what walking is - just the name. They wouldn't be hallucinating, they would be just calling it something else. So, reality is not changed here - just as reality between the French and the Germans is not changed because they call a table a different name.

A hallucination would be the children actually "seeing" themselves as up in the air- or flying.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 12:51:05 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 12:42:49 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
Again, this is just a word swap. The adults could call "walking" "flying", but that doesn't change what walking is - just the name. They wouldn't be hallucinating, they would be just calling it something else. So, reality is not changed here - just as reality between the French and the Germans is not changed because they call a table a different name.

Oh, but isn't it? They both perceive different things, you know; the French see la table, and Germans perceive Der Tisch - if you try to tell a Frenchman to find Der Tisch, he won't know what you're on about, and the same is vice versa. The only way he'll figure it out is if he perceives Der Tisch - aka., the table - and labels it as such. Until then, what the f*ck is "Der Tisch"?

Languages are how we rationalize what we perceive in order to communicate it to others; it is how we connect into a shared reality. But, unless the other knows the language, they cannot be apart of that shared reality, because they don't know what you're communicating.. I could go on, but you get the point.

So yes, it is just a "word swap" - but even simple words can alter how you perceive reality.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 12:55:41 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 12:51:05 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 10/18/2009 12:42:49 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
Again, this is just a word swap. The adults could call "walking" "flying", but that doesn't change what walking is - just the name. They wouldn't be hallucinating, they would be just calling it something else. So, reality is not changed here - just as reality between the French and the Germans is not changed because they call a table a different name.

Oh, but isn't it? They both perceive different things, you know; the French see la table, and Germans perceive Der Tisch - if you try to tell a Frenchman to find Der Tisch, he won't know what you're on about, and the same is vice versa. The only way he'll figure it out is if he perceives Der Tisch - aka., the table - and labels it as such. Until then, what the f*ck is "Der Tisch"?

Languages are how we rationalize what we perceive in order to communicate it to others; it is how we connect into a shared reality. But, unless the other knows the language, they cannot be apart of that shared reality, because they don't know what you're communicating.. I could go on, but you get the point.

So yes, it is just a "word swap" - but even simple words can alter how you perceive reality.

No, because a Frenchman would point at the table and be thinking about the table, and the German would be thinking about the table, and pointing at the table. What they call the table is irrelevant. They're thinking about the wooden structure with four legs holding other things up.

This example is about the act of being suspended in the air. It doesn't matter whether you call it walking or flying. The children will figure out that the man could do it, but they can't.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 12:56:10 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 12:51:05 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 10/18/2009 12:42:49 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
Again, this is just a word swap. The adults could call "walking" "flying", but that doesn't change what walking is - just the name. They wouldn't be hallucinating, they would be just calling it something else. So, reality is not changed here - just as reality between the French and the Germans is not changed because they call a table a different name.

Oh, but isn't it? They both perceive different things, you know; the French see la table, and Germans perceive Der Tisch - if you try to tell a Frenchman to find Der Tisch, he won't know what you're on about, and the same is vice versa. The only way he'll figure it out is if he perceives Der Tisch - aka., the table - and labels it as such. Until then, what the f*ck is "Der Tisch"?

Languages are how we rationalize what we perceive in order to communicate it to others; it is how we connect into a shared reality. But, unless the other knows the language, they cannot be apart of that shared reality, because they don't know what you're communicating.. I could go on, but you get the point.

So yes, it is just a "word swap" - but even simple words can alter how you perceive reality.

It's just a different way to describe reality - like mathematics is a tool of description. They are both describing the same thing. Just as "walking" switched to "flying" is describing the same action. So what reality does that change? It just changes the tool they use to describe it - language.

I get what you're trying to say, though.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 12:59:07 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 12:55:41 PM, Kleptin wrote:
No, because a Frenchman would point at the table and be thinking about the table, and the German would be thinking about the table, and pointing at the table. What they call the table is irrelevant. They're thinking about the wooden structure with four legs holding other things up.

If they're both pointing at it and calling it their respective names, then obviously the other will realize what "la table" and "Der Tisch" is, which doesn't contradict my point at all.

This example is about the act of being suspended in the air. It doesn't matter whether you call it walking or flying. The children will figure out that the man could do it, but they can't.

If it is the act of being suspended in air, that is different, as I said several times.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 1:01:55 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
it cannot exist to us.
Existence is not a "to us" sort of thing. We can perceive it or not. But the term "exist" refers to objective reality.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Vi_Veri
Posts: 4,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 1:52:27 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 12:59:07 PM, Volkov wrote:
At 10/18/2009 12:55:41 PM, Kleptin wrote:
No, because a Frenchman would point at the table and be thinking about the table, and the German would be thinking about the table, and pointing at the table. What they call the table is irrelevant. They're thinking about the wooden structure with four legs holding other things up.

If they're both pointing at it and calling it their respective names, then obviously the other will realize what "la table" and "Der Tisch" is, which doesn't contradict my point at all.

This example is about the act of being suspended in the air. It doesn't matter whether you call it walking or flying. The children will figure out that the man could do it, but they can't.

If it is the act of being suspended in air, that is different, as I said several times.

But again, Volkov, you are saying that reality is changed because of different description tools used. And that is what's not holding water. La Table and Der Tisch are describing same thing, even though the German might not know what La Table means, it doesn't mean he doesn't believe the table exists - or that the word La Table exists - he just doesn't know it describes the table. Descriptive tools, like grams or meters or language - don't really have substance, they are just ideas used to describe something.

So, again, just because they call walking "flying" doesn't make it "flying." It's just a different descriptive word.
I could give a f about no haters as long as my ishes love me.
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2009 4:57:37 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 10/18/2009 1:52:27 PM, Vi_Veri wrote:
But again, Volkov, you are saying that reality is changed because of different description tools used. And that is what's not holding water. La Table and Der Tisch are describing same thing, even though the German might not know what La Table means, it doesn't mean he doesn't believe the table exists - or that the word La Table exists - he just doesn't know it describes the table. Descriptive tools, like grams or meters or language - don't really have substance, they are just ideas used to describe something.

But that description - what you're perceiving - is key to what reality is, which is where I'm going with this. I may not be describing it best as I can, because this isn't my forte so to speak, but maybe this website can explain it better:

http://www.endlesshumanpotential.com...