The "One Reality" Illusion

[The Helmetmaker]

From post #42

If you are specifically referring to the part where I said - ''As we happen to exist in a physical universe with physical properties, features and attributes, something that exists should have physical properties, therefore be detectable in some way'' - this in no way contradicts what I said about ideas existing as bodies of information within brains. The brain is a physical organ, a physical information processor with memory retention, storage and retrieval ability. Ideas are a part of memory, they can be retrieved, they can be manipulated, extended, extrapolated just like any body of information stored in the brain, encoded in cells, synaptic clefts, etc.

I am specifically referring to the part where you said abstract ideas don't exist and aren't real, just to remind you that you did say it. I have described a simple abstract idea that requires no cognitive mechanism to exist, and yet it does, and asked if you still maintain it's unreality.

 

[DBT]

If you are specifically referring to the part where I said - ''As we happen to exist in a physical universe with physical properties, features and attributes, something that exists should have physical properties, therefore be detectable in some way'' - this in no way contradicts what I said about ideas existing as bodies of information within brains. The brain is a physical organ, a physical information processor with memory retention, storage and retrieval ability. Ideas are a part of memory, they can be retrieved, they can be manipulated, extended, extrapolated just like any body of information stored in the brain, encoded in cells, synaptic clefts, etc.

I am specifically referring to the part where you said abstract ideas don't exist and aren't real, just to remind you that you did say it. I have described a simple abstract idea that requires no cognitive mechanism to exist, and yet it does, and asked if you still maintain it's unreality.

Being busy with other things, I'm not sure of what your specific example was...and don't have time to search back through the thread. But as for ideas, the idea of warp drive used in Sci Fi books and movies, for example, does not exist in reality. We don't Warp Drive but it does exist as a fictional idea in the form of information stored human brains/minds and written in books, magazines and movies.Which, as I said, is in the form of information but not as physical objective objects like cars and trains...which began as ideas but were made actual objects.

 

[4321lynx]

I am specifically referring to the part where you said abstract ideas don't exist and aren't real, just to remind you that you did say it. I have described a simple abstract idea that requires no cognitive mechanism to exist, and yet it does, and asked if you still maintain it's unreality.

Being busy with other things, I'm not sure of what your specific example was...and don't have time to search back through the thread. But as for ideas, the idea of warp drive used in Sci Fi books and movies, for example, does not exist in reality. We don't Warp Drive but it does exist as a fictional idea in the form of information stored human brains/minds and written in books, magazines and movies.Which, as I said, is in the form of information but not as physical objective objects like cars and trains...which began as ideas but were made actual objects.

But the information contained in your brain and its storage and its retrieval are all accomplished by certain electrochemical changes in the cells of that brain. That we cannot yet detect exactlywhat the changes are and exactlywhich cells are concernedd does not mean that the changes do not exist. And does not mean that *ideas* exist as some sort ethereal presence, they are simply (ha ha ha ) changes difficult to record, difficult to localise, difficult to specify, but very much existing in terms of molecules, atoms and subatomic particles and their effects just as trains, planes and automobiles are, only a little smaller.

 

[DBT]

Being busy with other things, I'm not sure of what your specific example was...and don't have time to search back through the thread. But as for ideas, the idea of warp drive used in Sci Fi books and movies, for example, does not exist in reality. We don't Warp Drive but it does exist as a fictional idea in the form of information stored human brains/minds and written in books, magazines and movies.Which, as I said, is in the form of information but not as physical objective objects like cars and trains...which began as ideas but were made actual objects.

But the information contained in your brain and its storage and its retrieval are all accomplished by certain electrochemical changes in the cells of that brain. That we cannot yet detect exactlywhat the changes are and exactlywhich cells are concernedd does not mean that the changes do not exist. And does not mean that *ideas* exist as some sort ethereal presence, they are simply (ha ha ha ) changes difficult to record, difficult to localise, difficult to specify, but very much existing in terms of molecules, atoms and subatomic particles and their effects just as trains, planes and automobiles are, only a little smaller.

It is only the processor - the brain - that has access to its own encoded information and the means to represent an idea in conscious form,including the related motor actions requires to write it down, type it into a computer or tell it to someone else about the idea....whereupon the information that the idea is composed of is transferred to another brain (and spread throughout a related population and its media)

 

[fromderinside]

You just stuck your finger in the eye of the notion that reality is other than an illusion when you wrote "It is only the processor - the brain - that has access to it's own encoded information ...." We know the the brain is many processors, differently evolved, that sometimes work together. We both know ideas are only so associationally forced by similar ends to be brought together to some behavioral end in parts of the brain, perhaps never to be called on in any circumstance again.

 

[DBT]

You just stuck your finger in the eye of the notion that reality is other than an illusion when you wrote "It is only the processor - the brain - that has access to it's own encoded information ...." We know the the brain is many processors, differently evolved, that sometimes work together. We both know ideas are only so associationally forced by similar ends to be brought together to some behavioral end in parts of the brain, perhaps never to be called on in any circumstance again.

Sure, the brain is a modular system....I take short cuts, lack of sufficient time, laziness maybe, not feeling the need to go into such detail unless asked or challenged.

 

[The Helmetmaker]

Being busy with other things, I'm not sure of what your specific example was...and don't have time to search back through the thread. But as for ideas, the idea of warp drive used in Sci Fi books and movies, for example, does not exist in reality. We don't Warp Drive but it does exist as a fictional idea in the form of information stored human brains/minds and written in books, magazines and movies.Which, as I said, is in the form of information but not as physical objective objects like cars and trains...which began as ideas but were made actual objects.

Ah, the convenient busyness . . . in place of substance . . . sorry.

 

[DBT]

Being busy with other things, I'm not sure of what your specific example was...and don't have time to search back through the thread. But as for ideas, the idea of warp drive used in Sci Fi books and movies, for example, does not exist in reality. We don't Warp Drive but it does exist as a fictional idea in the form of information stored human brains/minds and written in books, magazines and movies.Which, as I said, is in the form of information but not as physical objective objects like cars and trains...which began as ideas but were made actual objects.

Ah, the convenient busyness . . . in place of substance . . . sorry.

Inconvenient busyness, more like. A reminder of a particular example is nothing unreasonable. As for substance, ideas don't exist in nature, only objects and their relationships.

 

[The Helmetmaker]

. . . A reminder of a particular example is nothing unreasonable. As for substance, ideas don't exist in nature, only objects and their relationships.

Refer to posts 49 and 51.

 

[DBT]

. . . A reminder of a particular example is nothing unreasonable. As for substance, ideas don't exist in nature, only objects and their relationships.

Refer to posts 49 and 51.

From post #49 - you said - ''But what of ideas that don't require a brain or device of some kind? The complex ballistic paths of objects moving in the universe, both in the past and projected into the future, are real whether a thinker conceives them or not.''

I don't see that objects or their movements can be classified as ideas. These are actual things with actual trajectories governed or determined by mass, gravity, etc. We may have ideas that are related to these things, but ideas do not exist outside of brains with the capacity to form ideas.


From post #51 - You said - ''The reality is that this orbital path is an immaterial thing and yet it exists whether or not anything thinks about it. But, to use your words, it is an abstract idea''

The movement of an object or its orbit is governed, as I mentioned above, by gravity, mass, initial conditions, perhaps quantum effects to some degree. The position, path or orbit is not an idea, but actual movement of objects in relation to other objects, which are all subject to gravity, heat and other forces. Orbits can be calculated, motion predicted if the drivers are well enough understood. We have ideas related to these things, but these things, objects and their relationships exist regardless of our ideas about them.

Ideas don't exist in the external world, they are bodies of information generated by brains with the capacity to process information and imagine things possibilities and things fictional.

 

[PyramidHead]

Refer to posts 49 and 51.

From post #49 - you said - ''But what of ideas that don't require a brain or device of some kind? The complex ballistic paths of objects moving in the universe, both in the past and projected into the future, are real whether a thinker conceives them or not.''

I don't see that objects or their movements can be classified as ideas. These are actual things with actual trajectories governed or determined by mass, gravity, etc. We may have ideas that are related to these things, but ideas do not exist outside of brains with the capacity to form ideas.


From post #51 - You said - ''The reality is that this orbital path is an immaterial thing and yet it exists whether or not anything thinks about it. But, to use your words, it is an abstract idea''

The movement of an object or its orbit is governed, as I mentioned above, by gravity, mass, initial conditions, perhaps quantum effects to some degree. The position, path or orbit is not an idea, but actual movement of objects in relation to other objects, which are all subject to gravity, heat and other forces. Orbits can be calculated, motion predicted if the drivers are well enough understood. We have ideas related to these things, but these things, objects and their relationships exist regardless of our ideas about them.

Ideas don't exist in the external world, they are bodies of information generated by brains with the capacity to process information and imagine things possibilities and things fictional.

I think you may be confusing the behavior of physical objects with the laws we invent to describe this behavior. Reality does what it does, with no instructions needed and no plan. Humans perceive patterns in reality and come up with ways to predict what it will do next. That's the trajectory example. An object's trajectory through space doesn't exist "out there" (if you disagree, please show me where I can find it). It's mapped onto the state of reality by observers as a model that happens to be relatively accurate.

It's also true that objects themselves are not properly distinguished at the level of observer-independent reality. Our senses highlight aspects of the surroundings that help us navigate, but there is no inherent sense in which there are objects in the universe that are separate from one another. There may be only one thing that actually exists: the unified field, with its localized peaks and valleys, corresponding to what we call particles or waves. If everything reduces to that, then everything else is ideas added by beings with brains.

 

[DBT]

From post #49 - you said - ''But what of ideas that don't require a brain or device of some kind? The complex ballistic paths of objects moving in the universe, both in the past and projected into the future, are real whether a thinker conceives them or not.''

I don't see that objects or their movements can be classified as ideas. These are actual things with actual trajectories governed or determined by mass, gravity, etc. We may have ideas that are related to these things, but ideas do not exist outside of brains with the capacity to form ideas.


From post #51 - You said - ''The reality is that this orbital path is an immaterial thing and yet it exists whether or not anything thinks about it. But, to use your words, it is an abstract idea''

The movement of an object or its orbit is governed, as I mentioned above, by gravity, mass, initial conditions, perhaps quantum effects to some degree. The position, path or orbit is not an idea, but actual movement of objects in relation to other objects, which are all subject to gravity, heat and other forces. Orbits can be calculated, motion predicted if the drivers are well enough understood. We have ideas related to these things, but these things, objects and their relationships exist regardless of our ideas about them.

Ideas don't exist in the external world, they are bodies of information generated by brains with the capacity to process information and imagine things possibilities and things fictional.

I think you may be confusing the behavior of physical objects with the laws we invent to describe this behavior.

No, I was referring to the path, orbit or trajectory that an object takes due to whatever is acting upon it, gravity, the force applied to a thrown ball, a bullet fired, a planet in orbit or whatever. My point was that the path, orbit or trajectory that an object 'takes' is not an idea but a fact, call it physics, relativity, quantum, it doesn't matter, these are indeed ideas we have about observable facts......

Reality does what it does, with no instructions needed and no plan. Humans perceive patterns in reality and come up with ways to predict what it will do next. That's the trajectory example. An object's doesn't exist "out there" (if you disagree, please show me where I can find it). It's mapped onto the state of reality by observers as a model that happens to be relatively accurate.

My point was that reality does what it does and that what it actually does is not an idea. As I said, we have ideas. Ideas only exist in the form of information content in brains. Ideas do not grow on trees, ideas don't fly a ball across the yard when thrown, ideas are not to be fished out of a creek, or found lying by the roadside....

 

[Random Person]

This is my reality. There are many like it, but this one is mine.

My reality is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.

Without me, my reality is useless. Without my reality, I am useless...




Hang on, I might be thinking of something else.

 

[fromderinside]

Ideas do not grow on trees, ideas don't fly a ball across the yard when thrown, ideas are not to be fished out of a creek, or found lying by the roadside....

Shelly Berman:

"Yes Lord. Er, what's a creek?"

 

[DBT]

Ideas do not grow on trees, ideas don't fly a ball across the yard when thrown, ideas are not to be fished out of a creek, or found lying by the roadside....

Shelly Berman:

"Yes Lord. Er, what's a creek?"

We have many ideas associated with creeks, and everything else, but a creek cares not in the least about us or our ideas...

 

[PyramidHead]

I think you may be confusing the behavior of physical objects with the laws we invent to describe this behavior.

No, I was referring to the path, orbit or trajectory that an object takes due to whatever is acting upon it, gravity, the force applied to a thrown ball, a bullet fired, a planet in orbit or whatever. My point was that the path, orbit or trajectory that an object 'takes' is not an idea but a fact, call it physics, relativity, quantum, it doesn't matter, these are indeed ideas we have about observable facts......

Reality does what it does, with no instructions needed and no plan. Humans perceive patterns in reality and come up with ways to predict what it will do next. That's the trajectory example. An object's doesn't exist "out there" (if you disagree, please show me where I can find it). It's mapped onto the state of reality by observers as a model that happens to be relatively accurate.

My point was that reality does what it does and that what it actually does is not an idea. As I said, we have ideas. Ideas only exist in the form of information content in brains. Ideas do not grow on trees, ideas don't fly a ball across the yard when thrown, ideas are not to be fished out of a creek, or found lying by the roadside....

We agree for the most part. However, I still maintain that the path, orbit, trajectory, etc. is not an actual entity but a concept. It cannot be found anywhere in nature except by extrapolating trends and patterns from what is observed, and those depend on minds.

 

[DBT]

No, I was referring to the path, orbit or trajectory that an object takes due to whatever is acting upon it, gravity, the force applied to a thrown ball, a bullet fired, a planet in orbit or whatever. My point was that the path, orbit or trajectory that an object 'takes' is not an idea but a fact, call it physics, relativity, quantum, it doesn't matter, these are indeed ideas we have about observable facts......

Reality does what it does, with no instructions needed and no plan. Humans perceive patterns in reality and come up with ways to predict what it will do next. That's the trajectory example. An object's doesn't exist "out there" (if you disagree, please show me where I can find it). It's mapped onto the state of reality by observers as a model that happens to be relatively accurate.

My point was that reality does what it does and that what it actually does is not an idea. As I said, we have ideas. Ideas only exist in the form of information content in brains. Ideas do not grow on trees, ideas don't fly a ball across the yard when thrown, ideas are not to be fished out of a creek, or found lying by the roadside....

We agree for the most part. However, I still maintain that the path, orbit, trajectory, etc. is not an actual entity but a concept. It cannot be found anywhere in nature except by extrapolating trends and patterns from what is observed, and those depend on minds.

How can the path an object in motion takes be an idea or a concept? If an object is moving, it is moving in relation to other objects. It's movement is both measurable and predicable. The movement doesn't exist without the object. Movement is merely a description of what the object is doing, the opposite to stationary. ''Stationary'' isn't an idea or a concept, it's our reference or description of a body at rest.