A=A how could it not?

Is a naive realism inferior to an eligant unrealism... What do you think?..

That because the cave man could not prove his reality that he lived in an unreal world...

The purpose of kicking the rock was to disprove nothing...

ill check it out




I agree things exist just are what they are. A=A that's it, there's nothing more to it than that and thats logical. Also how is logic only "our" way of understanding? what other kind of logic is there?





the irony...




To me logic refuses to go away. As I said before I cannot fathom an illogical reality. A=A how could it not? In an illogical reality A=B? but that cannot be everytime for it would be following some sort of consistency if A only equals B, which is a form of logic. So A would have to equal any and everything infinitely...

If dreams exist, how can aspects of dreams like dream-rocks not exist? Wouldn't dream rocks exist, at least in dreams?

I'll leave that response to the person that has lived the philosophy of 'naive realism' and has also the experience of living with other understandings.
My guess is that there were people that poo-pooed the wheel, claiming tradition and comfort of the known tread, until he rode a few miles. Ask him then.
I, personally, don't ever recall believing 'reality' is as it appears to these senses.


I really don't know what you are arguing with here. If you are arguing something that I said, please give the 'offending' quote and state your objection or ask for elucidation. You seem to be meandering and I have no idea where you are and where going.


Exactly! The purpose of kicking the rock was to prove the 'material reality' of the rock, to "disprove nothing"!
It was a Plato tale I thought, or perhaps Zeno... nothing new nevertheless. It was a bumpersticker attempt by the clueless to 'prove' materialism.

Reality is not real because it is provable as real, it is real because we feel it is real by what we call perception.

Where have you been, dude? I have been saying all over the place that 'reality' is manifested in/as our perception, that we are Conscious Perspectives!
Existence is 'real' 'because' it is (perceived). Existence, as perceived, is our 'reality'. It needs no 'proof'.
Everything exists. Feelings, science, thought, emotions, dreams, hamburglers, etc... are all features of 'reality'/existence.
When speaking of 'reality' from a sciencePerspective, it has it's own unique language (critical thought/experimentation...); like fools and priests and ice-cream men... all are valid features of existence (at the moment of perception).
Even if not the same paragraph, I think that we are on the same page... at least the same book... *__-

How much of reality do you fathom??? Any notion of a percent??? Since it is an infinite, it cannot be said known at all... Yet, we do think we know something of reality, and it is that part we can form judgements about and we can only form a judgement over that which behaves according to rules we think of as logical... It is logical that cats meow.. It is logical that dogs bark... Reality teaches logic...

please try and explain to me how an illogical reality can exist.

The relation of numbers to experience is just like that of 'kinds' in relation to logic. So long as an experience will keep its kind we can handle it by logic. So long as it will keep its number we can deal with it by arithmetic. Sensibly, however, things are constantly changing their numbers, just as they are changing their kinds. They are forever breaking apart and fusing. Compounds and their elements are never numerically identical, for the elements are sensibly many and the compounds sensibly one. Unless our arithmetic (and logic) is to remain without application to life, we must somehow make more numerical (logical) continuity than we spontaneously find.

There is no such thing as 'water' for 'science;' that is only a handy name for H2 and O when they have got into the position H-O-H, and then affect our senses in a novel way. The modern theories of atoms, of heat, and of gases are, in fact, only intensely artificial devices for gaining that constancy in numbers of things which sensible experience will not show. ...

(Only) by such elaborate inventions, and at such a cost to the imagination, do men succeed in making for themselves a world in which real things shall be coerced per fas aut nefas (through right or wrong) under arithmetical law.

Dreams do not exist... We live, a form of existence, and as part of life we percieve in our minds what is real, but the reality is mostly outside of us... It is not the dreams that are real, but ourselves, and our perception and emotions, and senses in regard to them are a part of us, our chemistry, and neurons resetting, or firing... Kicking a dream rock may cause a perception of pain, but our perceptions are not the reality, but the way we begin to understand reality... Our experience of dream as our experience of all reality -seems- real...

This doesn't solve the problem.

Again, how can an aspect of something real not be real?

We are real, and dreams are an experience which we, real things, experience, therefore dreams are real experiences. I'm not saying that they exist apart from our existence, quite the opposite. I'm saying that because dreams only exist in our experience that dreams must be, to some degree, real.

Or did I not dream last night?

so youre going to play the absolute certainty card.... please try and explain to me how an illogical reality can exist.

All reality is illogical until we can concieve of it... The helliocentric solar system was not logical because it did not fit with observable facts, like the sun rising and setting... It was math, a form of logic that showed what was obvious to be not logical... We see much that we cannot concieve of, and until we can concieve of it we will not know the logic of it...The logic and the concept goes together...It seems reasonable to expect that we cannot concieve of what is happening in every instance because it is illogical- because it seems illogical, or the logic of it does not fit with what we now consider logical, so if it beyond our logic, and material behavior is not predicted by our logical understanding, then, it is illogical to us.. Nature teaches logic... Reality teaches logic....

Kielicious wrote:

so because we dont fully understand something it is illogical? I hardly find that satisfying. If we dont fully comprehend something that doesnt imply it is illogical. Just by your example of heliocentrism the solar system still existed logically even though we didnt fully understand what was going on. Regardless of what we thought was happening the logic is STILL there. The solar system still followed logic.

I think you are missing my point... Until we understand something is logical we cannot say it is, and we never understand anything until we understand its logic, and it is because the logic of what we do not know does not fit with the logic of what we do know that we do not know it... Part of the weakness of logic is that it does not allow us to predict too much... From our point of view, this moment of time, most of what we see has no reason...

Quote:

Alot of the responses seem to rely wholly on the subjectiveness of the universe and continue to beg the question of absolute certainty. True there may be a chance that everything we know could be wrong but why are we still holding on to such solipsistic statements? While we're at it let's just deny everything, including our minds, and continue to be counter-productive. After all, it seems like that's all that "philosophers" do: question everything and do nothing.

We can never fully understand anything until we understand its logic. Of reality, and of existence, we cannot say we know a fraction of a fraction of what may be out there, nor can we say there is a logic to it, that there might not be some cause with a predictible effect that for some reason quite reasonable may some day NOT have the same effect, which would be illogical, and yet is possible... I agree that we should look for logical understanding of nature, reality and existence; but I think you may see that yesterday's logical explanations only blinded people to the real logic at work... Look at how people used race to explain poverty, illness, and crime... The Germans sterilized 350K of their own people trying to clean up their Genes, and threw a bunch of jews into the ovens like so many baked potatoes for the same reason... It was a false explanation based upon pseudo science... And it was a logical explanation that blined people to their own humanity and the facts...

Quote:

I apologize for the rant but the absolute certainty question is really annoying because its always going in circles to me.

I am looking for a workable explanation with predictable outcomes...

BTW; Questioning everything, and doing nothing is what makes knowledge virtue... When you know you don't know you don't get in no big hurry to shove your own foot up your own asssss...

Watch everything, do little, have a beer and take a piddle; and no one gets hurt, which is a small but tangible victory...

...for I would still like someone to show me how an illogical reality can exist. Even in a rudimentary way...

- is it logical for someone with OCD to compulsively wash their hands until they crack and bleed?
- is it logical for the stock market to swing uncontrollably?
- is it logical for one slip of a rock to come to nothing while the next cascades into a 6.7 earthquake?
- is it logical for us to invade Iraq?
- is this discussion logical?

#1: to them yes.