2 types of reality?

[Trifoilum]

This is...a rambling, really. I have no backups or contents inside what I'm talking about, but I'm just..

we..have...2 different kinds of reality? Are we?

I mean, first, we have the physical reality. Rules of gravity, atoms, cells, magnetism, sinus cosinus tangent, mathematics and science and biology and physics. All more or less fixed, working in one immutable grand rule. That only gets described in a different way. I mean, calling gravity a force or a work of some god does not change the fact that gravity works DOWN, with most likely the same acceleration and working under the same rule. Calling sperms a collection of cells or the nectar of god does not change the fact that if a woman gets them inside their vajayjay, there might be chances she's going to be pregnant. And swallowing can be an uncomfortable thing.

But then there are also another kind of reality; one concerned mostly with people.... And this one appears to be...less fixed, less...stuck-in-stone?
From where you stand, with what you know, with what you see and what you believe...reality appears different. It feels different.
The world, its people, and all their actions affected each of us differently.
Somewhat...psychological? Spiritual? I dunno.

But that's also reality, isn't it?

What would you call that?
I cannot say one is better than another, but there seems to be people who, within this particular framework, mistakenly use rules of reality #1 in reality #2 and vice versa?

I dunno. Lalala.

 

[tfg345i4u5lw]

Yes. There is the cut and dry reality. And then there is our interpretation of it. I just recently saw a good example of it while watching a documentary about people with BPD.

They showed images of a straight face to one individual who didn't have BPD. The person without BPD did not get any threatening feelings from the picture. The part of the brain relating to fear wasn't activated on the brain scan.

They showed the exact same face to another individual who had BPD. The person with BPD interpreted the face as making a threatening or devious expression. And the fear part of the brain was active on the brain scan.

I found it fascinating. One person was seeing merely a straight face. The other was seeing a face that was clearly threatening in some way. Both situations were reality. But at the same time, only one was. (twilight zone music)

 

[Kmal]

The seen reality and the unseen reality, neither separate nor the same.

And swallowing can be an uncomfortable thing.

fuckin lol

 

[sprinkles]

The real real is really real and the illusory real is really illusory.

Or in other words there is ONE reality and then there's how we perceive it.

Psychological, spiritual, perceptive 'reality' is not a different reality because it takes place within the one reality.

e.g. it is an aspect of one reality that there may be people who subscribe to two realities, and those who subscribe to one. They both exist in the same one universe.

 

[the]

What is reality?

The OPs question reminds me of this kind of person:

[video=vimeo;58933055]http://vimeo.com/58933055[/video]

 

[muir]

'reality' is simply energy vibrating at certain frequencies

Our five senses take in those frequencies and then our brain decodes them to create the illusion of a solid reality. The Indian religions have called this illusion 'maya':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)

Our cultural input can determine how we decode what is coming in; for example a hypnotist can make someone decode what is coming in differently so that they can't see something that other people around them can see

This of course has massive implications because if you can act in the capacity of hypnotist and implant perceptions in peoples minds then you can change the way they decode the information that is coming in and thereby change how they perceive reality

If a hypnotist convinces someone they are swimming in water then they will be perceiving that reality; they will even feel the water against their skin

We are like a beam splitter that creates a hologram from a beam of light. Where the beamed information is coming from is another matter but kabbalists speak of kether as the first crystallisation of manifestation

The ancients reverred the sun and also the distant suns of sirius as receivers and transmitters of energy/information (what we would call photons today). We are receivers and transmitters of photons and we receive this from the sun and we decode the information into a collective reality

The beam splitter is what the shamens would call the ''assemblage point'' so if you want to alter your state of consciousness ie how you are decoding reality then you can take mind altering substances or use yoga or ecstatic movements like whirling dervishes and you can shift your assemblage point

Move it a little and you change your mood, move it a lot and you change your reality...you can be completely dissassociated from your current reality

So we are part of what Ike would call a 'cosmic internet'. Our reality is the internet (matrix). We are consciousness experiencing the reality but we have forgotten this (or rather we have been told otherwise by priestcastes who have an interest in shrinking our perceptions)

But we are not humans having a spiritual experience, we are spirit having a human experience

The aim of many spiritual paths is to transcend the illusiory world of duality and experience the oneness of consciousness called 'samadhi':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samadhi

[video=youtube;fbRmJ_2nqyg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbRmJ_2nqyg[/video]

 

[SealHammer]

This thread is certainly an interesting take on solipsism.
I like and kind of agree with [MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION]' interpretation. There is a single objective reality, and then there are individual perceptions of it which take place within it. I think you could also expand on that by going into shared reality - how a group of people perceives something.
Couldn't hurt to look into the observer effect in quantum mechanics if you guys really want some wacky shit to challenge your perception of the universe.

 

[muir]

Well yeah there is the double slit experiment that shows that reality behaves differently when observed:

[video=youtube;tu57B1v0SzI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu57B1v0SzI[/video]

This is because as i said before we are decoding the information

 

[sprinkles]

This thread is certainly an interesting take on solipsism.
I like and kind of agree with [MENTION=6917]sprinkles[/MENTION]' interpretation. There is a single objective reality, and then there are individual perceptions of it which take place within it. I think you could also expand on that by going into shared reality - how a group of people perceives something.
Couldn't hurt to look into the observer effect in quantum mechanics if you guys really want some wacky shit to challenge your perception of the universe.

Indeed. The observer effect as it relates to quantum mechanics is one reason that I posit that true reality is chaos.

This is so because the observer effect does not pertain to conscious observation, but rather pertains to any interaction even if there's no conscious mind to observe it.

It's like putting a thermometer into some water. Whether you look at the thermometer or not, it must absorb some thermal energy in order to detect it and by doing so it in fact changes the temperature of the water slightly. A measurement 'costs' something which is why even instruments will cause the observer effect when you aren't even looking.

 

[Paladin-X]

 

[Trifoilum]

With all due respect, I somewhat disagree with this, especially in regards to perceiving reality. The....

I dunno, in this context I'm not talking about whether this reality is false or wrong, or a machine simulation.
I won't scratch down the chance that it is, and if given the choice I'll prolly pick the red pill, but within the range of the original post, that's a really simplistic way of 'waking up'. Oooh, forget developing a conscience, forget developing understanding of the world and all that may happen JUST TAKE THIS PILL AND WAKE UP BECAUSE YOU ARE THE CHOSEN ONE NEOOOOOOOO.

It was such an instantaneous, protagonist-centered morality.
Rubbed off me the wrong way, I think.

 

[Trifoilum]

Yes. There is the cut and dry reality.

I found it fascinating. One person was seeing merely a straight face. The other was seeing a face that was clearly threatening in some way. Both situations were reality. But at the same time, only one was. (twilight zone music)

The seen reality and the unseen reality, neither separate nor the same.

The real real is really real and the illusory real is really illusory.

Or in other words there is ONE reality and then there's how we perceive it.

I don't know, can you easily call it just an interpretation of the one reality?
I mean, you can call gravity elements of reality; temperature, for instance. Those are just words used to explain certain elements of nature, and the nature itself won't change no matter how you change how it's spelled. (OH, Temperature of the sun is nto 3822K, it's 20 degrees Celcius! IT MUST BE COMFORTABLE!)
But it's not the same with humans, our actions, and how it was seen, and its impact.

Psychological, spiritual, perceptive 'reality' is not a different reality because it takes place within the one reality.

e.g. it is an aspect of one reality that there may be people who subscribe to two realities, and those who subscribe to one. They both exist in the same one universe.

I...dunno.
If one acted under an incomplete reality and some illusions, and then it was perceived by people, themselves holding an incomplete reality and some illusions....are they not creating a separate reality of some sort, the reality where A did action X and the reality when A (who in their mind did action X) did action Y?

 

[Trifoilum]

What is reality?

The OPs question reminds me of this kind of person:

[video=vimeo;58933055]http://vimeo.com/58933055[/video]

Can you call something a reality to someone who doesn't see it?

Hahahahahahahahahahaha
oh, she gave him a blow job! I hope she can swallow.

But yes, i apologize for the pretentious head-in-the-clouds sentiment. I don't even know what I'm talking about or if it has any merit; it's just...you know, some thoughts that came off me after the other topic in regards to religious faith vs science... coupled with other personal thoughts on my own.

 

[sprinkles]

[MENTION=2172]Trifoilum[/MENTION]

Let's try to put it this way.

There may be five different people in a room looking at a painting, and they each interpret that painting in a different way. That painting encapsulates all five of those interpretations because there are five minds in one room, on one planet, in one universe, looking at one painting.

Personally I call that meta reality. The fact that there are five interpretations of the painting is one single fact in one reality shared by all five - they just only see their own piece of it.

It's like not being able to see out the back of your head. Imagine being a spider though. How wild would that be? You'd see above and behind you.

 

[Paladin-X]

With all due respect, I somewhat disagree with this, especially in regards to perceiving reality. The....

I dunno, in this context I'm not talking about whether this reality is false or wrong, or a machine simulation.
I won't scratch down the chance that it is, and if given the choice I'll prolly pick the red pill, but within the range of the original post, that's a really simplistic way of 'waking up'. Oooh, forget developing a conscience, forget developing understanding of the world and all that may happen JUST TAKE THIS PILL AND WAKE UP BECAUSE YOU ARE THE CHOSEN ONE NEOOOOOOOO.

It was such an instantaneous, protagonist-centered morality.
Rubbed off me the wrong way, I think.

I'm sorry if I've upset you. I understand precisely what you are saying in the OP. It was a bad joke I guess.

However, it is still apt as a serious reply to your OP if I expand it a little more. Going back to a post I made in your ego traps:

http://www.infjs.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23930&page=3&p=667124&viewfull=1#post667124

The first picture is me, after having taken the red pill. The rest of the pictures are my observations of others. The last picture, in the quote, especially conveys the difference in perceived realities amongst individuals.

NOTE: I am not saying that I perceive the true reality and no one else does. I am still trapped within my own bubble at times.

 

[Trifoilum]

'reality' is simply energy vibrating at certain frequencies

Our five senses take in those frequencies and then our brain decodes them to create the illusion of a solid reality. The Indian religions have called this illusion 'maya':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_%28illusion%29

Our cultural input can determine how we decode what is coming in; for example a hypnotist can make someone decode what is coming in differently so that they can't see something that other people around them can see

Yeah, I heard about Maya as well; in fact in our language we use 'maya' as the Indonesian equivalent of 'unreal' 'illusionary'. Although the concept was pretty..different.

 

[Trifoilum]

The first picture is me, after having taken the red pill. The rest of the pictures are my observations of others. The last picture, in the quote, especially conveys the difference in perceived realities amongst individuals.

NOTE: I am not saying that I perceive the true reality and no one else does. I am still trapped within my own bubble at times.

In some ways, I question whether in this case there's the 'popping of the bubbles'..
Because ego is a much narrower term compared to 'reality', even though our ego in a certain way does transcribe and process the reality we're in.
We can expand our perspective, and our consciousness, and our view of the reality. But can the bubble really be popped? Can the barrier (of time, of emotions, of beliefs, of awareness, of ego, of logical rules) disappear?
And what happens to reality? Which realities are we going to see at that time?
Would not that be, to generalize, omniscience?

 

[sprinkles]

One problem is that perception itself quite literally and physically alters reality (in minute ways, but it does none the less)

For example, as a human, to perceive something means quite a few things:

As far as we know you must be alive. Which means you must be warm, which in turn means you burn calories, which itself costs energy.

Secondly, perception requires a medium. For example, to detect a particle you must either bounce another particle off of it, or have it bounce off your detecting instrument. In either case this has an energy costs and alters the state of the particle and the state of the detector.

Third, because perception requires medium and energy, by being there to perceive, you impact the environment. If your eye is catching photons to see red, then your eye is effected, your brain is effected, and the photons are effected. Also consider that if you are in the way to look at something, and you're catching the photons, then a person directly behind you may not be able to see that object because you're in the way.

So in the end, regardless of how your brain constructs the perception, it was reality that got it to you in the first place.

 

[the]

Can you call something a reality to someone who doesn't see it?

It seems like by definition, reality should be perceptable in some way to all.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha
oh, she gave him a blow job! I hope she can swallow.

I dont understand why this was interjected here.

But yes, i apologize for the pretentious head-in-the-clouds sentiment. I don't even know what I'm talking about or if it has any merit; it's just...you know, some thoughts that came off me after the other topic in regards to religious faith vs science... coupled with other personal thoughts on my own.

No need to apologize, theres more need for you to expound on your thoughts... if we can call it a need. Maybe I just want you to expound.

 

[Trifoilum]

It seems like by definition, reality should be perceptable in some way to all.

It should; I'm not suggesting otherwise but... I dunno. It feels......not wrong not weird not incomplete not untouched just...

Perhaps it's just a random thought. I don't even know.

I dont understand why this was interjected here.

It was supposed to be the first sentence, but I thought to respond according to your order. And within your order of posting, you posted the reply after the initial sentence.

No need to apologize, theres more need for you to expound on your thoughts... if we can call it a need. Maybe I just want you to expound.

I still have no ...idea. Or even stray thoughts.