Featured I have a serious doubt that torments me

The problem isn't that people see subjectively. The problem is that some think that they are truly objective and that everyone who doesn't agree is wrong.

 

Well, there is an argument for direct realism (John Searle would be a proponent) that claims we do see reality objectively.

It is true that we have a certain way of seeing reality, i.e. an aspectual way, or reality-under-an-aspect. But aspectualism is compatible with objectivism. And most importantly, while we do see reality from a point of view, we do not see our seeing. We see the object. Searle thinks that traditional philosophy's mistake is the idea that we somehow see our experiences of things, whereas in fact the seeing itself is the experience. There is no "middle seeing" between the perceiver and the perceived - call it representation, idea, image, or anything else. We just see (aspectually) the object.

I'm undecided as to how good this argument is,but it is at least a case for our seeing objective reality.

 

"Objective reality" has a colloquial meaning, as well as different levels kinds of philosophical meanings. I think in this case the phrase implies what is going on with the relationships between humans rather than, is the stick in the water really bent.

 

Oh, right.

Then I don't know what it would mean to have an 'objective' relationship with another human. It doesn't sound like something I would want.

 

Given that " ideal objectivity " in interpersonal relationships is not possible, one can still strive or hope for some degree of less self centeredness in oneself and in others.

 

What do you mean by ‘see objective reality’? For example each of us carries our own subjective reality. To be truly objective would I have to be able to see the world through each and everyone else’s subjective viewpoint simultaneously?

 

Objective reality,

"Would the sun still rise if there was no one around?"

Yes.

The tree that falls in the forest crushes grass and opens a hole to allow more sun to hit the floor- does not matter if someone wrote it down or took a video.

We are participants in a system - story.

But as the present most powerful participants we have written are own story - but the further we go the more the inaccuracies show. "We are off target"

different cultures bought in to different stories

but universal law - perhaps may boil down to what works and what does not?

Harmony is possible at any point in any time. would have to be a choice. but the choice is not available to certain stories.

If someone is fully bought in to a story they see nothing else.

But Harmony to what end? I have heard true believers wonder if they would be bored in their heavens.

I think it is easily possible for earthlings to achieve harmony - peace - resonance.

That would mean accepting diversity and eliminating the need for the state of war or the state of nature - with technologies that provide - security- and abundant resources.

Some people think that humanity is inherently violent and need to vent out these or it will erupt. Well now or soon you will have a halo-deck or Virtual reality backed by AI.

You could relive the battle of Carthage - or be the happiest larper in history.

After all that we have - the infinite possibilities of perspective - space exploration.

And the arts. We will realize how infantile everything else was.

 

But let’s play …..

What is a tree, objectively? And what does falling mean without anyone to name it? Does the sun rise or does the Earth rotate? What is the dawn, in itself, in outer space - does the question even mean anything if there were no one to ask it?

‘We are such stuff as dreams are made on, and our little life is rounded with a sleep.’
Shakespeare, The Tempest

 

I think there are layers of reality and some laws that apply to every layer and some to a single layer.

maybe just a breeze.

 

Can you expand on this?