Objective Reality

[henry quirk]

The fire, created by the two men, or created by the lightning strike in the middle of the unihabited woods, is real, exists independent of any observer.

Reality depends on you and me and him and her not one damn bit.

[Impenitent]

The fire, created by the two men, or created by the lightning strike in the middle of the unihabited woods, is real, exists independent of any observer.

Reality depends on you and me and him and her not one damn bit.

"exists independent of any observer..."

thus we have god, santa claus, the easter bunny

-Imp

[henry quirk]

Not a one of those is necessary for our abandoned camp fire, or our lightning-caused fire, to exist, to burn.

[Greta]

The rest of the world is in the unknowing wether E happened to O. The only thing they know was that O told them about E, but it could be imaginary, or it could be real. The rest of the world will NEVER know wether E was real.

Now, since E never affected anything in the universe, except O, and only through O's actions (public speeches about E) affects the the rest of the world, what is the Objective Reality?

Did E happen?

YES.

Mind is not the only form of memory (not that in lieu of memory, nothing happened either - now it's here, now it's gone). Everything that happens impacts on the fabric of reality and, with advanced enough technology, could theoretically be reconstructed.

[Ramu]

Let's suppose we have an event (I'm not goint into any particular event, just any event that fits into this post).

We call the event E.

E was noticed by an Observer (O).

Now, let's suppose nobody except O noticed the event. Nothing in the universe, except O was affected by E.

Nobody saw, nobody heard and nobody had their atoms moved around by E, except O, which of course, told the rest of the world of E.

Only through O do we notice E. We don't know wether O was correct.

Now, let's suppose O is a human being. Lots of stuff can happen to a human, including the brain making tricks on itself. But let's suppose for this example, that E was an external event. That is, it did not come from within the human Observer. Let's suppose E cast a beam of light that travelled into O's eyes creating a vision of something. The light beam did not travel anywhere else. But it did happen, externally that is!

The rest of the world is in the unknowing wether E happened to O. The only thing they know was that O told them about E, but it could be imaginary, or it could be real. The rest of the world will NEVER know wether E was real.

Now, since E never affected anything in the universe, except O, and only through O's actions (public speeches about E) affects the the rest of the world, what is the Objective Reality?

Did E happen?

Another example of my thought-experiment is more visual:

Let's have a singularity in pure nothingness. For the sake of understanding this, let's visually represent "nothing" as a clean white piece of paper.
The singularity is an X anywhere on the paper.

Does X exist?

In relation to what, you might ask. In relation to nothing. X exist in relation to nothing, so IS X?

Now let's have another X (X2) anywhere on the same paper.

Does X exist in relation to X2? Where? What is location in this nothingness, what is distance?

Let's have a third X, X3. Now we can have distances. X relates in angles to X2 and X3.

Now we can say for sure, X exist. But does X still exist if we erase X2 or X3?

In short, can we only talk about existence, in relation to something else, or can something exist on its own?

The problem is objective reality doesn't really exist. All we can ever have is first person subjective. Reality is anecdotal.

[Ramu]

That is: E is independent of O.

So: E happened (observation, by one, many, or 'no observation', has no bearing on E's existence).

...and...

"there is no "objective" reality "

Yes, there is.

There are as many subjective takes on reality as there are minds, but there's only one reality.

Joe looks at the camp fire, remembers good times with his pop, feels warm and comfortable.

Stan looks at the same camp fire, remembers how he was seriously burned as a child, moves a little further out from the flames.

Two very different takes on the same object (the camp fire [which does what it does, is what it is, independently of what any mind thinks of it]).

Yet 3rd person objective is couched in 1st person subjective. It can never be anything but that. Reality is anecdotal.

[Dontaskme]

The fire, created by the two men, or created by the lightning strike in the middle of the unihabited woods, is real, exists independent of any observer.

Reality depends on you and me and him and her not one damn bit.

All you are doing is using concepts to describe what is actually being pointed to here, which is ...no one is watching, no thing is happening.

NOW HERE there is only the ''observer'' watching itself. The observer is not a concept. The observer is not a man or a woman, a man is a concept known by the non-conceptual observer. Concepts don't know anything, they are the known.

The watcher/observer is not dependant on any concept to be, but for any concept to be ... the observer is needed...is dependant on the observer to be..



No concept created anything. No thing was created, no thing ever happened.

Take away thoughts/conceptual language aka ''things'' out of the context....and see what's left...? .....there's just ''what is'' minus any knowledge about it.

What is... IS...WITHOUT DOUBT OR ERROR. .....but what this ''WHAT IS'' actually is...no one knows ...except as A conceptual fiction..no one is making up.

Conclusion: no thing is happening, no one is watching, and no thing doing anything...exccept in this conception...

The conception is a superimposed narrative upon the 'what is' ...an artificial overlay made of conceptual langauge, aka knowledge which informs the illusory nature of reality in that there is no one or thing running the show...doing anything, it does itself all alone, and it's not a thing.

Concepts are the appearances of the uncreated no thing being everything. ONE WITHOUT A SECOND.




.

[henry quirk]

"All you are doing is using concepts to describe what is actually being pointed to here, which is ...no one is watching, no thing is happening."

No, I'm using language to tell you and anyone else who cares to read: if lightning, for example, strikes a tree deep in the woods where no mind is present to perceive it, that tree will still burn, cuz the lightning strike and the fire it causes doesn't need you or me or him or her to 'see' it happen, to observe it.

To claim -- as it seems you and Imp do -- the fire 'isn't' if no one observes it is -- to me -- insane.

Simply, directly: Reality exists and it does so independent of 'mind'.

As an aside: Schrodinger's cat is dead or alive, not both.

'nuff said.

[RCSaunders]

Let's suppose we have an event (I'm not goint into any particular event, just any event that fits into this post).

We call the event E.

E was noticed by an Observer (O).

Now, let's suppose nobody except O noticed the event. Nothing in the universe, except O was affected by E.

Contra-hypothesis. An event observed means an event is external to the observer (so not imaginary or delusion). No real event can have no relationship to anything else in the universe.

Let's have a singularity in pure nothingness.

There is no such thing as, "pure nothingness." It doesn't even have a meaning.

Randy

[RCSaunders]

The problem is objective reality doesn't really exist. All we can ever have is first person subjective. Reality is anecdotal.

Speak for yourself. You may not know reality is what exists independently of anyone's consciousness or knowledge of it and is all there is to be conscious of, but don't assume your ignorance is universal.

You may disregard what I just wrote since it's only a subjective delusion of your own mind--simply an anecdote you've told yourself. It doesn't even exist, objectively.

Randy

[RCSaunders]

Did E happen?

YES.

... Everything that happens impacts on the fabric of reality and, with advanced enough technology, could theoretically be reconstructed.

That's right!

Randy

[RCSaunders]

Simply, directly: Reality exists and it does so independent of 'mind'.

Absolutely. That's why it's called objective reality.

Randy

[surreptitious57]

Most of reality is beyond human experience and all of that is purely objective. The very
infinitesimal part of reality we actually do experience is both objective and subjective

[Dontaskme]

"All you are doing is using concepts to describe what is actually being pointed to here, which is ...no one is watching, no thing is happening."

No, I'm using language to tell you and anyone else who cares to read: if lightning, for example, strikes a tree deep in the woods where no mind is present to perceive it, that tree will still burn, cuz the lightning strike and the fire it causes doesn't need you or me or him or her to 'see' it happen, to observe it.

This is a story known, an image of no thing..the image maker aka the knower of the image/story...aka awareness watching itself via an image, has never been seen...rendering all images a mirage aka no thing...appearing real.

The observing separate I ..you are referring to doesn't exist. It's a phantom.

You only know the story now because it's a known event in awareness,(you) else you wouldn't be able to re-call the story now. Everything that ever happens is happening NOW simultaneously instantanously all at once here and now the only place there is.

So even when the illusory 'assumed' 'separate observer' is not present in a repeated event, aka a memory re-call of the event known...there is no way of knowing that ANY event is happening, simply because there is no such thing as a separate observer observing or knowing anything, because it does not exist....Any event is simply known NOW either as this realtime happening one with the knowing, or as a memory re-called now by awareness only.

ALL events are known as stories rememebered now in the only knowing there is which is awareness. To know anything.. The awareness has to refer to memory aka the mind for anything to be known, it does this not in realtime, but always on demand...knowledge of anything is always after the event has already unawarely taken place, knowledge is on reflection via memory....when awareness becomes aware of itself.

This is all a fiction happening in awareness which is everywhere, now here, nowhere all at once, all one, all alone.. there is no other one here, all assumed other ones are fictional characters/concepts that never happened, only appeared to happen in that which never happens.

The separate observer does not exist ..there is here now only observing awareness watching itself in the form of memory...aka knowledge known.

To claim -- as it seems you and Imp do -- the fire 'isn't' if no one observes it is -- to me -- insane.

Simply, directly: Reality exists and it does so independent of 'mind'.

As an aside: Schrodinger's cat is dead or alive, not both.

'nuff said.

This is a known mentally created conceptual narrative appearing from, in, and of No thing..aka awareness...it's neither dead nor alive...

.

People who speak like this don't worry that they are said to be insane ...they already know that, they know they do not exist except as a concept, a fictional idea of no thing.



.

[Dontaskme]

Simply, directly: Reality exists and it does so independent of 'mind'.

Absolutely. That's why it's called objective reality.

No thing is calling an objective reality.

That should tell you all you need to know about the reality of an object.

.