Objective Reality: Exploring Your Viewpoints

[magus niche]

imagination is alive and kicking..

your views on it?

I reckon objective reality, if it exists, is a chaotic/ordered amalgamation and crystallisation of the collective imagination of all subjective (sub)consciousness in existence. ie: the combination/overlapping/interference of the belief of all energy/space/matter, where belief is used in a very loose manner closely related to the idea of 'information' in cybernetics and maybe cybermagic.

Here I am letting all energy/space/matter have consciousness or 'belief' to a certain degree, whether it is simply information embedded in subatomic fields or whatever. To me consciousness (maybe 'being information') is an ultra-subtle vibration, resonating in what might as well be termed a distinct dimension from physicality, simply due to its unobservability by third parties. it therefore takes on characteristics very far removed from the standpoint of conventional physics. eg. the ability to be detached and re-attached to the physical.

And i believe it is all one infinite nothingness/everythingness up and down, inside and out. An eternal process of veluptuous splendor!

So essentially i believe ideas, thoughtforms, memes, collective hallucinations, egregores, spirits, gods, archetypes etc. are all different words for ultra-subtle aspects of the objective universe. collective beliefs strengthen the subjective conviction and ultimately (if one includes all beings and matter in the universe) manifest as objectivity.

i try not to draw a clean distinction between subject and object, simply because i believe they are integrated. the words form a literary polarisation of two generalised extremes in the human condition, that philosophy attempts to understand through the use of language.

the thing is, i also know one can effectively construct ones own reality, but that is off topic...

 

[Schrodinger's Dog]

There is no way to prove logicaly either the existence of the objective or subjective? How do we know what anyone sees is really objective or subjective? Without being that person it's not objective and being subjective we cannot be truly objective. Who's to say what we see is any more real anyway. If Zoltan came down from planet Sklixnax and told you the sky was green instead of blue, which of you would be right? Both? Neither?

 

[hypnagogue]

The opening post of this thread is exceedingly vague and undeveloped; in addition, a philosophical discussion of these matters would involve arguing for one's view of objective reality, rather than merely stating it (as the opening post asks for). For those reasons, I'm going to lock this thread for not being in accord with the philosophy guidelines.

There have been some interesting and worthwhile discussions that have cropped up in this thread, for example the discussion about solipsism. If interested parties wish to continue these lines of discussion, I encourage them to start a new thread (while making sure to observe the guidelines in the creation of any such thread).