Happy Easter and a belated Happy Passover!!

Nope, I won't have reality on the right hand side of any sentence about perception. Reality comes first - perception makes of it what it can. My overriding principle is that I want my internal model of reality to correspond as accurately as possible to actual reality. Anything less than that makes no sense to me. I know I don't get everything right, but any time I identify a shortcoming I do my best to rectify it. Anything else means that you are going to be making bad decisions based on bad data.
 
DonP said:
My overriding principle is that I want my internal model of reality to correspond as accurately as possible to actual reality. Anything less than that makes no sense to me. I know I don't get everything right, but any time I identify a shortcoming I do my best to rectify it. Anything else means that you are going to be making bad decisions based on bad data.
Click to expand...
And this is your construct. But I will put forth a few thoughts:
- your attempt to separate one from the other may be a limiter for you. I am not suggesting that there is no difference between the physical and mental. If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound? Well, it makes sound waves that is for darn sure! But to separate the effect of these facts upon us so vehemently is fruitless. The paradox in this question is only the double entendre implied by the word "sound" - the physical happening of the waves (and arguably the movement of our ear bones) vs. the perception of that data. What is the point of even pondering the wave without the realization that we have been granted the ability to ponder? While indeed they are separate and always will be, the need to consider them separately other than for the sake of a delineated controlled experiment is often unnecessary in my humble opinion.
- Data is ever changing. We were born in a moment in time and we are subject to that. Surely, the premise that the world if flat and the earth is the center of the universe seems silly now, but as a man of science, I would think it is your sincere hope that our principles of today will be dwarfed by greater enlightenment. What of string theory and dark matter and many other topics that we are only beginning to comprehend?
- Which is more relevant to your short life here, the data or the perception? Surely, the tiger or moose does not care of Hubble or dark matter or sound waves. It is only that we were granted the gift of abstract thought that we even care. To try to have our perceptions controlled by our limited understanding of the data and science of today, rather than use or perceptions to make the data and physical properties surrounding us more meaningful during our short existence seems backward to me. "One man's trash is another man's treasure" - "half full/half empty" etc.

We are both correct. We have to be. We were born to die and we have 0-120 years to do it, and that is all we have. I am glad our paths have crossed on this journey my friend!
 
Well, obviously I'm going to jump on some of your words - like "granted" for instance.

And I'm going to say that the ability to separate the reality from the perception is the only way that knowledge can advance. If we think that reality is what we perceive, what possible motivation could we have to move on? And a lack of that ability could be costly when our perception of gravity lets us leave the building by a window on the tenth floor.

String theory and dark matter? Yup, I'm involved in those peripherally - experimental methods of detecting dark matter and dark energy are part of my remit. I'm still flipping a mental coin over string theory though. But at least I've managed to kick out my old prejudice that if it was right it was beautiful; that is a crock.

For me as a scientist the data is everything, I couldn't care less about the perception, right up to the point where it matches the data. Then it is merely interesting.
 
I skipped to the end, late but
Happy Easter and Passover to all whom it matters and a friendly TTR hello to those who it doesnt.
 
DonP said:
Well, obviously I'm going to jump on some of your words - like "granted" for instance.

And I'm going to say that the ability to separate the reality from the perception is the only way that knowledge can advance. If we think that reality is what we perceive, what possible motivation could we have to move on? And a lack of that ability could be costly when our perception of gravity lets us leave the building by a window on the tenth floor.

String theory and dark matter? Yup, I'm involved in those peripherally - experimental methods of detecting dark matter and dark energy are part of my remit. I'm still flipping a mental coin over string theory though. But at least I've managed to kick out my old prejudice that if it was right it was beautiful; that is a crock.

For me as a scientist the data is everything, I couldn't care less about the perception, right up to the point where it matches the data. Then it is merely interesting.
Click to expand...
I think we are agreeing that they are both important and separate, but with different emphasis and your unshakable insistence that they must be kept completely separate for all intents and purposes except mental frivolity. As I mentioned earlier, this concept is very effective in your hands and you are undeniably an asset to those who surround you (and I imaging even those who do not (I do not really know the nature of your work) and therefore all is as it should be. However, please remember that just as you mentioned that perceptions/interpretations can be used to cause harm, so too can a strict adherence to the "facts" and 'science" have an adverse impact on the human condition. I think that empathetic action can be quite contrary to what the facts or science of the situation imply is the right thing to do (and do not ask me to expound on this last part too much - this idea is undeveloped and in large part a product of our discourse here)
 
DonP said:
All sort of ok up to the last. There is absolutely no validity to the concept that perception is reality. Reality exists, perception interprets. Do you really think that a tree only exists if someone is looking at it? Will the entire universe vanish when you die? I know these things sound like fun to say, but if you really are a solipsist then all conversations are meaningless.
Click to expand...

If conversation is meaningless, I engage in a lot of meaninglessness everyday!!!! LOL!!!
 
DonP said:
Well, obviously I'm going to jump on some of your words - like "granted" for instance.
Click to expand...
Oh, and despite the thread topic, I was not referring to a god. "Able" is just as apt a word. Whether it be bestowed by divinity or the structural alignment of organic material and electrical impulses has no bearing on my intended point.
 
RVA said:
Oh, and despite the thread topic, I was not referring to a god. "Able" is just as apt a word. Whether it be bestowed by divinity or the structural alignment of organic material and electrical impulses has no bearing on my intended point.
Click to expand...

I knew that really from the context of all the previous. Just thought I should deal with it though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RVA
Robert Herndon said:
If conversation is meaningless, I engage in a lot of meaninglessness everyday!!!! LOL!!!
Click to expand...

Don't we all!? That's half the fun in life. Even this conversation RVA and I have been having is kind of meaningless. We aren't going to change the world, and neither one of us is going to sway the other. Just fun, is all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RVA
DonP said:
Don't we all!? That's half the fun in life. Even this conversation RVA and I have been having is kind of meaningless. We aren't going to change the world, and neither one of us is going to sway the other. Just fun, is all.
Click to expand...

Not to mention it is cheaper to talk about guitars than to buy them... :-)
 
DonP said:
Don't we all!? That's half the fun in life. Even this conversation RVA and I have been having is kind of meaningless. We aren't going to change the world, and neither one of us is going to sway the other. Just fun, is all.
Click to expand...

But you have changed the world.
I have a word I did not have before the conversation started.
Everything has a cause and a result.
 
Tony M. said:
But you have changed the world.
I have a word I did not have before the conversation started.
Everything has a cause and a result.
Click to expand...

Everything doesn't have a cause. But there we are into quantum mechanics and the Big Bang. Let's leave that.
 
DonP said:
Everything doesn't have a cause. But there we are into quantum mechanics and the Big Bang. Let's leave that.
Click to expand...

I have to think about this and do some reading.
Can you recommend some reading material that
won't be "over my head"? (I'm not good at math.)
 
Tony M. said:
I have to think about this and do some reading.
Can you recommend some reading material that
won't be "over my head"? (I'm not good at math.)
Click to expand...

Let me investigate. This field is moving so fast at the moment that there may be no current books that are getting it right (as far as we know). It's all happening in the peer-reviewed papers, and I definitely would not recommend those.
 
Tony M. said:
Major religions don't get founded out of thin air for no reason (or do they?).
Click to expand...
HubbardAndDiana.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top