How does our subjective picture of reality differ from the objective reality?
Posted on February 7th, 2010 by admin
How accurate are the senses at creating a picture of the ‘external’ objective reality. The senses receive all this information from the environment, which is turned into a meaningful picture in the brain, how close is this picture to what is actually out there in the world of matter? Since our brain is mainly designed to survive on this tiny planet, how can we ever come to know an objective reality when all the knowledge we gain comes through the subjective perspective of the human brain?
We have created machines that can detect things undetectable by human senses, so there is no doubt that there is an objective reality. A radio telescope could be programmed to continually add the number of radio waves it detects, and even if every human being disappeared from the face of the earth, that number would continue to increase as long as the machine exists.
Whilst we can never say with certainty that anyone perceives reality with absolute objectivity, there are certain things that are almost universally agreed upon by all people, (e.g. we must drink water to survive) so it’s safe to say we are being as objective as we can be in our observation of these things. Whether water is actually what we perceive it to be, or something entirely different, doesn’t matter at this point because we are being objective in our observation that without it, we would die.
Of course, we don’t know if we are being objective in our observation of death, either.
I would argue that mathematics is objective.
February 7th, 2010 at 8:51 am
There is no objective reality. Reality exists only in perception.
References :
February 7th, 2010 at 9:18 am
Subjective reality is the only true reality. Objective reality, although a useful concept in our day-to-day lives, is ultimately an illusion. I don’t use "subjective" in the sense of mere opinion, but rather in the sense of perception, the faculty of perception beyond simply the ordinary sense consciousness. To complicate further the issue, the subjective reality is objective in the sense that it is the only true reality and therefore cannot be altered or distorted by limited concepts and ideas.
I hope that made some sort of sense.
References :
February 7th, 2010 at 9:54 am
We have created machines that can detect things undetectable by human senses, so there is no doubt that there is an objective reality. A radio telescope could be programmed to continually add the number of radio waves it detects, and even if every human being disappeared from the face of the earth, that number would continue to increase as long as the machine exists.
Whilst we can never say with certainty that anyone perceives reality with absolute objectivity, there are certain things that are almost universally agreed upon by all people, (e.g. we must drink water to survive) so it’s safe to say we are being as objective as we can be in our observation of these things. Whether water is actually what we perceive it to be, or something entirely different, doesn’t matter at this point because we are being objective in our observation that without it, we would die.
Of course, we don’t know if we are being objective in our observation of death, either.
I would argue that mathematics is objective.
References :
February 7th, 2010 at 10:14 am
It’s not exactly true, as someone answered, that there is no objective reality. But there is no objective reality INDEPENDENT OF subjectivity. Reality is a field, and the subjective (mind) and the objective (matter) are the negative and positive poles of that field. These two aspects come together through the process of knowing/experiencing, in which mind knows or experiences the external world.
References :
February 7th, 2010 at 10:33 am
objective reality is built upon the actual physical existence of something, (eg. primitive clay pots, ancient swords and sheilds, fossilised dinasour skeletons etc) allowing one to quantify objective reality more precisely.
Subjective reality is far less so, whereby someone could simply make a claim about anything based on sentiment and emotion than evidence and verification, then actively promote this flimsy sentiment as an absolute form of (ahem) proof.
References :