Originally posted by Troubleshooter
Quote:
Quite simple really.
Reality is objective, it exists regardless of our interpretation of its existence.
A good classical example is the definition of sound. Sound requires three things.
1) source, or emitter
2) medium, through which to travel
3) receiver
The old saw about a tree falling in the forrest states that there is no sound.
|
Sound does not require a receiver in order to exist and I was under the impression that the old saw (which I thought was originally composed by a Zen Master) did not state that the tree made no sound but simply asked the question as to whether or not it did.
Besides, by defining a sound as depending on the receiver kind of contradicts your initial assertion that reality is independent of the observer or at least it seems as though it does.
Originally posted by jaguar
Quote:
|
Everyone read Plato's cave, think for 10 minutes and come back to the table.
|
All Plato's cave says to me is that what we see is but an aspect of reality. It does not make the case that we all see the shadows differently (subjectively) but that what we see is not "all there is to it." I understand that Plato felt that way (objective realist) but that kind of thinking (absolutism if not objectivism) is pretty black and blue since 1905 or so.