Your experience is subjective in a way that you don't realize. Here's proof.

It was a nice read, and I hate to trash your post, but these things are pretty well known on a personal level i would think?

You have just "scientificly" worded out what many people already know. I can even change the way i perceive things simply by wanting a diffrent perception thus creating a diffrent subjective reality for my self. Its something you can experiment with and its something drugs can tamper with also. If you would smoke some weed with happy mood with your friends suddenly everything lights up and the world is a beautiful place, thats why drugs CAN be a good thing. If you listen to depressive music it will change your mood and perception of things.

I hate to get back to drugs here but Mushrooms can vastly change your perception in an amazing way, it's all psychology and everyone can research it in there own mind, you just have to notice.

good read though.

Originally posted by OnceReturned
Thoughts?

Yes, this is truly so, circumstances (internal, and external) mould the way we feel and perceive things at any given time.

Every point of perception differs, due to all the things that affect them - including our own points of perception, on perceivable things - be they thoughts or stuff of the real tangible material world - depending on the point of time and place at which we are to perceive or experience these things.

In that way our own perceptions will allways differ, because it is not techically possible to experience anything twice, unless you go back in time, and experience it again - from a state of not having already experienced it..

..this is also interesting when people say "I would do it differently, if I was given another chance, with a similar setting" (..regarding something..) - if the setting was truly identical, then the person would not know it had already happened - and most likely the outcome would be just the same..

..but ofcourse this cannot be proven, since we do not have any actual theory on consciousness (except the biological, standard one which does not allow for free choice, since free choices in 3D world can be driven only by a multidimensional soul, with a connection to timelessness, because only timelessness, can be free of the predeterminations of 3D world -> causalities in time and space, the cause and effect -external or internal), and incase consciousness is something, that allways has a free choice, then we certainly could not predetermine the outcome of a similar situation, with the similar and identical setting affecting at all fronts, to allways have the same outcome (because that kind of viewpoint would not allow for free will).

[edit on 11-4-2010 by Jussi]

[edit on 11-4-2010 by Jussi]

2) When you listen to music or watch a movie or look at art, your resultant opinion of that piece of art is subjective. You had a unique experience of it and either like it or didn't like it(or somewhere in between). This is the sort of thing that you cannot be wrong about it. There is no "right" answer to whether or not some piece of art is good; it's a matter of opinion. Because there is no “right” when it comes subjective value judgments, there is no “wrong” answer either. Everyone gets to form their own opinion, and because we acknowledge these value judgments as "opinions," we tend to accept that while we may agree or disagree, there no "right" or "wrong" here.

You still need logical reasons for a like of dislike of the painting. If you cannot communicate a logical reason or one at all, then either your memory is corrupt or the person receiving the information is poorly educated.

All of this is well and dandy when its a delusion in somones head.... its when you have to share this information with somone else, thats what really matters. A mind always has peer review his logic, unless its malfunctioning.

Wow, this is a really interesting thread, OP - thanks for the most enjoyable read

I definitely think things are subjective to the individual person, and in fact I've experienced several 'weird' what you might call subjective things myself.

When I was younger (about 13 I think), I was running home after getting off the school bus. I tripped and fell forward - except the time it took to fall to the ground took *ages*. It was all in slow motion - really weird. Soon as I hit the ground though, time went back to normal (and my knees hurt :@@

Also, I remember something from when I was really young - I used to get upset and tell my mum that everything seemed 'far away' the only way I could describe it was that it was like looking through the wrong end of a pair of binoculars - everything was smaller and further away than it should have been. (Of course, mum didn't believe me, but I know what I saw... or at least I think I do )

Great thread. I love stuff like this.

reply to post by OnceReturned

The next time you see an object in front of you, remember that it looks the color that it does, the size that it does, and the distance from you that it does, all because of your state of mind and the context in which you are making your observation. The next time you see that object, it may appear different. This is because your experience at any given instant is subjective in a way that few have realized; it is unique to the moment, and changes constantly. You never see the same thing the same way twice, in the same way that no two people see the same thing the same way. Your experience is much more subjective, dynamic, inconsistent, and contextually dependant than you had ever thought. If you don’t believe me, read the experiments.

Bloody good OP and a subject I'm fascinated by...it led to night school classes in psychology and on to university for Psychology BSc. I bailed by the 2nd year due to statistical analyses...hated them! Kai Rho. Still got my Gleitman, Gross and Hildegard reference books and a love of psychology...

A basic book like Gross 'The Science of Mind and Behaviour ' would appeal to many ATSers and generate increased self-awareness. Flagged

the Buddha teaches that it is best to remain neutral in all things.


critical thinking lies at odds with the many different forms of subjectivity you have described. the essense of critical thinking is neutrality. with a lack of both fear and desire, you can clarify the lens significantly.

__________

note to OP: a perfect read for sunday morning. i normally would not have committed to reading the whole thing. but as it was written by you, i made an exception. you did not disappoint.

I perceive your thread to be very informative on perceiveing the thread to perceive perception. Everything is subjective, what the real world looks like I do not know but I know that I do not know. If you dwell to much on it you faze out of the herd consciousness, and usually get depressed and stuf once you get used to it you see that everybody does this on a daily basis but they are not aware of it. People literally have a conciousness for indiduality and one for when in masses. The individual singular is more aware the individual in a group syncronizes there perception to emulate the group, thats why its easier to fool lots of people, and harder to fool one person. And if you look at history and our biology the group has a habit of jumping in to the sea or holes they cant get out of, like the lemings do. Anyways I especially liked some of the responses like budro and his attempt to kill himself by way of drugs, and seing a chimera, and even a cheshire cat in the trees, red or blue pill Alice. wonder land.

O ye who build your houses on shifting sand know that come the storm and the flood your house will come down and be washed away. Much better therefore is to build your houses on firm rock so that come the storm and the flood your house will remain standing.

No matter whatever our subjective psychosis might be, none the less if we seek the TRUTH by use of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, then we will indeed find that TRUTH. The "Laws of Physics" are such TRUTH arrived at through using the scientific method to peel away the layers of psychosis which previously had us blinded by dogmas and superstitions. I define the "scientific method" simply as allowing the data to dictate the paradigm. Unfortunately, all too often, what happens is that, any data that does not fit in with the prevailing paradigm, gets ignored or perhaps even persecuted. For example the modern secular view about, "God does not exist", is actually based on a paradigm which is incomplete. Certain data is being ignored. We need to accept all the data so as to be able to arrive at a paradigm that can account for all the data. Evolution Theory, put forward by Darwin, is an incomplete paradigm, which is in need of modification, because a considerable amount of data is contradicting it. Data has to be accepted in all its entirety without any favouritism or prejudice. We must not allow the paradigm to dictate the data.

You mention about the perception of colour being unique to each individual. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". A good book to read is COLOUR THEORY by JOHANNES ITTEN. It is a classic on the subject. A must read for any one thinking to call him self an artist. Psychology of colour perception is a fascination of mine. Once again each individual responds uniquely due to personal psychosis. Related in some way is the psychology of music. How we uniquely respond to sounds.

In the light of what you have written, I think that you will find it interesting to read the following book, which will initiate you into a new way of understanding the Universe. "THE HOLOGRAPHIC UNIVERSE" by MICHAEL TALBOT [Harper Collins] ISBN-0-586-09171-8. Originally published in 1991. Another author, who introduces the reader to similar "multi-dimensionality", is PROFESSOR DAVID DEUTCH in his book, "THE FABRIC OF REALITY". [Penguin].

If as the above authors contemplate, the very essence of reality is multi dimensional [holographic] then, thus they speculate that "insanity" might be nothing more than broader mindedness. We only see what we believe is possible.

As regard to Diamonds. I believe that "Pink Diamond" [Ruby] are what you're talking about. They are rare and considered valuable if you like them. Apparently it is the "Blue Diamond" [Sapphire] which some prefer. But of all the coloured Diamond I think on enquiry with a jewellers you will discover that the most expensive of all is the "Green Diamond" [Emerald]. Personally, I would not waste my earnings on such "glitter". However, that is my unique psychosis. Other persons crave them. With the introduction of good quality synthethic diamonds, now on the market, the cost of a diamond is now less than it used to be. There is nothing to beat the unique beauty of a real diamond as it refracts the light.

[edit on 11/4/2010 by CAELENIUM]

My opinion?

The universe is a conscious entity, each one of us experiencing reality "subjectively" - you navigate the higher dimensions using thought, so, you take your focus off all negativity and anything that stems from it (ego) and onto love and anything that stems from love and you will find that reality molds itself around your "subjective loving" view and becomes a wonderful place to live in. This is the true way to heaven, nirvana or whatever else you want to call it.

All the events of today are orchestrated to feed the ego, the false self, they bring fear, lust, greed - all the qualities that feed the ego. If you can block it all out, find the real you hidden behind the ego, love and happiness will be an unshakable foundation for you - and events external to you will never interrupt your love and happiness.

deoxy.org...

Here's more relevant research:

Air travelers have long complained of the blandness of airline food, but new research suggests the aircraft noise may be the problem rather than the chefs or the menu.

The study, published in the journal Food Quality and Preference, reported that the presence of high levels of background noise diminished the sensitivity of the palate in volunteers, making food taste bland and flavorless, while pleasant sounds could increase the sensitivity and enjoyment of the food.

Researcher Andy Woods and colleagues from the University of Manchester in the UK and Unilever blindfolded 48 volunteers and gave them a range of foods while exposing them to different levels of white noise via headphones. Foods used in the trials included cheese crackers and flapjacks, and the results showed that the louder the white noise, the less the subjects were able to sense and enjoy the saltiness or sweetness of the foods, and the less they tended to like them. One thing that did increase in the presence of loud noise was the sense of the crunchiness of the foods tested. In another experiment they found a relationship between liking of music being played while they ate, and liking of the food.

Source