It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Reality Is Not An Opinion

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jwest06

Reality Is Not An Opinion


Sure it is. Belief turns the world. The sooner you accept this, the sooner you can begin affecting it.


Originally posted by Jwest06
Reality is an absolute train wreck because of opinions.


You are entitled to your opinion. I think that the richness of perspective is a large part of the beauty of the whole thing, and (perish the thought) might actually be the point.


Originally posted by Jwest06
The ego holds them captive, out of reach of the truth, in the form of ignoring reality.


True. Yet the irony of this statement is pretty darn funny. The mental image that comes to mind is a snake eating it's own tail... and still somehow complaining about the idiocy of snakes eating their tails. Weird.




posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErgoTheConfusion

Originally posted by Jwest06
I don't disagree with this either, that one person can break the "impossible" if their will is strong enough. I have thought about pushing human evolution as far as what it would take in the past though. For example, say that we wished to fly. To develop the genetic code, it's going to need to be useful in life. You'd need generations upon generations of people to flap their arms and fall from distances to create stress on their legs for a large portion of their lives. Eventually, DNA would get the memo lol.

/salute! Will be interesting watching the current rule set we're constrained by develop over time to see what happens.

My only disagreement is that my opinion views DNA changes as the effect, not the cause. At least in our style of experiencing time/order of events.


Namaste.
edit on 2012/5/23 by ErgoTheConfusion because: (no reason given)


Don't know, won't pretend to haha. DNA is not my area of expertise. What I do know is that if the current model of evolution is to hold up my method would work, but would be a huge pain in the ass. Something more probable I am considering is undoing the damage we've done through domestication to the best of my ability. I'd love to live out in a cleared area of jungle in Peru, start a farm, and venture into many journies of degrading my capacity to fear things via ayahuasca. The animals though such as cows, goats, horses, chickens, dogs, cats or what have you would not be for food purposes. Instead of inbreeding them to death like we're doing and have been doing on our current path for food, I'd experiment with different alkaloids and see what tickles their fancy. Who knows, might only take a couple generations of that in an environenment where it can flourish for a cow to start talking. Lots of good ideas, few resources, world falling apart before I'm likely to get the opportunity. You know how it goes haha.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheJourney

"We're on Earth, not in space." 'If you drop something it will fall' is firstly relative to being on earth, and its implied mass and atmospheric conditions and gravitational forces at work, etc.


It's implied to the human experience... Tis good to dream and all, but you're going to be human for the foreseeable future. I thought I was the only alien here.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by imherejusttoread

Originally posted by NorEaster
The word infinity doesn't actually describe anything but an imaginary notion. Quantum physics debunked infinity 100 years ago. Look it up if you don't believe me.


That's rather false. Quantum mechanics puts a limit on how much can be known precisely because of infinity. This was the point of renormalization.

The uncertainty principle in physics is analogous to the incompleteness theorems in mathematics.


The infinity I refer to is the conceptual infinity of the halved distance conundrum (two separated points halve their distance apart forever, since the number of halves would be infinite) This was the only infinity example that could be logically defended. Then again, I'm not surprised that you aren't familiar with it. Planck's Constant proved that the survival of the electron orbit (the physical basis of the atom as a unitary structural staple of material existence) would not mathematically prove out if that version of "logically provable" infinity was allowed to stand as a conceptual plausibility. He called the rigid and objective physical unit of action the "quantum", and that launched quantum physics. And the atomic age.

Infinity can't exist if the quantum exists. The two are mutually exclusive.
edit on 5/23/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   


All of that was clouding something simple though, but something simple didn't work. Go figure.
[

I' ll give you one thing for sure OP. There is determination in your writing style. I can't even put my finger on it !
But it is there so SnF.


edit on 23-5-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by redhorse

Sure it is. Belief turns the world. The sooner you accept this, the sooner you can begin affecting it.


Funny that you should say that as I was trying to get everybody on board with the universal facts part of life.


Originally posted by redhorse

True. Yet the irony of this statement is pretty darn funny. The mental image that comes to mind is a snake eating it's own tail... and still somehow complaining about the idiocy of snakes eating their tails. Weird.


I wrote this in an egoless state, or as close as I could get for the moment. Medicine wears off. I wouldn't deny my own faults but I've made major strides to end my own sense of entitlement to having opinions. Instead, things are probable to varying degrees.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs


All of that was clouding something simple though, but something simple didn't work. Go figure.
[

I' ll give you one thing for sure OP. There is determination in your writing style. I can't even put my finger on it !
But it is there so SnF.


edit on 23-5-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)


I felt enlightened two years ago. Now I know better than to feel things lol.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jwest06

Originally posted by SubPop79

Originally posted by Jwest06

Originally posted by TheJourney
Reality is not an opinion, but ANYTHING that could possibly be said about reality IS an opinion. Sounds like you have some opinions in OP...


If I drop something that has weight will it not consistently fall? Is that fact or opinion?


When you speak of it falling, do explain it in its mathematical terms, referring only to formulas? No you don't. I guarantee you never say the object fell with a velocity of blah blah blah in relation to the average atmospheric resistance blah blah blah.

If you don't, and since you don't, whenever you speak, you are "cookie cutting" the truth so that you may be able to explain it in simple, everyday, understandable terms. Because you do this, what you say is subjective and for all intents and purposes, is your opinion.

What about in deep space where there may be no gravity? Can you prove that this is the only universe that exists? Can you prove that gravity is the same in everywhere in the universe? Universal truths have not been proven in either science or philosophy.
edit on 23-5-2012 by SubPop79 because: (no reason given)


Too much distortion that I'm getting tired of responding to. We're on Earth, not in space. The lack of mathmatical terms doesn't make "if something is dropped, it will fall" less true. It just adds more detail to the truth. Those making the spiritual journey should be familiar with the concept. You start out with some basic understanding that develops into a seemingly never-ending complexity as time goes on. I'm unaware of anything that can't be built on.


Exactly. The details are what make the truth. If I am adding more detail, then there can't just be black and white. If I am adding detail, you could say, I'm making different shades of black or white, and if I am doing that, then gray is involved.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by SubPop79

Originally posted by Jwest06

Originally posted by SubPop79

Originally posted by Jwest06

Originally posted by TheJourney
Reality is not an opinion, but ANYTHING that could possibly be said about reality IS an opinion. Sounds like you have some opinions in OP...


If I drop something that has weight will it not consistently fall? Is that fact or opinion?


When you speak of it falling, do explain it in its mathematical terms, referring only to formulas? No you don't. I guarantee you never say the object fell with a velocity of blah blah blah in relation to the average atmospheric resistance blah blah blah.

If you don't, and since you don't, whenever you speak, you are "cookie cutting" the truth so that you may be able to explain it in simple, everyday, understandable terms. Because you do this, what you say is subjective and for all intents and purposes, is your opinion.

What about in deep space where there may be no gravity? Can you prove that this is the only universe that exists? Can you prove that gravity is the same in everywhere in the universe? Universal truths have not been proven in either science or philosophy.
edit on 23-5-2012 by SubPop79 because: (no reason given)


Too much distortion that I'm getting tired of responding to. We're on Earth, not in space. The lack of mathmatical terms doesn't make "if something is dropped, it will fall" less true. It just adds more detail to the truth. Those making the spiritual journey should be familiar with the concept. You start out with some basic understanding that develops into a seemingly never-ending complexity as time goes on. I'm unaware of anything that can't be built on.


Exactly. The details are what make the truth. If I am adding more detail, then there can't just be black and white. If I am adding detail, you could say, I'm making different shades of black or white, and if I am doing that, then gray is involved.


The concept of shading was confused. Let me try another example here. Let's say that a man named John is being mean to another man named George because John thinks George deserves it. John overlooks the fact that he's being mean with his justification. He doesn't see what he's doing clearly.

Rarely can you see something as it is if you're immersed in it, your mind included. You have to lose it to view it in an unbiased manner, but alas, I have no legal suggestions on how to do that.

EDIT: To end this confusion, how would you say that you're adding shades of grey by adding more details to your truth?
edit on 23-5-2012 by Jwest06 because: Confusion



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Reality isn't what people say reality is. Is money real? It could be worthless next weak. Is the Economy real? It is a fabrication with belief behind it and it can collapse in a short while. How about cars, they can be turned into something not usable by a huge solar flare or even just ground voltage. Can you drive a car legally without a license or insurance? one accident and your use of cars is lost. Is science real? If it was how come things known about it are constantly changing. I have seen many theories discounted within my lifetime but the evidence is sometimes added to a list of things that are excluded from the theories. Do we own our home? No we don't, don't pay your taxes for three years and you will see. So what is reality, a bunch of misconceptions? That's not real, it may be normal but not real. Is our government really for the people? That's true, they aren't for the dogs and cats and they do serve certain people. So if the Reality is not an opinion than what is it. We don't live in reality, at least not here in the United States. Maybe some tribe in Australia lives in a reality void of lies and half truths but I don't. I spent half of my life supporting an Economy that wasn't real and that's my opinion.

Another thing, just because someone with credentials says something is reality doesn't mean it is. It could be real for the current society and the current limitations created by the powers that exist but it doesn't mean it's real. Schools teach what they think is real and pertinent to the time-frame and these teachings are in constant evolution. Many things I was taught when I was young are not real anymore. Good luck with your view of reality, I've been around too long and experienced too much to believe what I am seeing and hearing.
edit on 23-5-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
Reality isn't what people say reality is. Is money real? It could be worthless next weak. Is the Economy real? It is a fabrication with belief behind it and it can collapse in a short while. How about cars, they can be turned into something not usable by a huge solar flare or even just ground voltage. Can you drive a car legally without a license or insurance? one accident and your use of cars is lost. Is science real? If it was how come things known about it are constantly changing. I have seen many theories discounted within my lifetime but the evidence is sometimes added to a list of things that are excluded from the theories. Do we own our home? No we don't, don't pay your taxes for three years and you will see. So what is reality, a bunch of misconceptions? That's not real, it may be normal but not real. Is our government really for the people? That's true, they aren't for the dogs and cats and they do serve certain people. So if the Reality is not an opinion than what is it. We don't live in reality, at least not here in the United States. Maybe some tribe in Australia lives in a reality void of lies and half truths but I don't. I spent half of my life supporting an Economy that wasn't real and that's my opinion.


Aha! Someone else who hints at getting it lol. In a world of deception, wouldn't it be nice if we were mostly on the same page about it? If we were honest creatures, we would be.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
The infinity I refer to is the conceptual infinity of the halved distance conundrum (two separated points halve their distance apart forever, since the number of halves would be infinite) This was the only infinity example that could be logically defended. Then again, I'm not surprised that you aren't familiar with it. Planck's Constant proved that the survival of the electron orbit (the physical basis of the atom as a unitary structural staple of material existence) would not mathematically prove out if that version of "logically provable" infinity was allowed to stand as a conceptual plausibility. He called the rigid and objective physical unit of action the "quantum", and that launched quantum physics. And the atomic age.

Infinity can't exist if the quantum exists. The two are mutually exclusive.
edit on 5/23/2012 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)


Well, that's abit condescending, considering I am a mathematical physicist. But this a muddled confusion of concepts:

1. Planck's constant is the tool for which the uncertainty principle operates. When Planck's constant is no longer applicable, we've reached the point beyond what's intelligibly measurable.

This is a good place to mention absolute zero. We say it's impossible to cool anything below -273.16 C not because it's actually impossible but because it has no meaning. How do you measure heat below heat?

Renormalization is also a product along this line of thinking.

2. Infinity isn't a physics concept, it's a mathematical concept, and it means, generally, the entire system of real numbers which can't be quantified. It's incomplete, therefore all conclusions drawn on black and white logical appeals, like the OP's, is inconsistent.

Practical is another matter.

3. The electron is not a material existence, an electron is a wave. It's not a thing. A wave is the product of a field. The quantum is the same: simply a chunked ripple of an underlying field. It's not an actual particle with a physical existence. Infact, I much favor Einstein's suggestion that perhaps it's time to get rid of concepts like particle and speak in terms of fields. It's difficult to popularize physics when people think in the classical sense.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Jwest06
 


Well for the John & George dilemma I would say that even if John were able to see the utmost righteous way to act toward a person, because of his past and present experiences, if he were to be righteous, he would do it in his own manner, because he is genetically and mentally inescapably John. Therefore his actions are different than someone elses.

You could argue Jesus and Buddha were both equally righteous people and that they operated the way people ought to operate ideally, but the fact remains that they both came from different backgrounds (culture, religion, geography...) and if they were to be hypothetically alive at the same time, they would still have different present lives, making ones righteousness different than the other. Let's call that righteousness "white." If they are both "white" and yet different, they are different shades of white, and when it comes to colors, if one shade of white is darker than the other, it is because of the introduction of black, resulting in a graying.

Like black and white photos.


edit on 23-5-2012 by SubPop79 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-5-2012 by SubPop79 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by SubPop79
reply to post by Jwest06
 


Reality IS an opinion. This universe is only real because of the beings that perceive it. Without anything perceiving the universe, there would be no reality, as the universe wouldn't exist to anyone and might as well be better off having not been created at all.

edit on 23-5-2012 by SubPop79 because: (no reason given)


So, if nothing can exist unless it is perceived, then what brought the original perceiver into existence? If you claim that the original perceiver "always exists", then you're no different than the religionist who just points to whatever god is being embraced as being the Alpha and Omega of everything. You just call your god "universal consciousness". Nothing new. Just a new label.


I can fathom a universe without a God just as well as a universe with a God, but in regards to this thread, whether God exists or not and in what manner he exists is irrelevant because we are talking about reality as experienced by man, and not by a God whose ability to perceive and manner of perception are pretty much unknowable to anything that is not the full extent of said God.
edit on 23-5-2012 by SubPop79 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Jwest06
 


I will explain to you my version of understanding different realities and truth.

Let's say there are 10 people in a room and they are all looking at the same painting. After viewing the painting for a while....the 10 people... have ten different opinions about the painting...and they are all...right!

Each individual opinion about the painting is their truth...there reality.



posted on May, 23 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jwest06
Aha! Someone else who hints at getting it lol. In a world of deception, wouldn't it be nice if we were mostly on the same page about it? If we were honest creatures, we would be.

"a world of deception..."

Bingo!,Yahtzee!,Bing,bing,bing..

We are living in a world full of people that are being deliberately LIED to without KNOWING it every waking minute of every day! WHY? Because the "plan" depends on deception in order for it to work.


Quotes from "Deja Vu"

"What if you had to tell someone the most important thing in the world, but you knew they'd never believe you?"

"You think you know what's coming? You don't have a clue."

People have always been warned about what's coming since the very beginning of time and yet they STILL ignore the most important things in the world.

End result: "They don't have a clue..."




What if everything you believed was a lie?

What if you woke up tomorrow and everything you had thought was true was a deception? A deception formed by people that stood to profit from your ignorance. Not just on one small area but every facet of your existence. Would you want to know? Or, would you be content with the life you had before you discovered the truth? Could you close your eyes and act as if nothing ever happened? What if you could see the ways that you have been deceived and the way that those that came before you were made to believe a lie? How valuable would the truth become? Would it make you change your habits? your routines? the way you talk or think or speak? Would it impact you or would you brush it off and carry on with business as usual?

What if after waking up you decided to respond to that truth? What if you started studying history and world events and, like a string of pearls, events were no longer random but contained a sequence? What if that sequence was repeating? What if while studying these events they began to seem familiar?LINK


"Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroys information, and religions destroy spirituality." ~ Michael Ellner



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join