• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Perception is reality...

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
That's why you never debate with solipsists online. Unless you can drop that brick yourself, you are on a losing path.

I suppose I'd have to drop a brick on my own foot... Oh, wait.. :p
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
I had a friend who liked the psychoactive effects of some mushrooms and used to eat fly agaric for that even though he knew they were dangerous. He did this by only eating a small section at a time.


Fly Agaric (amanita muscaria) contains a mild hallucinogenic toxin, but it won't do you much harm. However, it has a close cousin, Panther Cap (amanita pantherina), which contains much more potent toxin. They can make you quite ill.

I wouldn't recommend either tbh. The Liberty Cap (psilocybin semilanceata) grows freely all over the UK in autumn, and contains a powerful compound with effects similar to LSD. Obviously, I wouldn't recommend that either but...
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I had a friend who liked the psychoactive effects of some mushrooms and used to eat fly agaric for that even though he knew they were dangerous. He did this by only eating a small section at a time.

Was never in to magic mushrooms although i know a few people who were. My chosen mushroom are ceps (porchini), geroles (chanterelles), champignons de paris (whites) and morells
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Was never in to magic mushrooms although i know a few people who were. My chosen mushroom are ceps (porchini), geroles (chanterelles), champignons de paris (whites) and morells

I never tried magic mushrooms, just LSD and a strong like of Marijuana. If I had a choice between alcohol and weed the weed would win but it is a case of one being too much but never enough for me I'm afraid so that is behind me now.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Fly Agaric (amanita muscaria) contains a mild hallucinogenic toxin, but it won't do you much harm. However, it has a close cousin, Panther Cap (amanita pantherina), which contains much more potent toxin. They can make you quite ill.

I wouldn't recommend either tbh. The Liberty Cap (psilocybin semilanceata) grows freely all over the UK in autumn, and contains a powerful compound with effects similar to LSD. Obviously, I wouldn't recommend that either but...

I never tried them, which is probably a good thing.
 

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
Fly Agaric (amanita muscaria) contains a mild hallucinogenic toxin, but it won't do you much harm. However, it has a close cousin, Panther Cap (amanita pantherina), which contains much more potent toxin. They can make you quite ill.

I wouldn't recommend either tbh. The Liberty Cap (psilocybin semilanceata) grows freely all over the UK in autumn, and contains a powerful compound with effects similar to LSD. Obviously, I wouldn't recommend that either but...

I remember picking mushrooms on the Pennine Way many moons ago. Some interesting experiences.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
So to get back on track, what exactly would be the realistic difference between these two scenario:

1. Dropping a brick on your toe, causing the nerve endings to fire impulses into your brain, and you, therefor, to experiencing pain.

2. The action of someone who is experiencing anxiety saying (and repeating) a prayer to their God asking it to grant them peace, thereby releasing chemicals in their brain that counteract the chemicals causing them to feel anxious and giving them the new sensation of peacefulness.

Why is the brick and the pain it cases 'real', while the prayer and the peace it causes are some sort of self-deception?

I am asking this of those of you who are philosophical materialists that would claim "perceptions aren't reality".
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
So to get back on track, what exactly would be the realistic difference between these two scenario:

1. Dropping a brick on your toe, causing the nerve endings to fire impulses into your brain, and you, therefor, to experiencing pain.

2. The action of someone who is experiencing anxiety saying (and repeating) a prayer to their God asking it to grant them peace, thereby releasing chemicals in their brain that counteract the chemicals causing them to feel anxious and giving them the new sensation of peacefulness.

Why is the brick and the pain it cases 'real', while the prayer and the peace it causes are some sort of self-deception?

I am asking this of those of you who are philosophical materialists that would claim "perceptions aren't reality".


Prayer is an electrochemical reaction with no physical input
Dropping a brick on your toe is internationally also an electrochemical reaction but a/ with an outside stimulus (reality) and b/ causes physical trauma (measurable)
 

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
Prayer is an electrochemical reaction with no physical input
Dropping a brick on your toe is internationally also an electrochemical reaction but a/ with an outside stimulus (reality) and b/ causes physical trauma (measurable)

The tricky part is equating the external stimulus with "reality", which would imply that the internal stimulus is somehow "unreal". Aren't they just different aspects (modes?) of experience?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
The tricky part is equating the external stimulus with "reality", which would imply that the internal stimulus is somehow "unreal". Aren't they just different aspects (modes?) of experience?

I see no problem equating external stimulus with real
I also see no promotion seeing internal electrochemical reaction as real.
External reality is objective while internal reality is subjective.
 

Martin

Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)
I see no problem equating external stimulus with real
I also see no promotion seeing internal electrochemical reaction as real.
External reality is objective while internal reality is subjective.

I need to think more about your distinction between objective and subjective here.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Prayer is an electrochemical reaction with no physical input
Dropping a brick on your toe is internationally also an electrochemical reaction but a/ with an outside stimulus (reality) and b/ causes physical trauma (measurable)
Why does 'physical input' matter? You read a book, you get "input". You see a photo, you get "input". You touch sandpaper, you get "input". You shout out and hear your own voice, it's "input".

Everything is "input". And it all effects us in some way, as our bodies react to the input. Why would it matter how 'physical' the input is? Isn't it how it effects us that really matters (to us)? So why is the effect of praying less "real" then the effect of a brick falling on our foot?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Why does 'physical input' matter? You read a book, you get "input". You see a photo, you get "input". You touch sandpaper, you get "input". You shout out and hear your own voice, it's "input".

Everything is "input". And it all effects us in some way, as our bodies react to the input. Why would it matter how 'physical' the input is? Isn't it how it effects us that really matters (to us)? So why is the effect of praying less "real" then the effect of a brick falling on our foot?


Why does physical input not matter?

External stimulus is 'extrtnal' as in an object (objective)

Internal input is created by the subject, as in subjective
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Why does physical input not matter?

External stimulus is 'extrtnal' as in an object (objective)

Internal input is created by the subject, as in subjective
Why are you pointing out this difference? Why does this difference matter to you? That's what I'm asking. Because, to me, it's ALL "input", and it's ALL effecting us both physically and mentally.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Why are you pointing out this difference? Why does this difference matter to you? That's what I'm asking. Because, to me, it's ALL "input", and it's ALL effecting us both physically and mentally.

Because physical objects exist in this world and existed long before the brain evolved to lay claim to them. Simple really

And you avoided my question again
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Because physical objects exist in this world and existed long before the brain evolved to lay claim to them.
So what? All they are to us, is 'imput'. They fall on our foot and make us feel pain. We say a prayer and it makes us feel peaceful. It's all input and response. I don't see why you think one kind of input is more "real" than any other.
Why does physical input not matter?
It's all that matters. Because it's all we get. Input and it's effect is our way of experiencing existence. Which is why I don't understand why you think the pain effect from the input from a brick hitting your foot is more "real" than the calming effect from the input of saying a prayer. It's all input and effect. We try to avoid the effect of the brick on the foot, and we welcome the effect of communing with God (if one does so). But it's all the same experience of existing. It's all equally "real", for us.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member

SlipperyAcclaimedKob-size_restricted.gif
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
So to get back on track, what exactly would be the realistic difference between these two scenario:

1. Dropping a brick on your toe, causing the nerve endings to fire impulses into your brain, and you, therefor, to experiencing pain.

2. The action of someone who is experiencing anxiety saying (and repeating) a prayer to their God asking it to grant them peace, thereby releasing chemicals in their brain that counteract the chemicals causing them to feel anxious and giving them the new sensation of peacefulness.

Why is the brick and the pain it cases 'real', while the prayer and the peace it causes are some sort of self-deception?

I am asking this of those of you who are philosophical materialists that would claim "perceptions aren't reality".
If (and only if) the chemicals in the second example are measurable, there is no difference. Suggestion and auto-suggestion work and are part of reality, though they have their limits.
That doesn't make perceptions real, it is just a form of perceiving reality.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
If (and only if) the chemicals in the second example are measurable, there is no difference. Suggestion and auto-suggestion work and are part of reality, though they have their limits.
That doesn't make perceptions real, it is just a form of perceiving reality.
Why does measurability make such a difference to you? The EFFECT is certainly measurable. Why must the cause also be? Do you presume there cannot be a cause that we cannot measure? And how can there be an effect if there is no cause, even if we cannot measure the cause? Everything that exists is a caused effect, is it not?
 

Hermit Philosopher

Selflessly here for you
...said a Project Manager who reported to me. His point, if pithily communicated, was that a happy client was a happy client, regardless of how well we were meeting their needs, and an upset client was an upset client, regardless of how well we were meeting their needs.

'Hmmm...', I said, really wanting to tell him the project was a mess, despite the happy client.

'It's one of my closest held beliefs. There is no reality, ultimately. It's all just our perception.'

'Okay. Shut your eyes.'

He shut his eyes. I punched him hard in the arm. I figured it was a good way to suggest that reality was reality.

I dunno if it was an effective way to make my point, but it certainly made me feel better.


Haha, that is a funny story lewisnotmiller …and yet, was that person entirely wrong…?

As nothing is not perceived (even collective perception is perception) and we can never act from a place of non-perception , it is fully posible to say that perception - at the very least - has an genuine tendency to become reality.

There is great “power” in grasping this notion.


Humbly
Hermit
 
Top