Existence Vs. Belief / Perception Vs. Reality

[Deadpool]

Is there a way to definitively prove something’s existence beyond an individual’s belief or perception of it?

If you take person X and place a stone in their hand is there any way to prove that it is a stone or that it is actually in their hand if they do not believe it is there?

Belief is a powerful force that can overwhelm one’s senses. If person X’s belief was strong enough that they would not / could not see or touch the stone in their own hand; could not / would not believe you that you had put it there; is there any way to prove that it actually is?

Could not the argument be made that you only perceived that you placed a stone in person X’s hand and that your belief is so strong as for you to think that it is actually there even though it is not?

If two people witness the same event, yet they perceive it differently how are we to know what really happened? Is it possible that neither is right? What does that say about the event itself?

Where do you draw the line between belief and reality?

 

[GTS]

Faith

 

[ThaG]

Is there a way to definitively prove something’s existence beyond an individual’s belief or perception of it?

If you take person X and place a stone in their hand is there any way to prove that it is a stone or that it is actually in their hand if they do not believe it is there?

Belief is a powerful force that can overwhelm one’s senses. If person X’s belief was strong enough that they would not / could not see or touch the stone in their own hand; could not / would not believe you that you had put it there; is there any way to prove that it actually is?

Could not the argument be made that you only perceived that you placed a stone in person X’s hand and that your belief is so strong as for you to think that it is actually there even though it is not?

If two people witness the same event, yet they perceive it differently how are we to know what really happened? Is it possible that neither is right? What does that say about the event itself?

Where do you draw the line between belief and reality?

Your point?

We have evolved an accurate enough perception of the world to allow us to be here and live, otherwise we would not have survived

If you think there's a stone in your hand, because you see it and you feel it, it is 99.9999% certain that there is really a stone in your hand

 

[Hemp]

there is an external reality, and an internal one which would be the attempt of persuing the outer "real" reality.
The inner reality is the one we all live in and its instantly custom made from the first understanding/belief of what IS until now you've been co creating your reality.
and the standards and norms you setup will determine what things you believe in and such.

and about perception vs belief,
only once you allow the subject to be believed or even better, understood, will your subconscious mind allow you to understand it.

so basically, belief SETS your perception, but your "reality" is only perception.
your perception is like the filter of reality which become things such as daily decision making. One doesnt realize that HE is the one that 'places the choices on the table', or that his perception is only that to him .

i say this because many times believers of religion seem to say shit like "your hipocrit because you turned your back on God!" to an athiest guy thinking this cant be debated or used as support for your arguements because they only matter in your world.

i got lots to say but i grew from that

 

[Deadpool]

Your point?

I'm not trying to make a point. I'm just asking questions.

If you think there's a stone in your hand, because you see it and you feel it, it is 99.9999% certain that there is really a stone in your hand

What if your belief in the stone is so strong that you believe you see it and you believe you feel it, yet no one around you sees the stone. Does the stone exist? Is not the human mind capable of such a task?

Yet, who is to say the stone is not real. Maybe it is the others that believe it is not there and it is you that a correct in believing it is. Is there proof beyond perception?

 

[RedStorm]

If our senses are an accurate depiction of the world, then we can prove the stone exists. Since we can't definitively show that our senses accurately depict the world (since we can't "see" the world beyond our senses; no frame of reference), we can't actually prove the stone exists. But for someone to deny the stone exists would be preposterous IMO because I believe our senses are an accurate depiction of the world.

 

[Deadpool]

Can you see Oxygen? You believe you breath it right? What sense tells you that it exists?

 

[2-0-Sixx]

^blow into a balloon. Stand in front of a fan. It is a chemical element that can be scientifically measured.

Man can only gain knowledge through his senses. Nothing else.



BTW,
Does liquid Oxygen count?

 

[Deadpool]

How can you prove that is oxygen filling the balloon? What if person X believes it is part of your soul filling the balloon and person Y believes it is the secrets of long dead ancestors? How can you prove that it is oxygen?


How can you prove to someone that it is liquid oxygen? What if they believe oxygen only comes in gas form? What if their senses tell them that it looks, sounds, moves like water so it must be water not liquid oxygen?

What it person Z doesn’t believe in the existence of oxygen at all, let alone a liquid form? How can it be determined that you are right and Z is wrong? Maybe your belief that it exists is wrong.

Is the human brain not capable of overwhelming the senses, interpreting them differently, not recognizing them? If a person believes that a rock feels like grass and the sky is purple and catsup is yellow aren’t those just facts to them? Things that can’t be disproven? If their brain tells them these things and the brain interprets the senses then how can you prove that the sky is not purple?

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

Is the human brain not capable of overwhelming the senses, interpreting them differently, not recognizing them? If a person believes that a rock feels like grass and the sky is purple and catsup is yellow aren’t those just facts to them? Things that can’t be disproven? If their brain tells them these things and the brain interprets the senses then how can you prove that the sky is not purple?

Good point. Although, we are set to standards as humans. Someone a lont time ago said "this color is red". THerefore, we are trained to see ketchup as red.

As far as preception goes, yes, we can all look at anything, say what we BELEIVE it is, and run with it. But, youhave to undestand our set standards, so most likely that person will be viewed as "crazy", or "delusional" by the majority.

As far as making the human mind seeing past what is there and ignoring the senses, I think only thought process can be blocked. No matter what someone says, a chocolate cookie will taste like a cholcolate cookie. You actual taste buds cannot morph a taste. You IMAGINE it taste like speghetti, but it does not mean it WILL taste like speghetti.

Then again, if everything is just percpective and belief, it would be total chaos in the world. Up could be down, left, or an obtuse 91 degree angle.

I still beleive that the human mind has much to be unlocked as far as processing thoughts and manipulating brain waves. Ive always heard that we only use 10% of our brains. I do not know if that is true, but if it is....thats scary. We have done ALOT with 90% not in use.

 

[2-0-Sixx]

How can you prove that is oxygen filling the balloon? What if person X believes it is part of your soul filling the balloon and person Y believes it is the secrets of long dead ancestors? How can you prove that it is oxygen?

As I stated, oxygen is a chemical element that can be scientifically measured. If you don't understand how that is possible, you should probably research it. HERE is a good starting point.

If a person disregards these measurements and believes fire is in the balloon, that's on them. If a person is convinced there is a flying spaghetti monster, maybe it's time they are checked into a mental hospital.

How can you prove to someone that it is liquid oxygen? What if they believe oxygen only comes in gas form? What if their senses tell them that it looks, sounds, moves like water so it must be water not liquid oxygen?

Again, a person can believe whatever they want, as absurd and stupid as it may be. Hopefully, through education, they can learn. If not, there is not much that can be done.

If someone looks at you and says you're a black man, even though your white, then they are either color blind or insane.

What it person Z doesn’t believe in the existence of oxygen at all, let alone a liquid form? How can it be determined that you are right and Z is wrong? Maybe your belief that it exists is wrong.

Through our senses, through logic, through the scientific method, etc. Just because person Z believes they can catch a bullet with their teeth, doesn't mean if person X shoots them in the face with a .45 they will catch the bullet.

Is the human brain not capable of overwhelming the senses, interpreting them differently, not recognizing them? If a person believes that a rock feels like grass and the sky is purple and catsup is yellow aren’t those just facts to them? Things that can’t be disproven?

Yes they can be disproven. Person "A" believes they are 10 feet tall. Persons B, C, D, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z measure this person and verify they are only 5 feet tall, it has been disproven.

Listen, we can gain knowledge only through our senses. There are no other methods currently available. This is how we learn. This is how we were able to advance. If someone is missing a sense or senses, or their brain is damaged and their senses are scrambled or send incorrect signals to their brain, that doesn't mean what they believe is true. They may believe it's true, but doesn't make it true. We, as a whole, can verify things to be true or not true through logic and reason, despite what one person bellieves.

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

.



Just because person Z believes they can catch a bullet with their teeth, doesn't mean if person X shoots them in the face with a .45 they will catch the bullet.



.

LOL

 

[2-0-Sixx]

"Yes they can be disproven. Person "A" believes they are 10 feet tall. Persons B, C, D, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z measure this person and verify they are only 5 feet tall, it has been disproven."

I wonder what person "E" was doing?? lol

 

[Fucky McFuckerson]

"Yes they can be disproven. Person "A" believes they are 10 feet tall. Persons B, C, D, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z measure this person and verify they are only 5 feet tall, it has been disproven."

I wonder what person "E" was doing?? lol

E slept in late due to partying with 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, and 9 the night before. Cocaine is a helluva drug, appearntly.

 

[Deadpool]

“As I stated, oxygen is a chemical element that can be scientifically measured. If you don't understand how that is possible, you should probably research it. HERE is a good starting point.”

I personally understand science just fine smart ass. You're taking this whole thing to literally. The thread is an exercise in thought, not a manifesto on my belief system. Allow people to grapple with ideas as simplistic or complicated as they may seem. Simple mockery has done much to stifle the depth of thought on this message board.


” If a person disregards these measurements and believes fire is in the balloon, that's on them. If a person is convinced there is a flying spaghetti monster, maybe it's time they are checked into a mental hospital.”

Who is to say that your belief in oxygen filling the balloon is reality though?

If a person quotes Richard Dawkins to the point of cliché should they also check into a mental hospital?

“Hopefully, through education, they can learn. If not, there is not much that can be done.”

Who is to say what they learn is fact? You of all people being a champion against what people “learn” in school should know this. If person X in the first person views a historical event and person Y views the same event in the first person, but they both offer conflicting views of what happened how are we to know what the truth is? Is it not possible that Y was right, X was right, they were both right, they were both wrong? How much of what we learn is actually based on perception? How much is based on what we are told is fact, but is really just the official agreed upon perception of things?

“If someone looks at you and says you're a black man, even though your white, then they are either color blind or insane. “
What if they are right? Is that not just a perception of a person? Just because I look black to you does that mean I can’t really be brown? What if I believe my skin is yellow and you think I’m white and Jesse Rice thinks I’m black? Who is right? Am I right because my perception of myself is what rules or does your perception of me matter more? Or does Jesse Rice’s perception prevail because he can find another person that agrees with him?
”Yes they can be disproven. Person "A" believes they are 10 feet tall. Persons B, C, D, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z measure this person and verify they are only 5 feet tall, it has been disproven. “

So reality is based on the rule of the majority? Just because B-Z believe Person A is 5 feet tall that makes it so? If the majority of people said that trees have feelings, but you said they were wrong, we would all have to believe that trees have feelings because everyone else thinks so except you? What if they locked you up and called you crazy for not believing that trees have feelings even though you KNOW it to be false? Would you still be right or would they? What if some trees had feelings and others didn’t? What are we to take as reality? Just because what we know right now tells us trees don't have feelings does that mean they don't?

 

[2-0-Sixx]

I don't enjoy philosophical nonsense. **YOU**, Deadpool, already know how things can be and are verified and this debate will stretch on and on. Our senses are the only available source to verify what is real and what is not. If you or anyone else can explain how and why our current method of making conclusions is false, say so now. If not, pointless thread.

I personally understand science just fine smart ass.

Are you sure? Then why do you ask such stupid questions? (Can you see Oxygen? How can you prove that is oxygen filling the balloon?).

If you have a point, get to it right away, no need to dance around and ask silly questions that have simple answers because simple answer are what you will get.

I understand the point of this thread perfectly fine. We've had similar ones on this site before and tons of literature has been written regarding human perception. Some of the Hindu regulars love to say our senses are flawed. Point is, the debate is worthless. Reason being, if a person has a rock in his hand and says it's a lizard, what is the importance of this? The claim that its a lizard demands evidence. Perceptual evidence. There are two possibilities here - either we will discover evidence for the claim its a lizard, or we will not. If we don’t, then there is no point in discussing it. If we do find evidence, then the position will be confirmed and we may have to revise how we interpret perception and arrive to rational facts.

Who is to say that your belief in oxygen filling the balloon is reality though?

Who says we are not all just a dream? Who says George Bush isn't a Lizard King? Who says our universe really isn't Satans asshole?

Who is to say what they learn is fact?

When it is verified through our senses, through logic, through the scientific method, etc.

If a person quotes Richard Dawkins to the point of cliché should they also check into a mental hospital?

Maybe, but I don't know anyone who has quoted Dawkins more than twice.

Who is to say what they learn is fact? You of all people being a champion against what people “learn” in school should know this.

I never said what they learn is fact and never mentioned anything about school. I simply said that if a person doesn't believe in Oxygen, hopefully they could be educated about it (since the person obviously is ignorant regarding the subject at hand).

If person X in the first person views a historical event and person Y views the same event in the first person, but they both offer conflicting views of what happened how are we to know what the truth is?

Historical events is a different matter altogether. You were talking about a rock in a persons hand (something that can physically be proven or disproven). Historical events do not work in this manner and is a completely different topic.

How much of what we learn is actually based on perception? How much is based on what we are told is fact, but is really just the official agreed upon perception of things?

Again, I was commenting on the rock in hand.

So reality is based on the rule of the majority?

No it is based through our senses, through logic, through the scientific method, etc.

Just because B-Z believe Person A is 5 feet tall that makes it so?

If they can scientifically prove it, yes.

What if they locked you up and called you crazy for not believing that trees have feelings even though you KNOW it to be false?

Wouldn't be the first time in history something like that occurred.

Would you still be right or would they?

Depends on how you define "right." Scientifically, they would be incorrect. Under their own laws they would be correct.