Guybrush

Since there's suddenly a new forum for philosophy, I will start with a relatively heavy topic - reality, how we percieve it and hopefully a discussion on how we should percieve it.


Starting with the basics - many years ago, I thought a lot about reality. I quickly realised there's likely two realities, one which is ultimately true no matter if we exist or not and then there's the one we percieve and believe in, the subjective reality.

The subjective reality can be just as "real" to some people as the ultimate one. Let's say for a moment that the following examples all take place in the subjective reality. A junkie could see Jesus and the event could make him come off the drugs. Can you then say that Jesus didn't appear and help him? A person could get healed from a serious disease by the appliance of shamanistic magic, much like placebo pills may help test subjects in medicinal research. Can you then say that the shamanistic magic didn't work?

If you ask these people, they will say that these things took place in reality. We might say that these events took place in their subjective reality and not our own. Still, we could argue here that all kinds of events that most of us percieve as superstitial or mythical or whatever could take place in a subjective reality and so perhaps you should respect whatever people believe in because you understand that to them, it's real even if it's not for you.

That was roughly my conclusion then, I thought the subjective reality was the most important.


After a while, I started thinking about ultimate reality which is what many of us are trying to figure out what is. Science is the pursuit of this universal truth, often through small steps at a time. I want my own subjective reality to closely reflect that of the ultimate reality, so I tend to believe in things that can be scientifically tested and proven. For that reason, I don't believe in ghosts and I don't believe in any religion and I basically percieve those kinds of beliefs to be a descent into subjective realities that removes you further from the truth. At least until they can be proven - then I'll believe in them.

Some years ago, I didn't think of subjective realities as such a bad thing, but now as I've gotten older, I think of the massive repercussions it has when there are so many people believing in different versions of this "truth". Wars, people being misled, people being mistreated etc. Also, I think many people are not aware of how "real" the subjective reality can be. Human minds are extremely good at associating and lifelike experiences with ghosts or religious beings (examples) can easily be created in a mind when the internal truth meets the external.


Nowadays as society is getting more and more englightened, I think it's important that we realize the human weakness for wanting to believe in stuff and become a bit more choosy with what we believe in on a personal level. We're easily tricked into believing stuff which most people would never think of as real. For example, A young girl might be scared if someone tells her she will see the ghost of a dead friend at midnight. We are impressionable.

I think that when you decide what system to believe in, it should be the one that we know most closely resembles the truth. At the moment, there is no good contender besides science because that's the only one actually dedicated to the pursuit of the ultimate truth. It is entirely objective and if there really is such a thing as "God", then science aims to find that out. Furthermore, if you think large scale that humanity would be better off believing in one thing because that will reduce suffering for everyone, the pursuit of science can even become the right choice from a moral point of view.

Any thoughts?

__________________
Something Completely Different