Hi to all of you visitors of my dear friend Sam’s website. My name is Britney Pieta. I wrote this essay, originally inspired by a post I wrote about “The Greater Reality.” I decided to expand it and write about something that I can relate to and have a lot of experience about. I learned about reality in Philosophy but I personally like my definition better! I hope you learn that there truly is one reality that we can have no doubt in our minds about and that is that God is love and he loves us unconditionally!
What is reality anyway? According to the dictionary, it is the quality or state of being actual or true. Reality can be a person, an entity, or an event, that is actual. It can also be the totality of all things possessing actuality, existence, or essence or something which exists objectively and in fact. Reality is not black and white. Reality is different for every person and their experiences, it is an open definition, open to interpretation.
First, for some people reality isn’t based on the real world such as a schizophrenic like myself. A schizophrenic can’t tell the difference between the inside and outside world. We can become so attached to our imaginary world that we won’t even consider it as a figment of our imagination. We just can’t be convinced otherwise. A social worker might say to me, “Even if your imaginary world were real what would that mean?” I might say, “That I am not crazy.” People may think me a freak. In Gnarls Barkley’s song, he says, “I remember when I lost my mind. Does that make me crazy?”
People who have auditory or visual hallucinations are confused because no one else can hear or see what they do. They wonder how come no one can hear what they are hearing. It’s a very lonely disease. It may be even as bad as losing your memory. There is a saying, “The mind is a dangerous neighborhood. Don’t go there alone.”
Next, some of us live inside our heads. We live in fantasy. If we don’t like the world we live in, we turn to books, movies, or music. The list goes on and on. It’s easy to do this, especially, in our American culture. Natalie Bedingfield said, “Take me away, to a secret place, a great escape, take me away.” We want to feed our imagination and daydream all day in hopes that just by wishing for our dream house or dream person that it will come true. It’s nice to get lost in a book or lost in our lover’s eyes, but in the end we can’t escape life. Sooner or later the hype will go away and we will be back with our problems again. Someone said, “The feeling of being on top of the world is fleeting.” Douglas Everett said, “There are some people who live in a dream world, and there are some who face reality; and then there are those who turn one into the other.”
Also, some of us lie to ourselves so much we believe it. So our reality becomes twisted. We might tell ourselves that we are happy even though below the surface we are not. We might tell ourselves that harming others is ok as long as no one knows. After a while, lying about everything will eventually push everyone away from you. You may lie to yourself so much that no one can hit the buzzer to tell you to stop. There is a story about a man that kept lying to others that he needed help when he really didn’t; when he actually was in a situation where he was serious, no one believed him anymore. Earl Nightingale said, “Whatever we plant in our subconscious mind and nourish with repetition and emotion will one day become a reality.”
Next, for some their reality is limited because it’s all they know. There’s a verse in the Bible: “My people perish for lack of knowledge.” Someone might not know that they should have good hygiene to prevent diseases if they grew up in the jungle. A homeless man might not know there is a job opening somewhere close because no one bothers to help him. People who are Amish don’t know what the modern world is like until they leave home. People who commit crimes, but don’t understand it is a crime should be helped to understand what they have done. Someone told a story about a man who just got out of college, and had an accident; he had to go to a nursing home and has been there 30 years. While, if a person was disabled their whole life, it wouldn’t be as hard on them.
The more we know, the more we are expected to help others. It’s wrong to hoard everything for yourself. People with loads of money should consider using it to help others. There is a saying, “With great power, comes great responsibility.” People with creative minds and are inventors should use that knowledge for the good of mankind instead of making bombs or nukes.There’s a double side to power. Wouldn’t you want to leave a better reality for others?
Also, someone may have grown up in an abusive home, or grown up in extreme poverty so they never get the chance to live fully or reach what some call self-actualization. If you are abused you might see no way out. Your reality could be the four walls in your room. You might see the world as hopeless or unkind, unless someone were to show you a better way of life. You might just focus on having food, clothes, and shelter. “The perfecting of one’s self is the fundamental base of all progress and all moral development,” Confucius .
Lastly, you may feel like you are in a whole different world than your family when what you think about, believe in, and experience isn’t the same, even though you live in the same house! For instance, if you believe in Universalism, while your family don’t, but you never tell your family. If you have experienced a lot of mental illness and the rest of your family has not, you may discover that sometimes they will have no idea of what you are talking about or can even begin to understand. Reality is different to every person, so those psychiatrists should literally get a taste of their own medicine! Whoever sets the standard for what’s real, or not real, needs to get their eyes checked. Did they read the fine print that says, “What’s real is up to you to decide.”
I think the spirit world and mental world overlap. Where do you draw the line? Where does the spirit and mental world come together? We may never know and science can only tell us so much. We should let people come to their own conclusions. Reality is an open-ended subject and experienced in different forms and ways for different people. Reality is a gray area. Some people may truly hear spirits, talk to them or see them. Thomas in the Bible wouldn’t believe that Jesus appeared before the disciples unless he saw with his own eyes. There are a lot of doubting Thomas’s out there — I hope I am not one of them. There is one reality I believe is true: that God is love and he loves me unconditionally. Brian Tracy said, “Whatever you believe with feeling becomes your reality.”
© 2009 – 2017, Lekatt. All rights reserved.Number of View :48978
PHYSICS AND REALITY
Reality for most of us consists of the table and chair; of people and pets; of the sun and the moon. It could also include such insubstantial items as pleasure and plain, freedom and bondage, justice and oppression. In short, ordinarily, the word Reality refers to what we see and hear, touch, smell and feel.
As a first approximation, this is also what one means in Physics by the term Reality. But more importantly, for the physicist Reality refers to aspects of the world that exist independently of whether and how human beings recognize or perceive them. This hard-core view of Reality guided and served physics well during the past four centuries. It is not intrinsically different from the common-sense notion of Reality.
However, this view has undergone significant modifications as a result of the emergence of Relativity Theory and Quantum Physics during the first third of our century. Other developments in fundamental physics during more recent decades have brought about even further changes in our usual ideas about Reality.
In this paper I will discuss the some of the concepts of Reality that emerges from a study of Physics, both classical and modern.
A Definition of Reality
We witness Reality in its multiple variety. As the poet Shelley wrote,
Day and night, aloof, from the high towers
And terraces, The Earth and Ocean seem
To sleep in one another’s arms, and dream
Of Waves, flowers, clouds, woods, rocks, and all that we
Read in their smiles, and call reality.
But one may wonder whether such an aspect exists independently of the human mind. This is not a trivial metaphysical question, because one cannot be absolutely certain that one’s current experience is any more substantial than a dream. After all, while dreaming one entertains the feeling that the associated experiences are as real as in the waking state.
Then again, our channels of perception are not always totally reliable. The two horizontal lines below which are intercepted by slanting lines, are in fact straight and parallel to each other. Yet they strike us as being curved.
We are all familiar with other optical illusions like the rising and setting of the sun, and mirages. There are also other types of illusions involving hearing, touching, smelling, and tasting.
One goal of physics is to seek the truth behind the appearances. What makes the sky blue and the stars twinkle, why do diamonds sparkle and magnets attract? Exploring such questions is the equivalent of de-robing Nature, for the physical world is quite different when we view it in its stark nudity. The exploration into the nature of things has also proved to be extremely fruitful, for the more we know about Nature's inner workings and behavior patterns, the more we are able to predict her future course and cajole her to our advantage. This is one of the primary reasons why physics is studied in our universities.
Anything we call Reality is of interest in the context of discourse only in so far as such an item has been recognized, directly or indirectly, by a human Mind, and can be communicated. Therefore, one valid definition could be that Realityis some aspect of the world which has been recognized by the human Mind. But, as with optical illusions, not everything that is formulated in or by the human Mind may have existence independently of it. We therefore put the further stipulation that an element of Reality must have an existence independently of the human Mind.
This assumption is at the basis of the classical Cartesian-Newtonian Physics which reigned supreme for three hundred years.
Human experience and its modes
No matter what Reality is, its recognition is an essentially a cerebral-sensory process. In other words, the recognition of Reality in whatever aspect is an intensely human experience. Now, human experiences involve interactions with the external world of things and living entities. Interactions occur in different (though intermingling) modes. The principal modes through which we interact with the world around are emotional, sensory, spiritual, and intellectual. Thus, love and compassion, as also anger and hatred, are of the emotional kind. The sensory mode includes those resulting directly from our channels of perceptions, causing pleasure and pain. The spiritual mode involves religious communion, cultural participation, and the like. The intellectual mode calls for the use of the logical and analytical faculties of the human mind.
These different modes of experience cannot be separated out in water tight compartments. Thus, for example, aesthetic (spiritual) experience may be combined with the sensory (seeing); laughter (emotional) with the humor (intellectual), and so on. An important consequence of this impossibility of separation of the different experiential modes is that conflicts can and do arise between various modes. Such conflicts have generated numerous heated debates, mounds of writing, scholarly and otherwise, as well as downright violence.
Intellectual Mode: Goal of Science/Physics
Physics, like most sciences, is a primarily an intellectual mode of interaction with the world. Therefore, for Physics Reality is what emerges from an intellectual analysis of human sense perceptions. This implies the following:
(a) The logical process is essential in determining if something is part of Reality or not. In other words, there can be no scientific acceptance of Reality if reason and logic are relegated to the background.
(b) There must be consistency in the framework. Consistency means that logically incompatible elements will not be simultaneously accepted as valid.
(c) The mathematical dimension of the world is brought into play in the physicist’s recognition of Reality. This is because mathematics is the most sophisticated expression of the logical mode.
Perceived Reality and Sense perceptions
As Immanual Kant pointed out long ago, even at the ordinary level, when we recognize and analyze the world, we cannot avoid the intermediate filters of human sensory perceptions and cerebral modes. As a result, what we perceive as part of the real world is only a mapping on the human sensory system of whatever the thing-in-itself may be. Thus, if our optical apparatus had evolved without an ability to generate colors, the world would appear to us as on the screen of a black and white TV.
Indeed, our world of experience would be drastically different if the scope and sensitivity of our perceptive faculties underwent significant changes. For example:
If our ears were sensitive to very low frequency pressure-waves, we could hear the breathing of our neighbors.
If our eyes were sensitive to infra-red waves, we would recognize people and things as radiating sources.
If our eyes could detect the gases we inhale and exhale, we could feel quite uncomfortable seeing how the the same airs freely enter in and out of the mouths and nostrils and the people in a room.
If our skins were sensitive to the impact of individual microcosmic entities, we would experience perpetual pin-pricks from the zillions of oxygen and nitrogen molecules that keep bouncing off our bodies all the time.
Physics has brought to our awareness these and other aspects of the world from which we have been shielded perhaps because, as T. S. Eliot said,
Human kind cannot bear very much reality.
But physics has also revealed the subtle aspects of Reality underlying the blue of the sky and the fury of the volcano, and explained why lightning precedes thunder, why foot balls follow parabolic paths, and a thousand other matters.
Physics and Objectivity
The major goal of physics (and of science more generally) is to acquire objective knowledge about the physical world: by which is meant, an understanding of Reality that is independent of the human factor. One of the fundamental insights of the classical scientific world-view is that the physical universe has existed for eons before the emergence of the human mind, and will continue for another stretch of time even after the whiff of human presence fades away without a trace from the grand expanse of space. Understandably, the cosmos displays cold and utter indifference to our presence and activities in it.
Now, since a knowledge of the cosmos is possible only in the context of human awareness, a universe devoid of the human Mind would be supremely inconsequential and irrelevant to us, as it is to the myriad other creatures inhabiting the planet. In other words, a not-always recognized fact about scientific knowledge is that, for all its objectivity, it is intensely anthropocentric.
Impact of quantum physics
In the framework of pre-twentieth century physics, Physical Reality has an external, objective existence. Space, time, matter and energy are the four corner-stones of that physics. Their existence is completely independent of the telescope, the microscope and the inquiring Mind. Phenomena function in accordance with well-defined laws whether human beings have detected them or not. In other words, there is an external objective Reality which the completely detached observer studies, interprets, understands, manipulates, etc. This basic credo of classical physics is still operationally accepted by most practicing physicists.
But the physics of the twentieth century seems to suggest that this common-sense-inspired classical version of Reality may not be entirely correct. In fact, the classical view is based on the rarely articulated assumption, and evolutionarily generated conviction, that there is a little ego inside each of us which does all the observing, thinking and calculating; for it is based on a clear-cut dichotomy between an observing and analyzing principle on the one hand and the totally unaffected observed entity on the other. Unfortunately, physics has not probed into what the observing ego is with as much care and attention as it has devoted to the exploration of the external world. That neglect is not unlike looking through a telescope without checking if the lenses are clean and transparent. What appears as a magnificent line in the sky could be a mere crack on the eye-piece.
Indeed, a major revelation of twentieth century physics is that the distinction between the observer and the observed, between the knower and the known, which is implicit in all scientific investigations, dissolves at the microcosmic level. When we penetrate into the ultimate core of matter and energy, the boundaries between subject and object become fuzzy, just as when we move farther and farther away from a cluster of dots, the whole thing looks like one big hazy smear. It is as if at the fundamental level there seems to be an intermingling of mind and matter.
Though the public at large and a good section of practicing scientists are untouched by its implications, this dissolution of the subject-object dichotomy has momentous impacts on our appraisal of the world. It undermines our long accepted notions of an external world independent of the human Mind. The erasing of the observer-observed distinction intrudes on the independence of the state of the system that is being studied, throwing all objectivity to the winds.
Another major revelation of quantum physics is even more intriguing: A small group of physicists have been trying in recent years to draw consciousness into the realm of physics. A rather abstract result of quantum physics (the so-called 's theorem) and certain rather puzzling experimental results (relating to what are known as polarization reversals in electrons and photons) lead to the classically unacceptable notions of non-locality and interconnectedness.
Non-locality implies that what happens in one region of space could be affected by something in a totally (spatio-temporally) unconnected region. If this were so, such outrageous things as events happening without a cause, or effects preceding a causes, would be possible. Such possibilities can be avoided only if it is assumed that it is possible to transmit information instantaneously. But this is anathema to the current foundations of physics. Thus quantum physics has led us to a rather serious philosophical quagmire.
Interconnectedness means that in some inscrutable way, every entity in the universe is intrinsically intertwined with every other entity, a sort of cosmic network made up of inseparable parts. Interconnectedness is a radically new idea, altogether alien to the Cartesian-Newtonian scheme of things in which entities have separate and independent existence; and between which connections may be established only through specific interactions.
This means that ultimately the building blocks of the physical world do not conform to the model of classical physics according to which they can be specified as occupying well-defined points of space at well-defined instants of time, and as mutually interacting through processes that can never travel faster than light. This reductionist framework will have to give way to a holistic view if we are to grasp the intricacies of the world through the intellectual mode.
Physicists who are cultured in and committed to the classical tradition of science have difficulty erasing the subject-object demarcations and the associated definitions of Reality from their world-view on the basis of the newly emerging paradigm which tends to give more than conventional credence to meditative insights and mystical claims. Yet, when the carefully performed experiments pertaining to the so-called 's inequality are analyzed and interpreted in the framework of the enormously successful framework of quantum physics, one cannot afford to ignore these visions of Reality except by conceding that it is beyond the capacities of human Mind to build any self-consistent model of Reality. This is precisely some of the founders of quantum physics conceded.
Order and Meaning out of Chaos
What is created in our consciousness as external Reality may have just about as much objectivity as episodes on a TV screen: entertaining and emotionally jolting perhaps, hilarious or tear-jerking as the case may be, but in truth only very rapidly varying photonic dots of uneven intensities. The deeper we probe into the ultimate nature of the world, the more we are forced to revise our familiar view of Reality.
Classical physics already revealed that at the molecular level there is more randomness than order. It is not impossible to derive mathematically the observed precise mathematical laws from basic disorder. This was in fact one of the impressive achievements of classical statistical mechanics. But consciousness recognizes more than symmetry and pattern; it also discerns meaning and experience. To explain these from atomic and molecular configurations is a very different matter. Meaningful totality arising from meaningless microcosmic processes leave us puzzled at the intellectual level. Somehow, analysis is unable to solve the mystery of holistic coherence. There is more to sentences than combinations of letters with occasional spaces strewn in between.
Our sensory system is essentially a function of the properties of a neural network which arises from the (electro-chemical) properties of the molecules in normal human brains. If alien molecules are injected into the brain, or if the usual chemicals are modified in some way (as through meditation, chanting, etc.), deviations of Reality result from the normal modes. Depending on one's point of view, these deviations are described either euphemistically as higher visions, or disparagingly as hallucinations, when in fact they merely reflect unusual activations of the cerebral-neural network.
Experimenters like Aldous Huxley and Timothy Leary have vouched that small doses of certain chemicals provide the equivalent of cosmic revelations such as have been reported only by mystics. They have concluded from their experiences that there are loftier dimensions of Reality which are accessible to those who would allow potent substances to help open the closed doors of perception.
These claims show that what we perceive as Reality is to a large extent a function of the biochemical molecules that come into play in our brains. We all share a Reality only in so far as, and only for so long as, we have similar chemicals powering our cerebral circuitry. If the world view of other creatures is very different from our own, this has little to do with higher dimensions of Reality. The simple fact is that they are sporting with a different bunch of chemical substances.
Since the intellect plays a major role at the discursive level, it tends to accept as Reality only those elements that conform to its criteria. However, the other interaction moes generate other levels of Reality as well which the intellect is unable to accept as such. This causes of conflicts between science and other modes.
For example, we speak of love being real, of a feeling of elation being real, of friendship being real, etc. But these Realities are different from the table being real in the following important respects:
1. The Reality of love, friendship, etc. is far more intensely personal than that of a table, and may not be subject to universal agreement by a community of normal human brains, whereas this will be the case with the table. So is the Reality of the uniqueness or superiority of one's own religous tradition or beliefs.
2. A precise formulation of Reality of the first kind may or may not be of common interest in communal interactions, whereas the contrary is the case with realities of the second kind.
3. As a consequence, Realities of the first kind are far more significant and relevant to the individual whereas those of the second kind are of greater interest to a group or community.
4. It is not possible to subject Realities of the first kind to quantitative analysis.
The first kind of Reality may therefore be described as individually subjective.
The second kind of Reality is sometimes called objective reality. More appropriately, it should be called collectively subjective. It is this collectively subjective Reality that constitutes established scientific reality.
Virtual and Higher Dimensional Realities
One of the least expected, and most remarkable impacts on the physicist’s notion of Reality is from developments in computer science. It is well-known that with the aid of computers we can simulate Reality. The TV games which have invaded popular culture do precisely this.
More sophisticated versions of such games have led to such incredibly close mimic of actual experiences that this prompts us to define a new kind of Reality, the so-called Virtual Reality. Virtual Reality has practically all the characteristics of Reality in terms of sensory experiences, except that, like funny money, it is all fake, and we don't have to report it in our tax returns. This raises the question from which we started: How do we know that what our own taxed Reality is no more than some other type of Virtual Reality?
Than again, TV Reality is a two dimensional projection whereas our more familiar Reality is in three dimensional space. It could well be that there are still higher dimensional Realities which are beyond the perception or conception of our cerebral systems which are condemned to a three-dimensional mode. Could it be that higher dimensional intelligences, endowed with loftier levels of perception are populating multidimensional worlds whence they are watching our doings, even as we study and comment upon termites and E-coli?
There is no way we can prove or disprove such a possibility, but it is as good a thought as any to make some concluding comments.
Concluding Thoughts: Orders of Reality
The ironic conclusion to which scientific inquiries have led us is that our hope of discovering the ultimate nature of Reality is as exciting and reachable as trying to stand right under the rainbow, for anything that strikes us as Reality is but a sophisticated mapping of something outside of the brain. And this should be true of the brain also. The curious phenomenon of the brain examining and talking about itself is not without some inherent awkwardness, like attempts at writing an objective autobiography.
One way of not getting lost in this maze of Realities is by introducing the notion of Orders of Reality. Thus, we may define First Order Reality as what we directly observe and experience. Second order Reality consists of the fundamental entities and causes of First Order Reality. Physics informs us of this Second Order Reality. But these entities and causes such as they are recognized are functions of our own sensors and analyzers. Therefore, we may imagine a Third Order Reality of which Second Order Reality is only a reflection. It may well be that there are Fourth and still Higher Order Realities which are for ever beyond even our conceptual perception. At the other end, we may consider a Zeroth OrderReality consisting of the pure creations of the human Mind which are powerful factors in human culture and interaction. All our mythology and poetry, fiction and even some history, and other creations of the human imagination, as well such abstract elements as justice and equality, freedom and honor, belong to Zeroth Order Reality.
Suggestions for further reading
E. A. Abbot, Flatland (Dover, N.Y., 1952).
D. Bohm, Causality and chance in modern physics (Temple U Press, Philadelphia, 1957).
D. Bohm, Wholeness and the implicate order (Routledge Kegan, London, 1980).
R. Harris, The nature of reality (McGraw Hill , N.Y., 1987).
W. Heisenberg, The physicist's conception of nature (Greenwood Press Westport 1970).
A. I. Miller, Imagery in scientific thought (Birkhäuser Boston,1984).
P. Watzlawick, How real is real? , (Vintage N.Y., 1977).
A. Comfort, Reality and empathy, (SUNY, Albany, 1984).
P. Davies, God and the new physics, (Simon and Schuster, 1984).
I. Prigogine and I. Strengers, Order out of chaos (Heinemann, London, 1984).