Is reality relative?

[james03]

If something is an illusion, it just means that we see it as one thing when it is really something else. We see the self as existing on its own, when it was really constructed by you. You created your own sense of self.

But the "we" exists and is the reality that is viewing the illusion?  Or is this "we" also an illusion, and as I said, off to infinity.

[Probius]

If something is an illusion, it just means that we see it as one thing when it is really something else. We see the self as existing on its own, when it was really constructed by you. You created your own sense of self.

But the "we" exists and is the reality that is viewing the illusion?  Or is this "we" also an illusion, and as I said, off to infinity.

Yes, you exist, I exist, and we exist. The illusion is that there is this "I" that exists independently of everything else in the universe.

[Vetus Ordo]

If something is an illusion, it just means that we see it as one thing when it is really something else. We see the self as existing on its own, when it was really constructed by you. You created your own sense of self.

But the "we" exists and is the reality that is viewing the illusion?  Or is this "we" also an illusion, and as I said, off to infinity.

Yes, you exist, I exist, and we exist. The illusion is that there is this "I" that exists independently of everything else in the universe.

So the distinctions of identity between I, you and we that allow for a relationship to occur are illusory?

If so, once again, this conversation is bizarre, isn't it? It's an eternal nous talking to itself?

[james03]

Trying to keep track here.  So the we is an illusion viewed by the I.  But the I is an illusion.  An illusion to who exactly?  Off to infinity. 

[james03]

This looks familiar.

Reality is an illusion viewed by we.
But we is an illusion view by I.
But I is illusion viewed by who.
I got it!  Who is viewing the illusion!

If reality is an illusion, who is viewing the illusion?
Precisely!

Who's on first?  I don't know.  He's on third.

When your philosophy ends in absurdities, it's time to look at your premise.

[Probius]

If something is an illusion, it just means that we see it as one thing when it is really something else. We see the self as existing on its own, when it was really constructed by you. You created your own sense of self.

But the "we" exists and is the reality that is viewing the illusion?  Or is this "we" also an illusion, and as I said, off to infinity.

Yes, you exist, I exist, and we exist. The illusion is that there is this "I" that exists independently of everything else in the universe.

So the distinctions of identity between I, you and we that allow for a relationship to occur are illusory?

If so, once again, this conversation is bizarre, isn't it? It's an eternal nous talking to itself?

Yes, exactly! It is bizarre and that's why I find it so fascinating. Anyone who would claim that this isn't bizarre isn't really thinking about what Rovelli is saying. I can't just sit back and accept boring ideas about the word and that's it. I like to wrestle with wild fanciful ideas. I eventually wind up rejecting most of the ideas I wrestle with, but I feel like I have grown from wrestling with these ideas.

[Vetus Ordo]

If something is an illusion, it just means that we see it as one thing when it is really something else. We see the self as existing on its own, when it was really constructed by you. You created your own sense of self.

But the "we" exists and is the reality that is viewing the illusion?  Or is this "we" also an illusion, and as I said, off to infinity.

Yes, you exist, I exist, and we exist. The illusion is that there is this "I" that exists independently of everything else in the universe.

So the distinctions of identity between I, you and we that allow for a relationship to occur are illusory?

If so, once again, this conversation is bizarre, isn't it? It's an eternal nous talking to itself?

Yes, exactly! It is bizarre and that's why I find it so fascinating. Anyone who would claim that this isn't bizarre isn't really thinking about what Rovelli is saying. I can't just sit back and accept boring ideas about the word and that's it. I like to wrestle with wild fanciful ideas. I eventually wind up rejecting most of the ideas I wrestle with, but I feel like I have grown from wrestling with these ideas.

Bizarre is a euphemism, Probius.

What you are proposing is nonsensical. It means you and I aren't really distinct which cannot be a reasonable mechanism to explain reality, let alone a reasonable assumption of our thoughts and experiences.

[Probius]

If something is an illusion, it just means that we see it as one thing when it is really something else. We see the self as existing on its own, when it was really constructed by you. You created your own sense of self.

But the "we" exists and is the reality that is viewing the illusion?  Or is this "we" also an illusion, and as I said, off to infinity.

Yes, you exist, I exist, and we exist. The illusion is that there is this "I" that exists independently of everything else in the universe.

So the distinctions of identity between I, you and we that allow for a relationship to occur are illusory?

If so, once again, this conversation is bizarre, isn't it? It's an eternal nous talking to itself?

Yes, exactly! It is bizarre and that's why I find it so fascinating. Anyone who would claim that this isn't bizarre isn't really thinking about what Rovelli is saying. I can't just sit back and accept boring ideas about the word and that's it. I like to wrestle with wild fanciful ideas. I eventually wind up rejecting most of the ideas I wrestle with, but I feel like I have grown from wrestling with these ideas.

Bizarre is a euphemism, Probius.

What you are proposing is nonsensical. It means you and I aren't really distinct which cannot be a reasonable mechanism to explain reality, let alone a reasonable assumption of our thoughts and experiences.

I like the word bizarre. I wouldn't want to live in a world which had no bizarre things.

I'm not proposing anything. I have merely presented an idea for discussion. Whether it is true or not is not really relevant to me. It is the journey, not the destination, which I find important.