What is real? How do yo know it to be real?
What matters? Why does it matter and how?
How does what is real and what matters interact?
Can something unreal matter? If so, how?
How do your actions coincide with what you think/ feel is real? How are they at odds with one another?
Is it possible to be wrong about what is real and/ or what matters?




35 Comments

Leave a response

You must be to post a response.

  1. five2one 1 month ago

    Real seems very subjective to me:

    You have a computer, you have the hardware, that is real. Think computer on a desk, one from the 90s, dusty. Looks like any other piece of junk. It is “real”. But what about the software game in it? It is off, so that game no longer exists.

    But, turn the computer back on, load up the game, and start playing, is the game real?

    Does the game really exist?

    Look at the code of the game. It is a bunch of jumbled binary data. Check the source code, which makes much more sense, not unlike any human language. But, ultimately, that code is simply translated by the hardware on the level of on and off, 1’s and 0’s. In enough combination so the computer can understand it.

    Maybe that is where the reality is, where the language hits the hardware and the hardware operates from it? Maybe the hardware is real? Maybe just the software designer and game player are real?

    The software designer sees the code s/he writes. The game player sees the game he plays.

    The hardware folks put the transistors on the board.

    The computer is real, but it does not perceive it. Even though it is the center of attention. The vehicle by which everything moves.

    Unless, of course, all of this happens in a dream. Then, the software is real, everything is real, because it is all made and sustained in someone’s unconscious. The dreamer in the dream is more real then any of that? What about the people in the dream with them? Puppets in the hands of a child.

    A dream can be very real, as the dreamer would attest to. The dreamer would attest to the people being real. The dreamer would attest to everything in the dream being real.

    But, the only real person here is the dreamer, and s/he is sleeping.

    Dreams fade and go, usually forgotten, but for those who make an effort remembering them.

    Likewise, are lives are but dreams. We can be sustained in a grand reality for some time, but when it goes, and we end up losing everything, then what? The past is a fond illusion, none of it any real. Or a bitter and even possibly terrifying one. What bitterness of soul can it be to have it all, but lose it!

    For those with soul, they remember it fondly. For those without, it is only remorse and a horror.

    Only that which is everlasting is truly real, therefore.

    While I answered every question there, I will comment on the movie “AI”, which had a small robot child following a sign of the Blue Fairy, which he remembers from Pinocchio. The Fairy who could turn him into a real child. When he follows the signs to find the Blue Fairy, it turns out the Blue Fairy was simply something he wanted to believe oh so badly. A lie which was meant well, to lead him on. To trap him, so the designers could use him.

    He still believes though. Believes so hard and so bad he figures out a way to escape, and he returns to the Blue Fairy which is deep underwater. There he stays for a very, very long time.

    Finally, one day, robots more human then humans ever were find him, have mercy on him, and grant him his wish. Not to become “real”, as he always was very real. But, to have one last moment, one night, with his mommy.

    Why did he want to become real? Because his mommy rejected him. He loved his mommy so badly, he went through all this to find her.

    Conclusion: Love is what makes reality real. Love is the very source of everlastingness.

    Sappy, I know.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  2. five2one 1 month ago

    A dumbed down second response: What is unreal. We take dreams as real when in them, and they shift a lot. Life in the world is the same way. You therefore have to find the everlasting and have it proven to you it is true, so you have True Real.

    As time advances, time of the past shrinks.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Jear77 1 month ago

      @five2one each person needs to make that for themselves. Only (to use your own words from another response) an ignorant and whiny person needs a diety to tell them what is worthwhile. Why should i or you need some outside source for this?

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • five2one 4 weeks ago

        @Jear77 You often make whiny posts, and express your opinion on matters you have no experience in exalting it as the final word. I do not see why you complain about it when it is you doing it, not someone else.

        When I try and point out to you that Satan has you in his thrall only draining your life from you misery, and that there is escape… you say the only escape is money. A million dollars a year.

        That is how Satan shows favor to his children, with money.

        That would make you loved by the one you love.

        You need to escape from that. There is a better world. A better place. This world is passing away, and Satan, his angels, all of it together are going.

        Don’t go into the darkness and fire with them.

        As for what I want, what I have, you have no understanding of this, as you pretend to. The glory and power of the Kingdom of Heaven is nothing like this old world.

        You are betting on the wrong pony. You think you have no one above you, which is foolish.

        Your own deity is telling you lies to enchant you, you are filling your heart with fantasies about material wishes that would amount to nothing – even if they did come true.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 4 weeks ago

        @five2one Once again… NONE other than myself has the plan with what to do with the money. Other people say money ruined their lives. This is ONLY because they didn’t have a
        Systematic/ Specific
        Measurable
        Achievable
        Realistic
        Time bound
        method of dealing with it. I do.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • five2one 3 weeks ago

        @Jear77 You are always approaching these problems as if you have no error and all knowledge. The problem with that is you come off as intellectually dishonest, as I do not find you stupid. You are a smart fellow, but lazy with quite a number of areas you boldly speak on.

        You love money, showing trust it can solve all the world’s problems. But, the reality here is, it can’t.

        You are going to die soon, relatively speaking, so you do not have any vested interest to do this. You may believe you care about the poor and unfortunate, but this appears to me to be merely an internal construct of your imagination to make your self feel like a good person.

        I am sure you want to care, but how often have you given away more then 10% of all the money you have to live on?

        What about 20%, 50%? 70%, or even all of it?

        Say you have 200 dollars a week, after buying humble, inexpensive groceries that can last you until your next money. Then, go and give 200 dollars to some homeless person, and avoid accepting any credit from them at all.

        Then, we can talk.

        Until then, you like to talk a talk, but don’t follow what you profess to believe.

        As for me, I have done this, many times, in many ways. So, I know what I am talking about.

        Even just take fifty or a hundred of that metaphoric 200 and give it away, and then examine your heart for how you feel about it.

        Work at a “soup kitchen” now, take in a homeless poor — even if you just have an economy apartment. Go homeless your own self for a few days. Leave your place and your residence, and live in the streets or in the woods for a few days.

        I have done all these things (and more), so I know what I am talking about.

        As a child, I considered making a lot of money which I then planned to use to create systems that would help the unfortunate. So, it could be you are better person then you appear, though I will admit, my ideas there were naive. And, that was thirty years ago, in my twenties.

        As Jim Morrison said, well, “Money beats soul”. It beats it like a whip. Job and Solomon could handle it well enough, but you should not see your self as sitting at the seat of Job or Solomon until you have done as Job or Solomon have done: approach matters rightly, with honor given to those who deserve it.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 weeks ago

        @five2one with enough money (actually my plan is for HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of dollars, not mere millions) it doesn’t matter how much i don’t know, it doesn’t matter how much money is wasted… because there’s no way I’d be stupid enough to waste that much money. What does the bible say about wisdom being in one with many advisors?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 4 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Perhaps more accurately the ignorant and whiny us becomes the deity for us.

        Almost every exercise of atheism is trying to instantiate the deity within us: no greater than our current understanding.
        And bearing “burdens of proof” that are total non sequiturs so we can remain within constructs of self as deity.

        (Science deals with the material object. Transcendence cannot exist within such a scope . . . So the self-deifying structure is not threatened)

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 4 weeks ago

        @griz instantiate?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 4 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        The philosophical definition thereof.

        It ties into Nietzsche’s prophecy that in the absence of a Transcendent deity we would attempt to subsume those Transcendent aspects into ourselves and set forth trying to recreate reality in our own image; but with nothing standing against the malevolent aspects of human nature.

        It is why people grow resentful then bitter that reality is not ordered to their liking.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 4 weeks ago

        @griz oh. Thought you were trying to conjugate the word “instance.”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  3. griz 1 month ago

    Phenomenologically, what is real to each person is what they act as if is real. It matters for reasons only they can assign and assess. We tend to remain mostly ignorant to this process, unless considerable effort is taken to make ourselves aware of it and exercise some control over it.

    But this subjective reality and meaning is nested within a greater reality and meaning. That reality is more objective and transcends the individual, though the individual is no less a part of it.

    A mismatch between the personal phenomena and the Transcendent phenomena is what makes life hellish.
    And the greater the match the more Heavenly existence is.

    It is entirely possible to be wrong about what matters and what is real. This is our freedom.
    If nothing beyond the phenomenon of self has sufficient reality or meaning, being wrong becomes increasingly inevitable.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      Jear77 1 month ago

      @griz not necessarily… or not quite the way you might think. There have been instances where people are totally unconscious and they ended up beating up an attacker, having no memory of such. People brain dead, attached to machines to keep them alive still react to pain. In these instances no one’s in the “driver’s seat” and they still react.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • griz 4 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Our primitive brain, which functionally extends all the way down the spine, is perfectly able to function without conscious direction.

        The examples you cite in no way invalidate what I offered.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 4 weeks ago

        @griz nothing should be real to a person legally dead! At that point they’re less of a person and more of an object with organs to harvest, to help someone else’s quality of life.

        In terms of the transcendent, it’s too bad that such a concept can’t be scientifically proven.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 4 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        I’m not sure how “legally dead” entered into this conversation?

        Have you not noticed that everything that has been “captured” by science, comes very quickly to be taken for granted?

        Even if the layperson remains ignorant of the deeper processes around and within them the fact that a “hired a human brain” somewhere does profess understanding it . . . is sufficient grounds for it to be taken for granted.

        And once again I would remind you that science is not there to tell you about value or meaning or how to interact with objects around you in a free conscious way.

        It just tells you what objects without freedom and consciousness are made of and how they interact with each other.

        Not everything can be spoon-fed to us.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 4 weeks ago

        @griz science is constantly improving itself, overturning the knowledge it had for what can be found out by testing new methods, technology. The concept of a relationship with something that can’t learn, grow, change with the times is exceedingly stagnant. This is the selfsame god that told the Israelites to kill every man, woman, and child when talking over the holy lands. And others even nowadays who think they are in a relationship with this same diety with the concept of “kill the infidel.” With that as the basis for like 1/3 the world’s major religions, is it no small wonder that there are a growing number of people who want nothing to do with it?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 4 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        So what is it you propose that cannot change with the times?

        Are there things that should not change with the times, because they work when properly applied? To change for the sake of change, or to change something that doesn’t work just because people are misusing it is to invite folly.

        You dishonor (misuse) the context of the various Covenants to serve agenda. It’s no wonder they are perceived as mis-firing.

        I’m wondering why you are trying to conflate Christian and Islamic teachings together as if they’re the same.
        (Actually I do understand why. I’m hoping you do).

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 4 weeks ago

        @griz What if EVERYTHING needs to be renewed, reexamined, recycled/ upcycled (to take something old and make something more valuable out of it) with the times in order to be relevant to the “here and now,” irrespective of what it is?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Evolution doesn’t work that way. Even after cataclysm there are a large number of life-functions that reassert: because they are functional Truth.

        Before you speak again of radical reconstructionism you should read Alekandr Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago.

        Only evil has come from the notion that everything needs to change in a radical Reconstructionist way: backed by the wanton hubris to think that we know what is best when it comes to very complicated long-standing systems.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 weeks ago

        @griz that’s one way of looking at it. Another way is to see what’s needed by being prepared for it and forcing evolutionary proccesses to be that which survives.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        How many instances of human-forced evolution upon ourselves have turned out well?

        We’re back to the hubris factor.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 weeks ago

        @griz good, in the case of dogs. Man *created* them from wolves. Same with other domesticated animals we use for food, including bees.
        Keep in mind there’s another outcome for an apocalypse: total annihilation. You think mankind is immune to such simply because a text tells us that “everything will be all right?”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Those are a few good cases.

        How many bad cases are there?
        If we just accentuate the few good over the many bad to make our point, and then accentute the many bad over the few good to try to make the same point, our perceptions and process is unbalanced. We’ve talked before about reaching for convenient extremes.

        And I think the craving of annihilation also exists in that psychological category of “unbalanced”.

        If one stops at just worshiping the text, one never experiences anything beyond the text. (Which the Apostle Paul graced with the title, “Ministry of death, written on stone” — before going on to describe the process which keeps things constantly updated and alive).

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 weeks ago

        @griz You don’t get it. I am the one willing to be vilified by all of humanity to save it. You on the other hand are shackled by so many things you will not do because they are too abhorrent to consider. When push comes to shove, who would have a better chance of saving humanity? The one who says “I must not, it’s better for humanity to perish than do this” or the one who says “I don’t care, it’s the only option left?” The person in the latter condition can take fate that decrees annihilation for all of mankind and bend it to their will to make sure it doesn’t happen.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 3 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        It still sounds like you are trying to project the religious experience you had, upon others. I bear little resemblance to the foe you assemble.
        My hands are not shackled in any way. And more importantly neither is my mind. Because when push comes to shove I don’t have a limiting dogmatic religious structure I have to maintain.

        Whereas it seems you expend tremendous amounts of energy to keep it religiously intact just so you have something to rail against. I have seen this pattern so many times, using the same limiting mental constructs, the same adherence to ossified dogma, so sure that their negativity is going to be Humanity’s Saviour.

        You may not have studied history to the same extent I have: to the seeing of an infamous pattern in people that have tried to bend things to their will to maintain their imprisoning negative constructs.

        Such a process always spins sideways at the very least to the destruction of the individual: and at the very worst to the destruction of tens of Millions.

        It’s an infection.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 3 weeks ago

        @griz dude, look up religion on Wikipedia. Nothing you matches. Athiests don’t have priests, places of worship: i.e. churches/ temples, closed scriptures, costumes, rituals, holidays, feasts, laws, sermons, miracles, idols, study groups, etc.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Is the environment static and ossified? Or dynamic?

        You’re still trying to order your existence by dead, ossified concepts held in religious rigidity as the environment changes around us.

        The worst thing about religions is their holding in stubbornly totalitarian ways to ossified Dogma that cannot change. It’s “holy” (held on high above all else). It’s almost as if you see me as a heretic against Wikipedia in the dictionary, the “solid rock of your salvation”!
        The best thing about science is that it can amend and change rather than basing its foundations on that which is dogmatic, unchangeable.

        Book-worship is your undoing — whether relating to the physical or the metaphysical.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 2 weeks ago

        @griz even dynamic definitions fail you miserably. Take this concept to your lawmakers, judges, a jury, or even the “family feud” format of querrying 100 random participants it would not come up. Ask literally anyone what religion is and none will say the word atheism

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Were the advances of Einstein Rosen Bell Ford, Marconi Piaget Nietzsche Newton DaVinci Martin Luther King Freud Jung the result of judge and jury, or 100 random participants??

        What dictionary or Wikipedia did they use?!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 2 weeks ago

        @griz i’m 100% SURE on my case here and willing to put my money where my mouth is. Are you? I don’t bet money; it’s simply an unwise thing to do. Ask ANYONE in the world WITHOUT any introduction to the subject “what is religion?” If the FIRST words out of their mouth is “athiesm” or “the non belief in god(s)” i’ll pay you $100… BUT for EVERY person who says LITERALLY anything else, you owe me $100. Is it a bet?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Why not ask them what love is? Or responsibility? 1,000,000 people with a callow or outright incorrect definition don’t make the definition any less callow or incorrect.

        And my original point stands. What dictionary, Wikipedia, judge, jury, dogmatic doctrine (religiously held) or body of people — brave or cowardly — did these great thinkers and scores of others rely upon for their great discoveries most take for granted?

        You are still a slave to religious thinking. :frown:

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 2 weeks ago

        @griz sad… you say x is true yet can’t find a single person to agree with you without explanation.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • griz 2 weeks ago

        @Jear77
        Yes it is quite sad that people are prisoners to dogma and won’t think for themselves.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        Jear77 2 weeks ago

        @griz thinking for myself has only brought me massive trouble, heartache, and loss. Let someone else shoulder the responsibility of having the decisions.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

©2018 Soul Sequel | All Rights Reserved

 
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account