13 May 03
3 edits
A question my Psycholgy studying lady is revising for her Finals that I thought quite interesting:
"Imagine you woke up tomorrow morning to find a note on your bed. It says: "For the next 24 hours you will exist in different dimension where reality is an illusion created by your senses. This illusion of reality does not correspond to any external reality in this dimension."
Would it be possible to know if this note is a hoax?
If yes, how?
If no, is this argument evidence for the non-existence of an external reality?"
[This may or may not be an attempt at getting you clever boffins to provider her with some much needed answers, seeing as though I have been nowhere near able to 😉]
T1000
13 May 03
Originally posted by T1000Oke...how many times did you see the Matrix?😛
A question my Psycholgy studying lady is revising for her Finals that I thought quite interesting:
"Imagine you woke up tomorrow morning to find a note on your bed. It says: "For the next 24 hours you will exist in different dimension where reality is an illusion created by your senses. This illusion of reality does not correspond to any external reality ...[text shortened]... with some much needed answers, seeing as though I have been nowhere near able to 😉]
T1000
Olav
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
14 May 03
Originally posted by T1000Everything you see and feel is an illusion by your senses. It is just your brain way of making sense of electic impluses through your synapses. The only way to tell whether the situation you find yourself in is not the norm is to try and work out how much it deviates from that norm. Like when you are having a dream you think is reality and you suddenly click and it all falls apart.
A question my Psycholgy studying lady is revising for her Finals that I thought quite interesting:
"Imagine you woke up tomorrow morning to find a note on your bed. It says: "For the next 24 hours you will exist in different dimension where reality is an illusion created by your senses. This illusion of reality does not correspond to any external reality ...[text shortened]... with some much needed answers, seeing as though I have been nowhere near able to 😉]
T1000
The question probably links into the idea of what happens if you take away the rules by which people construct their "normal" world. Generally people go nuts. Already in this thread you have people pointing guns at their head!!!
Andrew
15 May 03
1 edit
Originally posted by latex bishopI wouldn't say our perception of our reality is an illusion, but probably a very good "representation" of the universe we see and feel.
Everything you see and feel is an illusion by your senses. It is just your brain way of making sense of electic impluses through your synapses. The only way to tell whether the situation you find yourself in is not the norm is to try a ...[text shortened]... is thread you have people pointing guns at their head!!!
Andrew
Lets say you have a penny in your hand, it has a color, it even has a taste. (been a long time since I put a penny in my mouth but I still remember the flavor)
If you let go of the penny it will fall from your hand and also make a noise when it lands... What we see, feel, and even taste happening is how this penny behaves in our universe.
It is not an illusion, and the way we percieve it is a very good representation of what is happening. But who's to say there aren't better ways to percieve it.
Perhaps we are blind compared to how we could possibly be able to percieve the same situation. Maybe you could see molocules moving in the penny... perhaps you would even know the pressure that was exerted on the penny to make the engraving... It might even taste like a sugar drop.
It will still fall with gravity and stop when it hits the ground. That is reality, although it does matter how we percieve it.
Now if you had that note in your hand, and do my handy little penny test you may be able to decide if the note was real... or an evil hoax to mess with your mind.
16 May 03
1 edit
Originally posted by T1000I know someone taking a Philosophy module. Apparently, on one of the past papers, you had to write an essay in response to the question, "Is it good?" 🙄
A question my Psycholgy studying lady is revising for her Finals that I thought quite interesting:
"Imagine you woke up tomorrow morning to find a note on your bed. It says: "For the next 24 hours you will exist in different dimension wh ...[text shortened]... , seeing as though I have been nowhere near able to 😉]
T1000
17 May 03
Originally posted by belgianfreaki heard of a philosophy exam where the only question was 'what is philosophy'. one guy wrote 'what isn't philosophy?' and got 100%...
other famous questions:
"is this a question"
"define courage" - top marks for this one went to the guy who walked out without writing anything. (Possibly because he gave up?)
17 May 03
1 edit
Originally posted by royalchickenThere was no indictment of empiricism in "Appearance and Reality", just an attack on a particular theory of perception, called 'direct realism' by some, 'naive realism' by others, according to which the objects of our perceptual states are physical objects themselves. Russell recounts some familiar (even for his day) arguments attempting to show that the object of our perceptual states are, in fact, mental objects. Contrary to both direct realists and phenomenalists like Berkeley, Russell claims that these mental objects represent physical objects, that our knowledge of the physical world is based upon inference rather than direct experience, and that this inferential knowledge is justified abductively. Since an essential part of the abductive evidence for the 'physical world hypothesis' will be the experience of regularity and consistency of our perceptual states, Russell's philosophy of perception is compatible with empiricism and his claims about how we're justified in believing in an external world are empiricist in character.
You mean "Appearance and Reality"? I gave a lecture on that to the eigth grade English class my mother teaches. Some of the students became actually angry at Russell's indictment of empiricism. 'Twas hilarious.
For more on the philosophy of perception and the related problems concerning our justification for believing in an external physical world, see the following article by my advisor, Lawrence BonJour:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/perception-episprob/#s-d