Originally posted by daniel58Actually I can. All sight has an intermediary that allows us to know (or believe or imagine) the existence of something. If I drop an apple and it falls I am 'seeing' gravity just as much as I am 'seeing' the apple as the existence of both is being communicated to my eyes and thus my brain via the movement of photons.
No not case closed you can't see gravity.
black beetle is arguing that even when the source of the information is internal to the brain (dreams), you are still 'seeing'.
Do you 'see' what I am saying?
Originally posted by twhiteheadWhat are we 'seeing' with then? For dreams are obviously a manifestation of light of some sort. It cant be our eyes,that is obvious. As for the theory of the 'third eye' I dont know enough about that to say definatly yes or no.
Actually I can. All sight has an intermediary that allows us to know (or believe or imagine) the existence of something. If I drop an apple and it falls I am 'seeing' gravity just as much as I am 'seeing' the apple as the existence of both is being communicated to my eyes and thus my brain via the movement of photons.
black beetle is arguing that even ...[text shortened]... nternal to the brain (dreams), you are still 'seeing'.
Do you 'see' what I am saying?
As for the fact that we see light when we dream is beyond doubt, but where this fact will lead us is intriguing to say the least. It may be beyond conventional proofs to explain.
I reckon a new mode of thinking is required here to progress...
Originally posted by black beetleNo not case closed, I'll give you proof that you can "see" God, God is force, if you make the argument that you can "see" gravity then you can also "see" force, therefore you can "see" God, case closed.
You come again conducting a false generalization, as if I told you that the Human is able to see Everything that is non-material. But I clearly told you that the Human is Also able to see non-material “things”, and I offered you the example with the dreams -and you are indeed aware of the fact that we can see dreams, which they are non-material;
Well ...[text shortened]... e that is used by a satellite sensor that monitors the surface of the ocean).
Case closed
😵
Originally posted by karoly aczelThere is no light whatsoever involved in dreaming. We only think we see light and there is nothing particularly mysterious about it as you seem to imply.
What are we 'seeing' with then? For dreams are obviously a manifestation of light of some sort. It cant be our eyes,that is obvious. As for the theory of the 'third eye' I dont know enough about that to say definatly yes or no.
As for the fact that we see light when we dream is beyond doubt, but where this fact will lead us is intriguing to say the l ...[text shortened]... tional proofs to explain.
I reckon a new mode of thinking is required here to progress...
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo we only think we can see light when we are dreaming?
There is no light whatsoever involved in dreaming. We only think we see light and there is nothing particularly mysterious about it as you seem to imply.
Could've fooled me.
But I will let you explain.
(Whats the difference between the light we see when we are awake and the 'light' we see when we are dreaming?)
Originally posted by karoly aczelYes.
So we only think we can see light when we are dreaming?
Could've fooled me.
You seem rather easily fooled by dreams. (aliens)
But I will let you explain.
(Whats the difference between the light we see when we are awake and the 'light' we see when we are dreaming?)
The light we see when we are awake is photons being emitted from or reflected off objects, traveling through space and being absorbed and measured by our eyes. No photons (light) are involved whatsoever when we dream.
If you dream about someone, is he really in your dream? There is no more light in your dream than there is the person you dreamed about. We can say "he was in my dream" and we can say "I saw him in my dream" and even "there was a bright light in my dream" but it is understood from such speech that the real counterparts to the objects and actions in question were not involved.