As I see it "reality" can be different for each individual person. Reality in my life is different from e.g. the Atheist. God is a reality in my life. For the atheist, God is not a reality. I would say that reality is related to personal experience, which would be different for each individual person. If the "reality" of one person does not contain God, is it reasonable for the person to claim that God is not real?
Originally posted by dj2becker As I see it "reality" can be different for each individual person. Reality in my life is different from e.g. the Atheist. God is a reality in my life. For the atheist, God is not a reality. I would say that reality is related to personal experience, which would be different for each individual person. If the "reality" of one person does not contain God, is it reasonable for the person to claim that God is not real?
Any thoughts?
You are confusing reality itself with your perception/knowledge of it.
Originally posted by dj2becker Are you suggesting that for a person, reality itself is different from how he/she perceives it, as well as different from what he/she knows about it?
Reality and perceptions of reality are two distinct classes of entities. While we can only know the latter and trust that it accurately reflects the former, it would be a mistake either to say that the two are one and the same or that the former does not exist because we cannot know it except through the latter.
Originally posted by lucifershammer Reality and perceptions of reality are two distinct classes of entities. While we can only know the latter and trust that it accurately reflects the former, it would be a mistake either to say that the two are one and the same or that the former does not exist because we cannot know it except through the latter.
Interesting. So basically "reality" is the same for everybody. It is only the interpretation of reality that would then differ. So if I were to define "reality" as God and everything created by God, there is no way to prove me wrong, because everybody might have a different interpretation of reality?
Originally posted by dj2becker Interesting. So basically "reality" is the same for everybody. It is only the interpretation of reality that would then differ. So if I were to define "reality" as God and everything created by God, there is no way to prove me wrong, because everybody might have a different interpretation of reality?
Except that you cannot define reality, only your own perception of it. I suggest for some light background reading you hunt down Descarts' Meditations, try here:
Originally posted by dj2becker there is no way to prove me wrong, because everybody might have a different interpretation of reality?
this is pretty much how i already view your stance. from what i can tell, your beliefs are based on faith, not proof. therefore, while i do not necessarily agree with your belief in god and the bible, i see no reason why i can, with a clear conscience, dismiss your faith as having no merit. however, you have to realize that, on the flip side of that coin, a faith-based religion is also one that may not be provable beyond any shadow of a doubt -- the confines of this shadow is where i habitually take respite.
as for defining reality, i don't know...hard question. i would probably argue as others in this thread, however, that there is a distinction to be made between inherent reality and one's perception of that reality.
Originally posted by LemonJello this is pretty much how i already view your stance. from what i can tell, your beliefs are based on faith, not proof. therefore, while i do not necessarily agree with your belief in god and the bible, i see no reason why i can, with a clear conscience, dismiss your faith as having no merit. however, you have to realize that, on the flip side of that co ...[text shortened]... here is a distinction to be made between inherent reality and one's perception of that reality.
this is pretty much how i already view your stance. from what i can tell, your beliefs are based on faith, not proof.
My faith is the evidence of things not seen.
Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
therefore, while i do not necessarily agree with your belief in god and the bible, i see no reason why i can, with a clear conscience, dismiss your faith as having no merit. however, you have to realize that, on the flip side of that coin, a faith-based religion is also one that may not be provable beyond any shadow of a doubt -- the confines of this shadow is where i habitually take respite.
Do you think that all things can be proven beyond that shadow of a doubt?