What does it mean to be real?

Post Reply New Topic

There is a notion of "realness", what does it mean? How does it relate to God? How does it relate to science and rationalism? Are you "real"? Why? Are you not "real"? How so? Is *everyone* "real"?

As each of us becomes aware of the universe we each construct an internal model with which we can understand, correlate and predict the general patterns coming in. That is reality for each of us and most of us, having reasonably similar sense systems, construct realities that are reasonably congruent. When there is a large lack of congruence in an individual model, that is considered insanity. A close examination of each internal model probably would real significant individual differences.

We don't live in the physical universe. We live in that little pasta sludge of ours we have in our head. So the definition of 'real'. Is a bit blurry. That's why science is so useful, it describes what really is there.

What really is there is probably marginally described by science better than all other methods but science is limited by human imagination and our perceptive capability both of which are very limited. I don't buy into theological nonsense or superstitious crap but as creatures evolved in a very limited local environment of one planet there is much still beyond our mental capabilities. That's why science is so fascinating. It keeps pushing the envelope.

Real means existing independently of our knowledge and will. The Sun is real. It exists and would exist even if we did not.

This position is the logical opposite of solopsism which holds that all things are the products of our own mind and imagination. That means all of you are just constructs of my mind and only I exist. This position is logically indefeasible, but I don't believe it, even for a billionth of a second. None of the other people I have dreamed up believe it either.

ruveyn

Some people are more real than other people.

Real, as in existing within the realm of truth, rather than fiction.

Otherwise, √3.14159 is also real, though in a sense √-1 is also real though imaginary too and is useful in alternating current calculations involving reactance and phase angles.

the same as what you get when you subtract fakeness from actuality.

Reality is what is.

Our perception of reality is a concept that lies in our head, yet is also a part of reality since it is formed by that thing you call a brain which resides in reality. Most importantly, our perceptions of reality do not wholly sync with reality, therefore you can never know reality. But you can definitely know pieces of it, though only by conducting empirical discourse.

No numbers are real in the sense intended by the original poster. That is just a locution used by mathematicians. All numbers are literally imaginary in that they exist only in our minds.

ruveyn

One of my favorite theories is that only God is real in the full sense. He exists outside of time, of course.

I mean, time? Please, how lame is that?! Time is the gradual realization of truth -- a "milk" form of reality for finite creatures who can't yet handle the truth in its true, "meat" form (to borrow a comparison from the Bible and adapt it to serve my point).

Last edited by Ragtime on 09 Mar 2009, 9:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Numbers with units represent real values. Example, would you want 100 kilovolts of DC electricity to have you as part of its circuit?

I find it interesting that "real" was often interpreted by this definition:

"Being or occurring in fact or actuality; having verifiable existence"

But I was trying to suggest another definition:

"Free of pretense, falsehood, or affectation, genuine, etc"

This can be seen in saying this: "Are you "real"? Why? Are you not "real"? How so? Is *everyone* "real"?" I mean, it can be considered a question about solipsism there. I was probably terrible at communicating my meaning, I think I was in an odd mood when I wrote up this thread. I also wonder if that is the only factor though.... hmm.... whatever....

Thus, Magnus, despite not providing a lot of specific information, I think addressed this heart of this question better than many other people often did, by providing the answer "Some people are more real than other people."

Ragtime also possibly addressed this question well too, because he states "only God is real in the full sense" based upon the notion that "He exists outside of time" and "Time is the gradual realization of truth -- a "milk" form of reality for finite creatures who can't yet handle the truth in its true, "meat" form". This reflecting the idea that God is the most genuine thing to exist, and that other beings are separated from being truly genuine due to their finiteness and limited access to truth. This could probably be combined with his religious intuitions to argue that the Christian is the most genuine form of person because they are in closest relation to the truth and live to express their truth, rather than live in self-deception and lies. I think I find Ragtime's answer very interesting, if I have interpreted it and it's implications right.

But as ruveyn points out "No numbers are real in the sense intended by the original poster." is likely true, unless numbers are regarded in some form of transcendent mystical form, but that is probably not what iamnotaparakeet meant anyway, as in my sense of real, things existing in the realm of truth can be less real than fictions, as a fictional character is not a falsehood, but rather can express things that are genuine or profound.

Reality is, of course, a word. A word is a tool we each use to convey something and people who write dictionaries make surveys on how different people use words and attempt to lay out which meanings the bulk of people assign to a particular word and supply that as the definition. There are particular words such as reality, beauty, nature, God, etc. that individuals feel strongly are confined to a small number of meanings but this is frequently an arrogant impertinence merely indicating personal preference. And should be attended to rather carefully with an understanding that even dictionaries can distort meanings.

Hmmm...good question...

Why not a poet...."To thine own self be true"

To be really real, one should have a valid reason for the way they are. Emotions play good role as to what it means to be real yet they have no well known validity. Many times they stem from misplaced concepts onto people, religions, concepts, idealogies, thus having no real validity except only to falsely verify no real validity of that which is conceptualized.

To put it bluntly, humans carry many visades to redeem themselves of these personal vulnerabilities. Many factors may contribute as to why one is unable to be authentic to thine own self so there is no great answere to pinpoint what it means to be real except through the concepts of these notions stated above which are not always definite or accurate.

In what does the "past sludge" exist?

ruveyn