What is life?

[perplexity]

Originally Posted by pilgrimshost

.... how does this pass on?

I have a theory of my own: Our brains are like some kind of television receiver; the requisite data is in effect broadcast from a central production studio, possibly run by somebody affectionately known as "God".

This would also explain consciousness and unconsiousness, the way that we lose the picture when the set is not in good working order, when the channels are not properly tuned in.

--- RH.

[pilgrimshost]

Do you want to know something, just between you and me(and the rest of the online world) thats exactly the same conclusion I came to about four years ago, though I just called it 'tuning in'.

[pilgrimshost]

I was at work today and my mate was pulling a cage which was loaded with stock. He said ; ''Bloody hell!'' , so ive said ''Its heavy aint it''

But then I stopped and thought,' im not pulling it, im not experiancing the heaviness of the load, my perseption is completly from memory and general expectation due to my mates expression; is it in fact heavy or is it only a matter of my mates understanding to what heaviness is-and to me it wouldnt be; or is it just a 'possibility' that it is heavy until certainty is validated when I take the cage off him ?'.

Then we went for a cup of tea.

Also is certanty a certainty in the respect were reality is subjective?

[perplexity]

Originally Posted by pilgrimshost

Also is certanty a certainty in the respect were reality is subjective?

Some certainties weigh more than others.

As I pointed out before, truth is the majority verdict, so it is wiser not to bet against the odds.

-- RH.

[pilgrimshost]

I was wondering if 'reality' is actually two fold; The personal subjective angle where what our consiousness understands acounts for 'the truth', becuase there is no actual other way to contemplate otherwise. Then there is the objective reality that exists to 'maintain' our universe even when we dont conseive of it. Therefore the objective reality is like an invisible 'manager'(there is a better term, but I cant think of it) who controls it, and when we percieve of it we see it in our own individual ways completly unaware of the 'managers' operations.
I dont mean 'God', Im trying to charactorise the consistancy of the exterior world beyond the inconsistancies of our interior subjective consiousness through which our perceptions are made.

[perplexity]

Originally Posted by pilgrimshost

I was wondering if '.....the objective reality is like an invisible 'manager'(there is a better term, but I cant think of it) who controls it, and when we percieve of it we see it in our own individual ways completly unaware of the 'managers' operations.

Then you are not the only one.

The "intelligent design" controversy rages endlessly.

I see nothing though to convince me that the said single reality exists, as opposed to an infinity of personal realities, except as a convenient notion, an ultimate generalisation, a lowest common denominator invented to simplify our practical communications.

To the contrary, the conceit of science rather offends me in the way that it likes to dismiss so much of what is extremely important to real people, as mere delusions.

"Any device that can lose information can generalize."
(W Ross Ashby)

--- RH

[Gillis]

This would explain how people in certain situations can experience extra boosts of adrenaline and lift cars and do unhuman like things.. Where mind the want of the car to be off of an individual for example , takes over matter. The normal thought that runs through our brain when we see car to heavy to lift. A case of mind over matter.. it is the ability to control this that is the ultimate trick. The ability to believe in self over anything else.

[Gillis]

Your theory that the world is like tv is what the movie "The Island" plays on..

[perplexity]

Originally Posted by Gillis

This would explain how people in certain situations can experience extra boosts of adrenaline and lift cars and do unhuman like things.. Where mind the want of the car to be off of an individual for example , takes over matter. The normal thought that runs through our brain when we see car to heavy to lift. A case of mind over matter.. it is the ability to control this that is the ultimate trick. The ability to believe in self over anything else.

Yes, that is a good example, the sort of thing one hears about often enough to have to take seriously, or do they?

This has always bothered me, that so many people, sometime in their life experience something or other that is perfectly real to their senses, but also obviously significantly out of kilter with what they know of the supposed laws of science.

If then those who preach the laws of Science were blessed with any integrity at all, they'd long since have stopped the attempt to suppose that their laws are absolute, in favor of a better understanding to account for the remarkable number of execptions to the rules.

Instead we hear the endless litany of "anecdotal", "delusion", "subjective", "pseudo science", or whatever else, while they cling to their cherished axioms with a fervour that would put the Spanish Inquisition to shame, on the occasion that a heretic should dare to dispute the creed.

--- RH.

[pilgrimshost]

Very true,perplexity. There is acute secumonstances that defy the laws of science, which is commonly called paranormal and supernatural. Though scientists tend to have a problem with adapting these to their understanding I would say that not only that science obviously isnt the 'golden rule', but it is quite literaly a dogma type approach to understanding much like the dogma of religion in the past.