Philosophy 101

PHILOSOPHY 101

Chapter 2

REALITY - 1

What is and what isn't?  It seems self evident.  What is true is, what  is false isn't; what we can perceive is, what we can't isn't; either the king is wearing clothes or he is not wearing clothes.  Which of these couplets do you believe?  Most of you probably believe at least one, but probably none of you believe all.  I see the main problem as definitions, language.  When there are no words to describe our explanation it is, at least, very difficult to give or understand an explanation.  What I propose to do, if possible, is to derive a workable, usable, true, acceptable definition of REALITY.
What is reality?:
Synonyms: What is; Being;  All that is not;  Truth;  Mind(for some);  Matter(for others);  Everything.

It's pretty obvious that there's more than a single thing in reality.  But it also seems that reality - itself - must also be unity.  'Absolute unity composed of infinite diversity'.
Some basic dualities:
Mind/matter
Prajna/maya
Religion/secularity
Philosophy/science
Infinite/finite
Physical/spiritual
Body/soul
You can come up with many more.  How do we explain the fact that duality does exist while, at the same time, reality is a unity?  I think we need a good definition/description.  One agreed upon by both scientists and philosophers.

It 's a strange argument when some say that there is only mind and others say only matter.  It's pretty obvious that there are both.  Both are real.  Then there is the argument that they are real in 'different ways'.  OK, what does that mean?  Mind is just a manifestation of matter - energy, particles - OK.  Agreed - manifestations are real - what exactly is a manifestation - what is a decent definition of mind according to a materialist?  Maybe what is worse is the philosopher who says that only mind exists.  Matter is an illusion - matter is a manifestation of mind.  How can we talk about reality as a whole if we dont know what's real?  Maybe we can say an illusion is real but not true? Doesnt work for me.  True but not real?  Doesnt work for me.  I believe in science.  I believe in physics.  They are very real to me.  Of course I know my mind is real - I have real thoughts and ideas.  To me, by definition, everything is part of reality. Every 'thing'. Ah, definitions.  Just noticed - change one letter in 'thing' and you have 'think'.  Dont give up!

Every 'thing' is related to all other 'things'.  If you look anywhere and everywhere that's what you see.  Particles related to atoms, to molecules, to objects.  Words, to ideas, to concepts, to theories, to achievements.  Mind to definitions.  Cause to effect.  Effect to cause.  Affect to effect.  Everything is relative to everything else.  Infinity.  Big problem - to 'Really' see 'Reality' you must understand paradox and infinity.  And you have to look at everything at the same time.  All knowledge, all relationships, every 'thing', including paradox and infinity must be held in the mind at the same time in order to fully understand reality.  Let's try to do that!  Don't give up!  We are going to sit down together and decide what "REALITY" is. Now we can't start with any preconceived ideas, or I should say we must accept all preconceived ideas.  Mind is a big box.  Put everything that's 'real' in the box.  Anything and everything that can be conceived by anyone in any way to be real goes into the box.  OK?

Communication - 1

I've spoken of aphasia.  It's a fascinating subject to me, I enjoy the texture of the word, (Yes words have texture, the feeling in the text), aphasia.  I have considered myself to have expressive aphasia for a long time, but now that I think about it I also have receptive aphasia and to my mind, in my mind, they are beginning to cancel each other out.  Have you ever read a book in translation?  Have you ever then read the same book in the original language?  Or in a different translation?  I wonder what a book would be like that was translated from one language to another and then another........and then back into the original language?  Some languages have words for things that other languages don't have.  I would like to see that - would the beginning, and the final book be identical?  Similar?  Would you see a gradual evolution from one to the next?  If enough translations were made would you see an exact return to the original?  I dont know.

That reminds me - I should write about how most books I read are biographies.  I mean my own biography.  It's amazing how much so many different writers know about me.  Maybe translations would portray my different lives - or the evolution of my lives.  I would enjoy that.  (See "The Evolution of the Self, Through the Perusal of Great Literature").  What I'm getting at is receptive aphasia.  Whenever I communicate with anyone, in any way, (you may know more ways of communicating than I do), I can never be sure that the information which I, the communicee, am processing in my mind is really the same information that the communicator is spewing out!  And then I wonder why, when I become the communicator, and 'the other' becomes the comunicee, I am surprised that 'the other' doesnt understand me.  No I don't have aphasia - you do.  Definitions! Synonyms - no such thing!  Antonyms - no such thing!  Just minutely slight diffences in definitions.  Minutely slight differences in all definitions of all the words that define the original word.  Accumulated small differences in definitions can change antonyms to synonyms - thesauruses to dictionaries - my mind and your understanding to a muddle - communication to misunderstandings.  Even if we could communicate by telepathy I would still be at a loss.  I would hate to base my understanding of you on the theory that I was interpreting your thoughts, (that my brain works the same as yours), in the same way that your mind interprets them.  When you tell me that my language, my ideas, my arguments are merely semantics, a manipulation of words, illogical - - I totally agree.  What would you have me use other than words?  I wish I had something else.....OMG I sooooo wish I did!!  Physics and mathematics? - - I'm not smart enough for mathematics - - equations always seem so logical - - too logical.  I guess physicists always know what other pysicists are equating - no confusion - chuckle.

Never believe what you hear.  Even if you think you actually understand what you heard!  You can never KNOW anything!  According to my definitions.

OMG!!  What a coincidence - I am just now listening to the radio - someone is talking about a book they wrote about Plato.  I misunderstood and thought they said Play Dough - everything they said made perfect sense!

Through With Chapter Two