Is reality subjective or objective? is reality a mere perception?

Question

please elucidate. thanks.

Answer 1

Elements of "reality" are called existents. Some are existents of empirical existence; some are existence of intellectual existence, like Edison's light bulb was before he built it. The meanings behind these words are intellectual existents.

But all reality is objectively perceived, and the objects of perception are called "cognoscenti." Cognoscenti are objects of "cognition."

Therefore, perceptions are of reality; whereas your question makes it sound as if reality has to do with perceptions being primary.

The Primacy of Existence says existents of empirical existence exist without need of a consciousness to reify them (make them real.)

The (fallacy of) the Primacy of Consciousness states that a consciousness is necessary to reify existents; which means all existents would first be existents of your intellect, and only later be existence of empiricism.

Answer 2

...reality is all there is, you mention only three...

...live it all, enjoy dont get loss along the way...

...welcome...

Answer 3

Reality is only subjective if you're a solipsist.

Answer 4

All life experiences subjectively.  To say life is objective is a subjective statement.  What is called Radical Subjectivity is often referred to as Self/God Realization or enlightenment.

Answer 5

All human perception is subjective, as are all our abstract concepts like "reality" based on our perceptions.  Objectivity to me is a presumptuous vanity, although I like to claim I am objective.

Answer 6

1.Reality is the quality or state of being real. So reality is objective by definition, but it's us who perceive it subjectively.

2. Our perception of reality comes directly from the information we receive from our 5 senses -eyes(retina), ears (ear drums), touch (never endings), noise, and taste.

3. When some unknown force makes contact with one of our senses, it repels the force away, preventing it from actually entering us. And what we actually get is only  the information that was produced from the effect of the force up against our senses. But never the force by itself.

4 The brain takes all the data from these interactions and form our perception of reality based on the input it receives from the effects. Our perception is very limited, because we only perceive the effects of something making contact with our senses. And if one of our senses were to stop working, then our perception of reality would be limited even further.

4. To makes matters more subjective, we then label the effect, based on how it made us feel. If the effect produced a sensation of pleasure, then its good. If it produced a sensation of pain, then its bad.

But what about the force itself, apart from us? What about us,  where are we apart from our senses? Who are we apart from our sense? And why is pleasure our point of interest?

To help answer these questions and more, I've attached a link to a short (9min) flash video that explains the nature of our true "objective" reality, and how our 5 senses are not able of perceiving it. If we want to perceive reality for what it is, then we will need to develop a new sense that will be able to perceive it, just like we can't perceive radio waves without a receiver, so shall we need a higher sense to perceive a higher reality. And it also suggest a method for how to do that as well.

http://perceivingreality.com/

Cheers!!!

Answer 7

Objective, with empirical evidence although everything must be falsifiable in science. If reality was subjective by that standard I could say that a triangle has two sides and be 100% justified believing that.

Answer 8

Reality is not a mere perception; that said, reality is a hard nut to crack.  At the quantum level, subjective and objective get real foggy.  What follows is pretty recent stuff, go to the url but be prepared its eight pages long--but it's a great lesson in the history of science at the quantum level. You will appreciate the gravity of this question if you read it, if you don't want to spend the time here's a brief summary of the results:

http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2008/06...

"Zeilinger's group, which has tested decoherence, does not believe there is a fundamental limit on the size of an object to observe superposition. Superpositions should exist even for objects we see, similar to the infamous example of Schrödinger's cat. In fact, Gröblacher now spends his nights testing larger-scale quantum mechanics in which a small mirror is humanely substituted for a cat...

Late last year Brukner and Kofler showed that it does not matter how many particles are around, or how large an object is, quantum mechanics always holds true. The reason we see our world as we do is because of what we use to observe it. The human body is a just barely adequate measuring device. Quantum mechanics does not always wash itself out, but to observe its effects for larger and larger objects we would need more and more accurate measurement devices. We just do not have the sensitivity to observe the quantum effects around us. In essence we do create the classical world we perceive, and as Brukner said, "There could be other classical worlds completely

different from ours."'