Isn't everything true and untrue since reality is based on perception?

Question

Isn't everything true and untrue since reality is based on perception?

Answer 1

There is only one reality which we all live in. You can choose not to see it and live by your dreams and wishes but ignoring reality will not make it different.

Answer 2

A simple answer, Yes in some sense (see ontological dependence and sense-data) and No, in another sense:

Truth is a property of propositions. Proposition are either true or false - by definition - and they are often expressed in subject-predicate like sentences, e.g. 'The dog ran home' or 'All bachelors are unnmarried'. Propositions are what is congnitively-significant when we grasp something factual. So, If I learned that 2+2=4, I would thereby be 'grasping' the proposition that '2+2=4'. Propositions are mental - they are not external whatsoever, but, again, since proposition say of something how it is, and they are either true or false, and they are what is cognitively significant when we grasp facts, or nonfacts, that means, when we grasp propositions, either we grasp what is true, or what is false, but nothing can have the property of both 'being true and false simultaneously'.

Right now, I am perceiving that there is a computer in front of me, suppose. IF I am perceiving that a computer is in front of me, either there really is a computer in front of me that I am perceiving, or there is not.

Look, formal contradictions are impossible: Don't believe me, try to understand this, '2+2 equals 4 and 2+2 does not equal 4'. Or this, 'You exist right now and you do not exist right now'. Or this, 'You understand this statement and you don't understand this statement'. Or this  (A) ' This sentence cannot be understood in English'. IF you undertand (A) then you don't understand (A)!

I hope you see the point here...'Reality' isn't based on anything, reality is a certain way, irrespective of our perceiving of it, believing of it, et cetera. You might be getting confused because of 'relational properties' which DEPEND for their existence on 'being perceived'. An example of this is 'redness' or 'the feeling of pain'. Those 'things' - the 'redness' and 'feeling-of-pain' would not exist unless perceivers exist. Sadly, though, not everything is ontologically dependent like that.

Please visit the sources, they will help you with your question better than anyone here, including myself, with the answer to it!

Answer 3

i'd call it unknowable and our best guess.

Answer 4

Perception is "based" on reality. How did you get it backwards? Without reality "out there", outside of your sensory abilities, you would have nothing to be conscious of, nothing to "base" your ideas of the world.

What you seem to be calling "perception" is not; it is "conception." It is how you "conceive" the world that is based on your perceptions. "A concept is a mental integration of two or more units [of perceptions] which are isolated by a process of abstraction and united by a specific definition." [Rand]

But your perceptions are based on reality.

Answer 5

goodness goodness goodness reality is not based on perception at all.  Reality is the entire electromagnetic spectrum and has nothing to do with perception of it.   perception of it is, well, what about it that we perceive!  Our perceptions of it are in fact a part of reality.  Reality does not depend on perception any more than cat food depends on what a cat thinks about it.

And that everything is true and untrue at the same time,  is absurd.  Nothing can simultaneously be the case and not the case.  Is my car blue and not blue at the same time?  Is my cat a cat and not a cat at the same time?  Is your question a question and not a question at the same time?  If everything were true and not true at the same time, we could not think rationally or effectively meaningfully, but we in fact do those things.  Truth applies only to statements that we call propositions, and depends solely upon whether a given proposition corresponds with reality.  It does not depend upon our perception of reality or upon our perception of what corresponds with reality.  again, you can see that what your pet might think about its food has no affect upon the truth of statements regarding the nature of the food.

Answer 6

There are no truths just what we believe to be truth....so yes your statement would be correct....or maybe what's true for one person is based on what they believe.

For example for a Christan, God exists because they believe he exists

But for an atheist God doesn't exist because he believes him to not exist.

Answer 7

There must have been thousands of books written on that very subject. No one knows the answer to that question. Your idea is not fact, its speculation. You say reality is based on perception but how could you possibly know that? The answer is you don't know that. You perceive that.

Answer 8

i think you'll do better by taking your best guess and trying to make things work to your advantage.

Answer 9

Depends what you believe. Reality is NOT based on perceptions if you are a Materialist. In that case, reality is made of matter that exists beyond our perceptions.

I am a materialist rather than an idealist (one who believes perceptions create reality), so i disagree with you, but it would take me way too much time to explain to you both theories and why materialism is superior in my opinion. So, because I'm lazy, check out the wiki articles.

Answer 10

Reality always asserts itself.  We may require the faculties of perception to get feedback from Reality, but Reality doesn't depend on our faculties of perception to provide that very feedback.

1) If you flew this very hour to the room, I am now typing from.... I could almost gurantee that no matter how many times you attempted to run through the south-wall you would meet some if not a lot of resistance.

2) Based on this perception I have, I would venture to say that everytime you attempted to run through the south-wall you would meet resistance.  You could run experiment after experiment... meditate as long as you wanted... prayed..etc...there are just some facets of Reality that remain true.... irregardless of wether we perceive them as true or not...

3) Now if you leveraged principle against principle...and took a backhoe(resistance) to the south-wall of this room, then true you would adventually be able to 'run through' the south wall without as much resisistance as you faced in the beginning; but then you must ask is a 'south-wall' the same as a 'damaged-south-wall'...

4) The point being that Reality in and of itself, will remain consistent enough to provide reliable-feedback that can be used to alter our situation(the backhoe, etc..); the problem comes from when we attempt to use our perceptions to define Reality, and we falsely-perceive what Reality is trying to show us.  If we feel we can change Reality, by choosing to perceive-differently, realize it is us that changed, not Reality...

5) In order to prove me wrong, simply run through my south-wall without any resistance....then I might buy the premiss that everything(reality) is equally true and untrue at the same time... as of now I got my money on Reality saying and dictating that somethings will remain True, and other things  remain Untrue(running through a solid-wall without any resistance), and if it appears otherwise it is us that falsely-perceives not Reality...