Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
- 3017Metaphysician
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am
Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
Feel free to critique the video. I was inspired by some other threads about the question of what was happening before the Big Bang, and wanted to post another wonderfully lucid video that spoke to me. As philosopher's, generally speaking, there are some exciting revelations in Metaphysics since our knowledge of antiquity, which are worth noting here:
― Albert Einstein
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
- 3017Metaphysician
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
Steve!Steve3007 wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 12:25 pm I haven't watched the video yet (although it looks interesting so I'll take a look later). But on the question of what came before the Big Bang: My understanding of the theory is that the beginning of the Big Bang (I say "the beginning of..." because it's still happening) is thought to involve the beginning of spacetime. If this were true, then the question of what came before it would be meaningless. Leaving aside the abstract concept of spacetime, and concentrating on what seems to be ontologically real: If time is an abstraction of the ontologically real phenomenon of changes happening, then the beginning of the BB would be the first change. To talk of what was happening before the first change would be self-contradictory, because it would amount to talking about the changes that were happening before the first change.
Because the BB is just a theory (like Darwinism) there are no absolutes in this context (unless you wish to argue about the laws explaining the initial conditions prior to same, which would make them transcendent laws), then one would have to explain either an unending tower of turtles, or one mathematical super-turtle. I could be wrong, but my interpretation of your explanation is infinite regress (unending tower of causational turtles).And as such, the question is far from meaningless, unless of course those concepts of causation are in-themselves meaningless for self-aware conscious beings!
Of course, to this end, things being self-contradictory is nothing new under the sun. If you recall, you and I briefly touched on self-contradiction/paradox as found in human reasoning (tautologies) and nature (time). But most importantly, consciousness itself (i.e., breaks rules of LEM/bivalence) is still beyond logic/transcends human reasoning.
Anyway, check out the video....interesting thoughts about 'biological existence' and 'cosmic information'.
― Albert Einstein
-
- Posts: 638
- Joined: April 4th, 2015, 7:25 pm
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
Again the same mistake about the word 'theory' in science, even after being informed of it previously. A 'theory' is science is what is firm. A 'hypothesis' in science is what hasn't been shown to be so yet.3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 1:40 pm Because the BB is just a theory (like Darwinism)
- 3017Metaphysician
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
PU!PoeticUniverse wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 3:40 pmAgain the same mistake about the word 'theory' in science, even after being informed of it previously. A 'theory' is science is what is firm. A 'hypothesis' in science is what hasn't been shown to be so yet.3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 1:40 pm Because the BB is just a theory (like Darwinism)
Theories are not absolute truth, are they? Hint: think conscious existence.
Alternatively, consider that which is absolute truth...
― Albert Einstein
-
- Posts: 638
- Joined: April 4th, 2015, 7:25 pm
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
You would have to undo the Big Bang and evolution Firm Theories…
Absolute Truth is The Eternal Existence as Necessity. No Magic is required. It is a must with no option not to be, and that is its trait.
- mystery
- Posts: 380
- Joined: May 14th, 2021, 5:41 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Mike Tyson
- Location: earth
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
yes, there is more to it than we know. we suffer from the disease of certainty in what we believe. the staggering number of truths that have been discovered as wrong or false in only a short time of humans. consider an infinite timeline and how many truths will be a future joke of our past ignorance.3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 12:10 pm Hello Philosophers!
Feel free to critique the video. I was inspired by some other threads about the question of what was happening before the Big Bang, and wanted to post another wonderfully lucid video that spoke to me. As philosopher's, generally speaking, there are some exciting revelations in Metaphysics since our knowledge of antiquity, which are worth noting here:
It is why children learn so fast, they don't have so much certainty and are open to learning.
If I have a different view after the vid, I'll update.
-
- Posts: 762
- Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
There are publically observable phenomena which can be categorized as 'materiality' and are accessible for the five senses of all humans with fuctioning senses and there are exclusively privately observable phenomena like emotions, feeelings, volition etc. which can be categorized as 'mentality' and are not accessible for the five senses - people usually agree to share this mentality although they cannot directly observe each others mentality.Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
Any assertion of phenomena beyond these two categories is necessarily merely a speculative fabrication.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
Dude, if you're going to refer to a 26 minute long video, you should provide a synopsis of your take on it's strengths and weaknesses.3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 12:10 pm Hello Philosophers!
Feel free to critique the video. I was inspired by some other threads about the question of what was happening before the Big Bang, and wanted to post another wonderfully lucid video that spoke to me. As philosopher's, generally speaking, there are some exciting revelations in Metaphysics since our knowledge of antiquity, which are worth noting here:
- chewybrian
- Posts: 1594
- Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
- Location: Florida man
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
I am having experiences, and therefore I exist as an experiencer. My experiences seem to be of a certain nature. That's about it.3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 5:19 pm Alternatively, consider that which is absolute truth...
Since I am finite and lack the complete information necessary to be truly objective, the true nature of my experiences might be slightly or drastically different from what I think I perceive.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
I agree. However have you considered there is nothing beyond what you and uncountable numbers of others think they perceive? Kant's thing in itself serves no useful or ethical purpose.chewybrian wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2021, 4:39 amI am having experiences, and therefore I exist as an experiencer. My experiences seem to be of a certain nature. That's about it.3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 5:19 pm Alternatively, consider that which is absolute truth...
Since I am finite and lack the complete information necessary to be truly objective, the true nature of my experiences might be slightly or drastically different from what I think I perceive.
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
A theory is a set of descriptions and predictions based on what appears to be the case. All theories are subject to potential modification or replacement in the light of new evidence (new things that appear to be the case). If that's what you mean by "there are no absolutes in this context" then I agree. There are no absolutes in pretty much any context. As I said, the BB theory, as I understand it, proposes that both time and space came into existence at some point. If that theory is correct then there are, by definition, no conditions prior to it. The whole concept of "prior to it" would be self-contradictory. If we think it isn't correct I guess we'd have to state the new evidence that leads us to think that and say what we propose to replace it with.3017Metaphysician wrote:Because the BB is just a theory (like Darwinism) there are no absolutes in this context (unless you wish to argue about the laws explaining the initial conditions prior to same, which would make them transcendent laws), then one would have to explain either an unending tower of turtles, or one mathematical super-turtle.
No, that's not what I said. I just pointed out that if the BB theory, as I understand it, is correct, then the question of what came before the BB is meaningless or self-contradictory. That's because it amounts to asking what change happened before the first change. Do you see what I mean by that? Please say so if you don't.I could be wrong, but my interpretation of your explanation is infinite regress (unending tower of causational turtles).And as such, the question is far from meaningless, unless of course those concepts of causation are in-themselves meaningless for self-aware conscious beings!
Well, on that subject, in the "How many illusions of Time are possible?" you said this:Of course, to this end, things being self-contradictory is nothing new under the sun. If you recall, you and I briefly touched on self-contradiction/paradox as found in human reasoning (tautologies) and nature (time).
I responded with this:3017Metaphysician wrote:With respect to tautologies,(like time), aren't they paradoxical too?
You didn't respond to that post in that topic, but you could respond to it here if you like. (Note: links to relevant posts are provided in the words "this" above. Whenever I provide a link like that you can click on it to go to the relevant post.)Steve3007 wrote:As I've said a tautology is a statement that is true by definition. I disagree that time is a statement that is true by definition.
As I said, my understanding of tautology is that it is a statement that is true by definition; true due to its logical structure, and my understanding of time is that it is an abstraction from the real phenomenon of change. I don't understand why you appear to refer (both here and in the other topic) to both of those things as paradoxes. A paradox is a kind of statement, so I'm especially puzzled as to why you would refer to time as a paradox. That appears, on the face of it, to be a category error.
I think we should park the question of consciousness for now as it's a whole new subject that probably requires a separate treatment to do it justice. (There have been a lot of topics about it.)But most importantly, consciousness itself (i.e., breaks rules of LEM/bivalence) is still beyond logic/transcends human reasoning.
I will do that.Anyway, check out the video....interesting thoughts about 'biological existence' and 'cosmic information'.
- chewybrian
- Posts: 1594
- Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
- Location: Florida man
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
I would toss out the idea that it promotes humility, which is a good thing. It prompts us to be less judgmental, perhaps not to fall into traps like the illusion of objectivity or the fundamental attribution error. If nothing else, it seems true enough. (I don't mean that there is nothing beyond what I think I perceive; I mean that I perceive only appearances, and not the actual things as they really are).Belindi wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2021, 5:50 amI agree. However have you considered there is nothing beyond what you and uncountable numbers of others think they perceive? Kant's thing in itself serves no useful or ethical purpose.chewybrian wrote: ↑October 2nd, 2021, 4:39 amI am having experiences, and therefore I exist as an experiencer. My experiences seem to be of a certain nature. That's about it.3017Metaphysician wrote: ↑October 1st, 2021, 5:19 pm Alternatively, consider that which is absolute truth...
Since I am finite and lack the complete information necessary to be truly objective, the true nature of my experiences might be slightly or drastically different from what I think I perceive.
I'm not sure many would see the value in the concept, but I think it is there. If you are suffering with all sorts of mental health issues, like anxiety or anger, for example, then it could be vital to making progress:
"Work, therefore to be able to say to every harsh appearance, "You are but an appearance, and not absolutely the thing you appear to be." And then examine it by those rules which you have, and first, and chiefly, by this: whether it concerns the things which are in our own control, or those which are not; and, if it concerns anything not in our control, be prepared to say that it is nothing to you.", Epictetus, "The Enchiridion"
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
As usual with these sorts of videos, it's interesting but it covers a lot of issues, each one very briefly. There would a heck of a lot to unpack if each issue raised was going to be discussed properly.
1 minute in:
"Does physical reality go beyond what we know today? What's beyond physics?"
I guess we could quibble with that on the basis that physical reality, by definition, can't go beyond physics. It can only go beyond current physics. It would always be possible, in principle, to update physics to account for whatever new stuff is found out about physical reality.
4 minutes:
"The physics of biological systems may be different from the physics of tables."
True. It could be.
5 minutes:
"It has to stop someplace?"
"Why?"
This is the "turtles all the way down" idea that you've (3017Metaphysician) alluded to in many of your posts. It's the classic question of whether we will ever come to a point where we've discovered everything about how the universe works. I've always thought that, by the nature of scientific enquiry, we never will.
7 minutes:
"Around 1900 people talked about the end of physics."
He then discusses the current differences between Relativity and Quantum Theory.
9 minutes:
"The pre-Big Bang era."
The current interviewee mentions theories about this. I don't know enough about this stuff to be able to comment on those theories but, as I've said, it seems to me that if space and time were supposed to have started to exist, in some sense, with the BB, then, by definition, there can't be a pre-BB era. So I presume any theories that posit that must not be saying that space and time came into existence at the BB.
11 minutes:
"I seek to break the bounds of known physical laws."
(The Pitt Rivers museum. I've been there (used to live in Oxford). Strongly recommend it. Very quirky.)
12 minutes:
"Evolution depends on creativity and repetition."
13 minutes:
"Memories of crystals around the world."
"Morphic resonance."
Mmmmm.
14 minutes:
"Teach a rat a new trick in Oxford and rats all over the world will be able to do the new trick better."
Mmmmm. Source?
Interviewer/presenter: "That Rupert is wrong does not prevent me from enjoying his ideas."
Fair enough.
17 minutes:
The hologram idea is briefly discussed. (It's been discussed here previously too.)
19 minutes:
"A view of physical law that it is not imposed externally but develop internally."
"An essentially theological view."
The guy being interviewed here proposes abandoning what he describes as "externally imposed" physical law.
20 minutes:
Consciousness is discussed.
21 minutes:
"The role of consciousness in collapsing the wavefunction."
So now the conversation is about the so-called "observer-created reality" of some interpretations of QM. An interesting subject in its own right. It has been the subject of several past topics here.
22 minutes:
Physicalism versus Naturalism is briefly discussed.
The guy now being interviewed proposes expanding physicalism by adding consciousness as a real existent in itself.
24 minutes:
The presenter summarizes and ends with more brief discussion of consciousness.
"Three possibilities to consider:
1. Consciousness is purely physical.
2. Consciousness requires profoundly new physical laws or 'stuff'.
3. Consciousness cannot be entirely explained within the physical world, but must include non-physical or spiritual elements."
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Is there more to reality than today's physical world?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023