YES!
NO!
Let me modify your statement to reflect my actual view:
There MAY BE an objective reality but none of us can experience it directly. We all experience it via our senses.
My vision MAY BE closer to that objective reality than yours or yours MAY BE closer than mine. They cannot be be on opposite sides of the coin and both land heads up. One of us is saying "heads" and the other "tails". The coin flips. It does not land on both. One of us is closer to the truth - whatever that may turn out to be.
For instance, if you believe (without evidence) that people are capable of "channeling" their future/alien selves, then your belief about this subject will ALTER the way you perceive the ostensibly objective world. If I withhold belief until I see the evidence, my simulacrum is likely to be closer to objective reality than a person who believes things WITHOUT evidence.
The reason for this is that my simulacrum will only consist of beliefs that I was able to justify with evidence, while your simulacrum will include beliefs that did not require evidence and thus may or may not reflect the "objective" world that seems to exist out there.
Again, if you wish to call that objective world into question, you are welcome to do so. I believe it exists "conditionally" (but I do not believe absolutely) based on my continued experience of the external world. When I am thirsty, I walk to the fridge and get a frosty beverage. The fridge is always in the same place and the beverages eventually run out. It's been like that as long as I can remember. So I "believe" that beverages in the fridge will generally be cold if the fridge is working and they've been in there long enough.
If you ask "Are you sure your beverages in the fridge are cold?" then I suddenly have a reason to doubt and I reply that I am not sure at all, but that I put them in there 4 days ago, so to the best of my knowledge, they will be cold. Maybe you know that the fridge is broken and you're letting me know passive-aggressively. When I discover the beverages are not cold, I will investigate further.
How can we know whether our sense data is lying to us? What will we use to test this if not our senses?
If our senses are lying to us, how will we perceive that we are being lied to? Should we use our senses?
I've answered this question over and over again, and you keep asking it.
Do you understand yet?
I say the sun is going to rise from the east in the morning and set in the west the same evening. Let's go outside and see what happens.
You say bashar is an alien/future self. If he is, he should be able to access alien/future knowledge. That he has yet to do so is more suggestive (not ABSOLUTE PROOF) that he does not have this access.
I never made the claim that objective reality exists. But if it doesn't, who do you suppose you are having a conversation with?
How many more times will I have to say that the only way I can measure "objective reality" is with my senses and my consciousness? Hopefully zero.
I already used the brain in the box hypothesis. If I am a brain in a box with sense data being fed into the brain via a computer, I can only experience whatever the computer is showing me. If I am in the Matrix, I cannot "wake up" until Morpheus shows up and provides me with the pill.
In the meantime, I can test the data being presented by my senses and accept only the things that return repeatable results.
For example - I don't believe that Bashar is an alien. You could get me to believe it by providing some evidence that he is.
I do believe the sun will rise tomorrow. It will rise from the east, travel across the sky and set in the west tomorrow evening.
So I feel confident in speculating that the sun will rise tomorrow. I do not feel confident in speculating that Bashar is a visitor from the future or an alien. See?
Even if the sun rises tomorrow, I will not be ABSOLUTELY SURE that the sun OBJECTIVELY EXISTS. All of my data about the sun comes to me through my senses and my senses might be lying to me.
Last edited:
