Mystery-anything that's not a fact
How do we find fact, or conclude that something is fact? Why, through our five senses: hearing, seeing, smelling, tasting, and touching. To quote Mr. Humphrey exactly, he said"Do you see the mystery hiding in the world?" so, technically, if we can see it, then it isn't a mystery, it's a fact. I don't really hear anything from the other side, mostly I make up stuff in my head, and I prove to myself that it's just in my head. I don't think that anything is hidden, it's really all just in our head. You can read the same book multiple times, and you'll pull out different things every time you read it, because of your state of mind.
About the video. I think that it's really sad that no one noticed him. If it was, oh say, Justin Bieber, or Lady Gaga etc. anyone would know who it was, and there would be an instant crowd. Humans are naturally a visually oriented people. If his picture was being broadcasted throughout the tv, people would reckognize him, and thus it would have been a pointless experiment. But since we just have stupid pop singers, and dumb people who are having affairs that no one cares about(*coughcough* Tiger Woods..) We have to actually make an effort to find out who these amazing people are, and we don't because we're FAT, LAZY people. It's ridiculous! But I don't want to get into that conversation. There are hidden things, and the people who take the time to look at it will be so much better!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I can't TELL you how much I disagree with this statement: "If we can SEE it, then it isn't a mystery, it's a fact."
ReplyDeleteHere's something I see that is a mystery to me: the love, the GENUINE love, between people that are in abusive relationships. Because sometimes they really love each other, both the abuser and the abused. That makes no sense, at all. You can say it is a fact, since it apparently exists and we can observe it, but that doesn't make it any less mysterious. The same for natural processes and scientific truths that we don't really understand, like gravity. Or dark matter. Or chaos theory.
I would also question the idea that observation is proof. I think plenty of people see things that aren't really there, and, as the video shows, even more people DON'T see things that ARE there.
I'm not a particular fan of it either, but it makes for some good arguements.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if I would neccesarily call it a mystery. I would hint more at human nature. If only everything were more cut and dry! Not justifying an abusers actions, but isn't there a hint of love in the abuse? They do it because they get so angry, that they can't make you do something, or that they can't control you, and they really want to help you in a way. And I think that the abuser can tell themselves that. Not saying that it's right in anyway, but if I were to have agression at anyone, it would probably be out of love. I've often hit walls (instead of humans) because I love them so much that I can't do anything for them, or they don't listen to me, etc.
As for scientific theories, and stuff, I think that science gets so far from the basis of what they're trying to prove, and so far into what others will think, and feel, and be affected by it, that everything gets so darn complicated, when really the most simple thing can explain the most difficult phenomenom.
Well, to the person that views it, it is fact. It may not be to anyone else, and it may not be an established fact, but to that persons brain, it is as there as you or I, and I think that's a fact.
But that's just what I think.
But if you love the walls, Tiffany, why do you hit them? Hee hee!
ReplyDeleteWatch those unclear pronoun antecedents. Here endeth the grammar lesson.
I agree that what a single person thinks to be true is a fact for that person, but the issue has to be about objective reality. If we think there is a world outside our senses, if we're not simply figments of a madman's imagination or all living in the Matrix, then what matters in terms of debate and discussion is not simply what is in one's head, but how close what is in one's head comes to what is outside it. When the facts in your head match the outside, then it can be considered clearly, definitively, reasonably, a fact, and we can all agree on it because we can all make the same correlation between outside and inside our heads. If it only exists in your head, it can't really be seen as a fact for the purposes of discussion; it can only remain a fact so long as it remains inside your head, which makes it pretty much worthless, as important and valuable as it may be to the person who keeps it inside.
The more fun idea is that someone's individual, unprovable, inside-head fact may actually connect with a hidden truth that the rest of us just can't see. That's where prophets and madmen come from.
How do you know that the walls aren't just in your head....?
ReplyDeleteYes, accepted fact, and assumed fact, and personal fact. If there were a world outside of ours, how are we supposed to know? To the people who are outside the world, it's a fact, but to the few people who accepted that fact in their head in our realm, what is it to them? Yes, in their realm of fact, it's completely mental, but to a higher realm, it's fact. It's a big circle! How many people does it take to accept something to make it a fact? To the Catholics in the Vatican City, they all agree that God is a fact, but as a world, God is not accepted as a fact. Likewise, with your brain. Have you ever seen, or felt, or touched or tasted your own brain? Does that mean that you, personally don't have a brain? Other people do, but do you personally?
Of course. Because what fun would the world be if we didn't have them?
No, we can't know if there's a world outside our own head. "I think, therefore I am;" that's the only assurance we can have, according to Descartes. Everything else could be illusion.
ReplyDeleteBut here's the way I look at it. If we assume that all of this is only happening in your head -- which, of course, may not be what you imagine as a head at all; it's entirely possible that you are a computer's aritifical intelligence program stuck in a loop, or frozen over a glitch (Any second now you're going to get CTRL-ALT-DELETEd and all of this will vanish), or a random wisp of coherent plasma in a nebula somewhere that only THINKS it can perceive a world around it -- and there is no external reality, then I am only a figment of your imagination. But the fun part is, since I am making sense, I'm the figment you should listen to. Because it is more useful to think of what we observe as an independent objective reality, and use it as a touchstone for conversations between the figments of your imagination; even if the end result is just as imaginary as everything else that happens inside your nebulous plasma-brain, still we can accomplish more if we pretend there is something worth talking about. If nothing else it keeps our conversations from going around and around this circle until we both vomit and pass out.
Do a certain number of people agreeing that something is true make it so? Not in objective terms, no; for the things that don't have a correlation in the objective world outside us (Like moral issues, such as: is rape a worse crime than murder? There's no scientific test to determine it, it is only set by our opinions), then the majority should rule with minority objections allowed. But if we're talking about things that correspond to our objective external reality (Which, again, may be subjective and internal but thinking that doesn't do us any good other than being kinda fun, so we might as well pretend there really is a universe outside your skull/plasma stream) then one person can be right even if the rest of the world doesn't believe him. Like Galileo.
Oh, and by the way: I may not have a brain, but I do have a mind. Because I think. Therefore I am.
"The truth is more important than the facts" -Frank Lloyd Wright
ReplyDeleteTrue, no? If everything is an illusion, then there is no such thing as fact or mystery, so either way, the subject is moot. If this is all taking place inside my head, then wouldn't both of our points make sense, seeing as they're from my head, and I thought them up? And if I did happen to think both of these arguements up, then I have severely underestimated myself.
What if Galileo is wrong? Well, I mean he's still right, until he's been proven wrong, so what if he's proved wrong? Then is what we believe now just common acceptance? Just thinking out loud here, but isn't that the same thing?
Not saying that you don't have a brain, but what's the difference between a brain and a mind?