Plato's cave anybody.
-
Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
- Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral
Is objective truth theoretical or actual?
- Thread starter celestialregale
- Start date
dragoncat16
Active Member
Whether there is an absolute answer to a question depends on the question. Even the wording can matter, and certainly the way the answer is reached as well.
Regarding wave/particle duality, everything is both a particle and a wave at the same time (position being the particle property, and momentum being the wave property). It is only when we seek to measure either position or momentum that we confine the entity in question to being either a wave or a particle. It is the same as Schroedinger's cat. Until you open the box (or find some other way to measure the state of the cat), the cat itself is both alive and dead, because the rest of the universe (except the cat itself, of course) hasn't yet been affected by that state. Of course, that is a bad example, and I'm pretty sure (and I sincerely hope) it was a thought experiment and not a real experiment, but people think it's cool to talk about Schroedinger's cat without really understanding what it means quantum mechanically so here we are.
An object is not really an object but millions or billions of separate particles. However, if you refer to the center of mass of the object, for example, that will move (in one direction at a time) according to the laws of Newtonian motion under most circumstances. Each fundamental particle will move in only one direction at a time. Here, fundamental means a particle that cannot be broken down into other smaller particles. It is not clear that we have identified the fundamental particles (quarks, leptons, glouons, etc.) or if science has yet to break it down even further. I personally believe that there is only one type of fundamental particle and it is the way these interact with each other that gives the appearance of the particles that we presently call fundamental particles, and also gives rise to the fundamental forces, which are ultimately, of course, just expressions of a single unified force. Complexity from simplicity. The simplicity (i.e. the identity and nature of the true fundamental particle) is the ultimate objective truth that we will possibly never discover.
Regarding wave/particle duality, everything is both a particle and a wave at the same time (position being the particle property, and momentum being the wave property). It is only when we seek to measure either position or momentum that we confine the entity in question to being either a wave or a particle. It is the same as Schroedinger's cat. Until you open the box (or find some other way to measure the state of the cat), the cat itself is both alive and dead, because the rest of the universe (except the cat itself, of course) hasn't yet been affected by that state. Of course, that is a bad example, and I'm pretty sure (and I sincerely hope) it was a thought experiment and not a real experiment, but people think it's cool to talk about Schroedinger's cat without really understanding what it means quantum mechanically so here we are.
An object is not really an object but millions or billions of separate particles. However, if you refer to the center of mass of the object, for example, that will move (in one direction at a time) according to the laws of Newtonian motion under most circumstances. Each fundamental particle will move in only one direction at a time. Here, fundamental means a particle that cannot be broken down into other smaller particles. It is not clear that we have identified the fundamental particles (quarks, leptons, glouons, etc.) or if science has yet to break it down even further. I personally believe that there is only one type of fundamental particle and it is the way these interact with each other that gives the appearance of the particles that we presently call fundamental particles, and also gives rise to the fundamental forces, which are ultimately, of course, just expressions of a single unified force. Complexity from simplicity. The simplicity (i.e. the identity and nature of the true fundamental particle) is the ultimate objective truth that we will possibly never discover.
Looks like you've just realised we're all god. The god particle
Science cannot be entirely split from philosophy. In science certain assumptions must be made that cannot be tested. The biggest assumption is that what we experience is real, not a facade. There is no way to test if what we experience day to day is reality or merely a dream. All of life hinges on the assumption that what our minds perceive is reality.
Ming of Mongo
Member
We all experience what it would be like without objective reality, in dreams. Objects appear and disappear. People become other people. You often move from place to place with no transition. Physical laws are just a suggestion.
You can't prove that waking life is based on an objective reality, but it sure acts like it, compared to a known internally created world. When left completely to our own internal resources, we are not consistent enough to create a world like our waking life.
You can't prove that waking life is based on an objective reality, but it sure acts like it, compared to a known internally created world. When left completely to our own internal resources, we are not consistent enough to create a world like our waking life.
I've long thought that in an infinite metaverse of infinite possibility, that all truth is local, hence relative and not absolutely objective. limited human consciousness renders all objectives local in the grand scheme of things.
GRRR... This is one of those videos that says (on my end) "Blocked in Country"... What is YouTube doing?
This is getting to be more and more (it seems)... I'm hoping there is some technological glitch as an explanation, because otherwise it seems a lot more like censorship. I will try and find another version of it.
I thought it was something to do with Dr. Dispenza... but couldn't remember for sure. He's a cool guy.
Ming of Mongo
Member
I find that when people say truth is relative, they usually aren't very clear on what the words "truth" and "relative" mean.
Truth means things exist or events happen, or they don't.
Relative means that properties can be different under different circumstances, as compared to a standard.
"The war of 1812 started in 1812." is either true or false. If truth is relative, what is it relative TO? Under what circumstances would the War of 1812 start in 1962? What would this difference be relative to? Is it true in January but false in August?
Your weight is relative to the planet you stand on. Your mass isn't. I don't see how truth fits into this kind of thing.
I could accept that it is possible for truth to be subjective, if I was the only person, and I dreamed up the whole universe. But for truth to be relative, it has to vary relative TO something.
Truth means things exist or events happen, or they don't.
Relative means that properties can be different under different circumstances, as compared to a standard.
"The war of 1812 started in 1812." is either true or false. If truth is relative, what is it relative TO? Under what circumstances would the War of 1812 start in 1962? What would this difference be relative to? Is it true in January but false in August?
Your weight is relative to the planet you stand on. Your mass isn't. I don't see how truth fits into this kind of thing.
I could accept that it is possible for truth to be subjective, if I was the only person, and I dreamed up the whole universe. But for truth to be relative, it has to vary relative TO something.
I know what they mean this thing somebody could say something is true but it's actually a lie so truth can be relative what you say is true isn't necessarily true to somebody else
And I can tell you The holy spirit must've told me that as I am usually blotto which means very very very exhausted to the point of almost being drunk
Depends on whether you agree the subatomic level exists
Sabrina
Gentle & brave earthling
An engineer, a scientist, a mathematician, and a philosopher are hiking through the hills of Scotland, when they see a lone black sheep in a field.
The engineer says, "What do you know, it looks like the sheep around here are black." The scientist looks at him skeptically and replies, "Well, at least some of them are." The mathematician considers this for a moment and replies, "Well, at least one of them is." Then the philosopher turns to them and says, "Well, at least on one side."
The engineer says, "What do you know, it looks like the sheep around here are black." The scientist looks at him skeptically and replies, "Well, at least some of them are." The mathematician considers this for a moment and replies, "Well, at least one of them is." Then the philosopher turns to them and says, "Well, at least on one side."
An engineer, a scientist, a mathematician, and a philosopher are hiking through the hills of Scotland, when they see a lone black sheep in a field.
The engineer says, "What do you know, it looks like the sheep around here are black." The scientist looks at him skeptically and replies, "Well, at least some of them are." The mathematician considers this for a moment and replies, "Well, at least one of them is." Then the philosopher turns to them and says, "Well, at least on one side."
I thought they were on a train...
Funny as soon as I read 'mathematician ' I knew it was the sheep one!
Does the one black sheep in a field of white sheep think it is white?
I would assume that it believes itself to be simply another sheep, unless the other sheep treat it differently.
Lets see... If the one black sheep was ASD and the rest of the herd non-ASD (white sheep)...
Yep, the little guy sticks out like a Rolls Royce parked at a Dollar Store... : )
New Threads
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
hello everyone besides my autism I have this in real life- Started by faeblitzbean
- Replies: 5
-
-
-
