wildcat
New member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,622
- MBTI Type
- INTP
Two people's brains do not construct things in the same way.hehe, poor Poe.
When I say the moon, I talk of the thing I call the moon. There is no way to know that two people's brains even construct things the same way. We've all learnt of an object in the sky and seen it, but to one human it might be made of cheese and to another it may be a piece of a planetary system they have also learn about or studied. So perceptual distance exists to start with.
When we learn of the moon we learn through measurement. We see an object in the sky with our eyes that gets tagged as 'moon'. When we see the object again, we think 'moon'. When we discuss the object, we call it 'moon'. In that sense 'moon' exists in our perception. The originally referenced object does not. The fact is the object we have referenced never exists in our perception, just a shadow of it. The object does exist though, we can just never completely capture it.
People like to be ego-centric. Hence the idea that there is nothing real outside our perception. But maybe there is nothing truly real within our perception and the non-existence lies with us, not the objects we reference. If we don't look at the moon, it may not exist to us. But its existence is not dependent on us. The line should be we can't know it exists, not that it doesn't exist. There is a big difference. It was there before us. It might well be there after us. The conclusion should be that we are incomplete measuring systems and our perception is limited.
The alternative is infinite.
Space is time altered.
Time is not space altered.
Koestler said the ghost is in the machine.
The machine is in the ghost.
What is the first number of a sequence?
The first number is not of a sequence?
Evidently one is the second number.
Otherwise it would not be one.