Epistemology is a conundrum

For the love of the pursuit of knowledge

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Compassionist
Guru
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 770 times
Been thanked: 135 times

Epistemology is a conundrum

Post #1

Post by Compassionist »

How can we know what is real, and what is not real? Epistemology is a conundrum because there are lots of hypotheses that can't be tested e.g. Simulation Hypothesis (the perceived world is simulated), Illusion Hypothesis (our perceptions are illusions), Philosophical Zombie Hypothesis (beings that appear sentient are not actually sentient), Gods Hypothesis (Gods exist and are all-knowing and all-powerful), Karma Hypothesis (sentient beings are rewarded and punished according to their Karma), Reincarnation Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and reincarnate in different bodies), Resurrection Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and are resurrected after death), Heaven and Hell Hypothesis (Heaven and Hell exist and immortal souls go there depending on their beliefs and/or actions), Undetectable Beings Hypothesis (beings that can't be detected exist e.g. angels, demons, aliens, time-travellers, ghosts, fairies, leprechauns), etc. How can we know what is true and what is false? Please see https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog ... at-is-real
Last edited by Compassionist on Mon Jun 06, 2022 7:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sherlock Holmes

Re: Epistemology

Post #2

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Compassionist wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 4:20 pm How can we know what is real, and what is not real? Epistemology is a conundrum because there are lots of hypotheses that can't be tested e.g. Simulation Hypothesis (the perceived world is simulated), Illusion Hypothesis (our perceptions are illusions), Philosophical Zombie Hypothesis (beings that appear sentient are not actually sentient), Gods Hypothesis (Gods exist and are all-knowing and all-powerful), Karma Hypothesis (sentient beings are rewarded and punished according to their Karma), Reincarnation Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and reincarnate in different bodies), Resurrection Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and are resurrected after death), Heaven and Hell Hypothesis (Heaven and Hell exist and immortal souls go there depending on their beliefs and/or actions), Undetectable Beings Hypothesis (beings that can't be detected exist e.g. angels, demons, aliens, time-travellers, ghosts, fairies, leprechauns), etc. How can we know what is true and what is false?
These are fine questions!

Speaking of "simulations" this idea seems to have only emerged relatively recently as computers have become prevalent. I'm not sure I find the question meaningful (the simulation hypothesis) outside the limited context of computing though. We have self awareness and "simulating" that makes no sense to me. How can one perceive with a simulated perception for example.

I'm aware of movies like the Matrix (which I find unwatchable personally) have popularized this idea but I've never seen the core idea presented in any meaningful way, it seems to be nothing more than idle fantasizing.

The question "How can we know what is real, and what is not real" also leads down an abyss I think, unless we can define "real" and I don't know that we can, in physics for example we use many abstract ideas and these change over the years. I mean is spacetime "really" curved? who can say?

Compassionist
Guru
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 770 times
Been thanked: 135 times

Re: Epistemology

Post #3

Post by Compassionist »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 4:56 pm
Compassionist wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 4:20 pm How can we know what is real, and what is not real? Epistemology is a conundrum because there are lots of hypotheses that can't be tested e.g. Simulation Hypothesis (the perceived world is simulated), Illusion Hypothesis (our perceptions are illusions), Philosophical Zombie Hypothesis (beings that appear sentient are not actually sentient), Gods Hypothesis (Gods exist and are all-knowing and all-powerful), Karma Hypothesis (sentient beings are rewarded and punished according to their Karma), Reincarnation Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and reincarnate in different bodies), Resurrection Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and are resurrected after death), Heaven and Hell Hypothesis (Heaven and Hell exist and immortal souls go there depending on their beliefs and/or actions), Undetectable Beings Hypothesis (beings that can't be detected exist e.g. angels, demons, aliens, time-travellers, ghosts, fairies, leprechauns), etc. How can we know what is true and what is false?
These are fine questions!

Speaking of "simulations" this idea seems to have only emerged relatively recently as computers have become prevalent. I'm not sure I find the question meaningful (the simulation hypothesis) outside the limited context of computing though. We have self awareness and "simulating" that makes no sense to me. How can one perceive with a simulated perception for example.

I'm aware of movies like the Matrix (which I find unwatchable personally) have popularized this idea but I've never seen the core idea presented in any meaningful way, it seems to be nothing more than idle fantasizing.

The question "How can we know what is real, and what is not real" also leads down an abyss I think, unless we can define "real" and I don't know that we can, in physics for example we use many abstract ideas and these change over the years. I mean is spacetime "really" curved? who can say?
By 'real', I mean something that actually exists outside our imagination. By 'not real', I mean something that does not exist outside our imagination. According to Hinduism, the world that we perceive through our senses are actually an illusion created by the Hindu Gods. How can we test this claim?

Sherlock Holmes

Re: Epistemology

Post #4

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Compassionist wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 5:43 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 4:56 pm
Compassionist wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 4:20 pm How can we know what is real, and what is not real? Epistemology is a conundrum because there are lots of hypotheses that can't be tested e.g. Simulation Hypothesis (the perceived world is simulated), Illusion Hypothesis (our perceptions are illusions), Philosophical Zombie Hypothesis (beings that appear sentient are not actually sentient), Gods Hypothesis (Gods exist and are all-knowing and all-powerful), Karma Hypothesis (sentient beings are rewarded and punished according to their Karma), Reincarnation Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and reincarnate in different bodies), Resurrection Hypothesis (immortal souls exist and are resurrected after death), Heaven and Hell Hypothesis (Heaven and Hell exist and immortal souls go there depending on their beliefs and/or actions), Undetectable Beings Hypothesis (beings that can't be detected exist e.g. angels, demons, aliens, time-travellers, ghosts, fairies, leprechauns), etc. How can we know what is true and what is false?
These are fine questions!

Speaking of "simulations" this idea seems to have only emerged relatively recently as computers have become prevalent. I'm not sure I find the question meaningful (the simulation hypothesis) outside the limited context of computing though. We have self awareness and "simulating" that makes no sense to me. How can one perceive with a simulated perception for example.

I'm aware of movies like the Matrix (which I find unwatchable personally) have popularized this idea but I've never seen the core idea presented in any meaningful way, it seems to be nothing more than idle fantasizing.

The question "How can we know what is real, and what is not real" also leads down an abyss I think, unless we can define "real" and I don't know that we can, in physics for example we use many abstract ideas and these change over the years. I mean is spacetime "really" curved? who can say?
By 'real', I mean something that actually exists outside our imagination. By 'not real', I mean something that does not exist outside our imagination. According to Hinduism, the world that we perceive through our senses are actually an illusion created by the Hindu Gods. How can we test this claim?
But surely an imagination is itself a real thing? I mean imaginations do exist, I have one, you have one, most people have one. Why is something within an imagination not as real as anything else? This is basis for my question, the OP wants to differentiate "real" from "not real" and I'm not sure we are able to do that with any rigor anyway.

Lets try this - give me an example of something that's real.

Compassionist
Guru
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 770 times
Been thanked: 135 times

Re: Epistemology

Post #5

Post by Compassionist »

[Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #4]

I don't know what is real and what is not real, so I can't give you an example of either. We can imagine lots of things e.g. teleportation. Just because we can imagine teleportation, it does not mean that we can actually teleport from Earth to Jupiter in one nanosecond.

It's possible that the universe we appear to live in is actually real. It is also possible that it is a simulation. I don't actually know. Whether it is real or simulated, while we can teleport in our imagination, we can't actually teleport.

Sherlock Holmes

Re: Epistemology

Post #6

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Compassionist wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 3:54 am [Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #4]

I don't know what is real and what is not real, so I can't give you an example of either. We can imagine lots of things e.g. teleportation. Just because we can imagine teleportation, it does not mean that we can actually teleport from Earth to Jupiter in one nanosecond.

It's possible that the universe we appear to live in is actually real. It is also possible that it is a simulation. I don't actually know. Whether it is real or simulated, while we can teleport in our imagination, we can't actually teleport.
I suppose the problem I have with "simulation" is that it's really nothing more than things being different to how they appear, not some special new concept (the critics of the hypothesis seem to dismiss it too as being without much substance).

Compassionist
Guru
Posts: 1020
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 770 times
Been thanked: 135 times

Re: Epistemology

Post #7

Post by Compassionist »

[Replying to Sherlock Holmes in post #6]

Although I can't prove or disprove the simulation hypothesis, I don't really take it seriously. Reality may be exactly as it appears.

Post Reply