Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

A Troubled Man
Guru
Posts: 2301
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:24 am

Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #1

Post by A Troubled Man »

We are constantly bombarded with believers telling us their versions of reality in which gods, demons, angels, etc. are constantly swirling around our heads in endless battles of good vs. evil, of invisible gods who intervene in our affairs and all other types of supernatural events taking place right under our noses.

Since there is only one reality and no one has ever shown it to be anything other than what we all experience it to be every day, which never shows those gods, angels or other supernatural events existing and occurring, are believers perceiving that as reality, are they just misunderstanding the terms reality and perception or are they merely wishing reality was the way they want it to be?


Reality - That which exists objectively and in fact.

Perception - to become aware of (something) through the senses, to recognize or observe.

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #11

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 2 by JP Cusick]
My finding is that people who refuse to believe in spirits and ghost and God are the people who reject their own perception, and then they start defining reality as different from their seeing of the ghost or of interacting with God.
Okay then. This would mean that your finding (or your perception, if I may use that word) is at odds with my own, in that it is not that I have experienced them and then rejected it...it is my own perception that I have never once experienced "spirits and ghost and God" or anything at all I could remotely describe as such.
We do know that God and ghost and spirits can be perceived, and then people will deny their own perception.
Please clarify who is this 'we' you speak of? Do you count myself to be a member of that group?
I have even been with people when we experienced the spirit world and the next day those same people would start their denials, as like it did not happen.
Complete hearsay. I am not calling you a liar. To be precise, I am saying that I do not believe the story at this point in time. All I have for this particular claim is yourself, good sir, and not any of the other people you very vaguely describe.
In short, I find this claim as unsupported in the same way as the claim from Paul that 500 people saw the risen Jesus.
Claiming that there is only one reality - is just one of the defensive chants for those in denial.
How about that there is only the one reality that both you and I commonly experience? Any claims from yourself or others about a separate reality I regard as unfounded, precisely because there is no evidence for such.
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #12

Post by JP Cusick »

Neatras wrote: Dismissing a claim is not an act of hostility. Requesting evidence is not hostility. You have imposed a tone on my post that does not exist, and in doing so have attempted to paint me out to be an antagonist. Do not do this.
That was not my intention, as I do not see "hostile" as an offensive term, and it is better than viewing the opposition as a competition as I see competition as an insult, and I view hostility as like in legal terminology as like a hostile witness which simply means they are telling an opposing message.

Honestly - to dismiss a claim is a hostile act, and requesting evidence is another hostile act, but calling it that does not need to be taken personally.

I said the comment (the words) are hostile to my view, and the comment is just the words on the computer screen, it is not about you personally.

You clearly do not accept the notion of God or of spirits and I do - so we are hostile to each other's comments.

Surely by now you must see me as hostile and I do not take that as some personal insult - because I am hostile to those who deny my reality.
Neatras wrote: There are records of people claiming to have perceived ghosts and spirits. Assuming the truth of unverified claims is exactly what I'm not doing by challenging your assertions.
The thing is that billions of people throughout humanity make the claim of experiencing God and of spirits or ghosts, and that is a valid piece of empirical evidence in itself.

It is not a matter of assuming the truth but of investigating the evidence.
Neatras wrote: Unless you can demonstrate that what is perceived is actually a physical manifestation of ghosts/spirits/gods, then all that exists to your claims is that "people claim to see ghosts." That is absolutely as far as you can take all your claims, and yet you add on so many presuppositions that you somehow think you can conclude "therefore ghosts/spirits/gods exist, and claiming people did not see them is dishonest."
The very notion of spirits and ghost and of God is based on the notion that they are not quite physical and therefore to demand a physical manifestation is like asking to see empty space.

The spirit world can not be put under a microscope, nor seen through a telescope.

Link = How can I see a ghost?

Human eyes can see what logic can not.
Neatras wrote:
Where people can CLAIM to experience ghosts or spirits. Unless you can demonstrate truthfulness, then all you are doing is repeating unverified claims in the hopes that your repetition outlasts criticism and skepticism from your peers who are not so gullible as to buy into what you say.
President Lincoln said that he saw God in the Civil War and I believe he did, then Gandhi saw God in non violence and I can see God in that too, and many people saw God in the Normandy invasion of WWII, and I believe their perception.

And I believe my own eyes and ears and my own experiences.

If you fail to believe what you are told then it is just your own loss - your failure to believe does not make any of it as untrue.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #13

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 12 by JP Cusick]
as like a hostile witness which simply means they are telling an opposing message.

Honestly - to dismiss a claim is a hostile act, and requesting evidence is another hostile act,
I am not telling an 'opposing message' (and neither is Neatras, if I guess his mind correctly). We are simply dismissing your claim until it is substantiated.
The thing is that billions of people throughout humanity make the claim of experiencing God and of spirits or ghosts, and that is a valid piece of empirical evidence in itself.
How so, when far too often these myriad claims are in conflict with one another?
The very notion of spirits and ghost and of God is based on the notion that they are not quite physical and therefore to demand a physical manifestation is like asking to see empty space.
Maybe not themselves physically, but indirectly? e.g. if someone claims they see God, and that God heals wounds, I ask to see evidence that wounds are indeed being healed and that the only valid explanation is God.
President Lincoln said that he saw God in the Civil War and I believe he did, then Gandhi saw God in non violence and I can see God in that too, and many people saw God in the Normandy invasion of WWII, and I believe their perception.
...what exactly did these various people claim? I could go look it up myself, but I won't. Instead, I shall leave the burden to yourself. What evidence do you have that these people actually did see what they apparently claim they saw, and that it was not imagination or hallucination or something entirely within the mind?
And I believe my own eyes and ears and my own experiences.
Same here, as in I believe the complete lack of anything I could remotely describe as holy, or God like, in my own experience, which is at odds with the claims made by various theists that I should be experiencing such.
If you fail to believe what you are told then it is just your own loss - your failure to believe does not make any of it as untrue.
In another thread, an atheist user made the claim that he is a powerful wizard. Does your 'failure to believe' not make his claim untrue? Does his claim stand, in other words, and should be believed?
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #14

Post by JP Cusick »

rikuoamero wrote: How about that there is only the one reality that both you and I commonly experience? Any claims from yourself or others about a separate reality I regard as unfounded, precisely because there is no evidence for such.
That stand is based on your own perception of reality as unchallengeable which I do not share.

There was a time when people thought that the earth was flat and that was their reality.
After finding out that the earth was a sphere then their perception of reality changed.

So the claim of only one reality is not sound.

I myself embrace the multi universe (multiverse) theory as true, because that explains the working of God so very nicely and substantially.

rikuoamero wrote: In another thread, an atheist user made the claim that he is a powerful wizard. Does your 'failure to believe' not make his claim untrue? Does his claim stand, in other words, and should be believed?
I would believe a person who said that, and not only is it polite to believe a person but it is a high virtue to believe.

The failure to believe is a defect and a vice.

I like what Fox Mulder says = "I want to believe."

To later be found as untrue is a human characteristic or circumstance which is the price to pay.

The search for truth is always trial and error.

I tell people that they are children of God and thereby they are a Prince or Princess to the King of Kings, and in my view that is better than being just a powerful wizard.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #15

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 14 by JP Cusick]
That stand is based on your own perception of reality as unchallengeable which I do not share.
Please cite where I have EVER stated that my own perception of reality is 'unchallengeable'?
There was a time when people thought that the earth was flat and that was their reality.
After finding out that the earth was a sphere then their perception of reality changed.
There was a time I believed my father to be innocent of some extreme charges made against him.
After finding out that they were true, my perception of reality changed.
(This works against what you claim I claim about my own perception of reality up above).
So the claim of only one reality is not sound.
Incorrect. In the sentences immediately preceding this one, you were talking about the perception of reality changing, not reality itself.
Please do not mistake the map for the terrain.
People believing on Monday that the Earth is flat, then on Tuesday it's a sphere does NOT mean that reality itself changes, that the Earth itself transforms from flat to sphere (technically oblate spheroid).
I myself embrace the multi universe (multiverse) theory as true, because that explains the working of God so very nicely and substantially.
To the best of my knowledge, multiverse is at this moment in time a hypothesis, and has not as of yet attained the status of 'theory'.
Either way, can it be shown scientifically that what you may or may not describe as heaven or hell are other 'verses within this multiverse, as in detected and shown to exist?
I would believe a person who said that, and not only is it polite to believe a person but it is a high virtue to believe.
...you believe me? You believe me, right off the bat, there is indeed another atheist user on this site, who has made the claim that he is a powerful wizard?
Not only do you believe me, but you WOULD believe such an individual?

What do you use to filter untrue claims from true? I ask this because it seems to given this statement from yourself that you do not use a filter at all!
The failure to believe is a defect and a vice.
Substantiate this claim. How is failing to believe that I am black a defect and a vice, for example?
I like what Fox Mulder says = "I want to believe."
So emotional desires win out over careful application of logic and examination of evidence?
To later be found as untrue is a human characteristic or circumstance which is the price to pay.
So your starting point is to believe any and all claims made? :?
The search for truth is always trial and error.
Which cannot happen if one starts out believing any and all claims made.
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

Rufus21
Scholar
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:30 pm

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #16

Post by Rufus21 »

JP Cusick wrote: I investigate my own sightings and experiences of God and of spirits and ghosts and I report my own to be true and accurate after a lot of study and research of my own.
Now this is a very interesting avenue.

How did you investigate those experiences? What methods did you use to confirm that they are true and accurate? How did you confirm that your perceptions are real? What criteria did you use to reject other people's perceptions?

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #17

Post by rikuoamero »

Rufus21 wrote:
JP Cusick wrote: I investigate my own sightings and experiences of God and of spirits and ghosts and I report my own to be true and accurate after a lot of study and research of my own.
Now this is a very interesting avenue.

How did you investigate those experiences? What methods did you use to confirm that they are true and accurate? How did you confirm that your perceptions are real? What criteria did you use to reject other people's perceptions?
More importantly...did Cusick get anyone ELSE to investigate it? Someone starting from the null hypothesis (unlike what Cusick describes himself as doing)?
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #18

Post by JP Cusick »

rikuoamero wrote: Please cite where I have EVER stated that my own perception of reality is 'unchallengeable'?
You made the assertion that there is only one (1) reality.

Clearly anything can be challenged but under your stance of only one then my challenge is rejected before it is ever started.

I accept that your reality is different from mine, and so by this mine is open and challengeable.

That is all I meant.

The distinction was just if you are open or closed to a challenge and so claiming that there is only one (1) is a closed reality.

I suppose that is just my opinion - so there is no need to take it personal to you.
rikuoamero wrote: Incorrect. In the sentences immediately preceding this one, you were talking about the perception of reality changing, not reality itself.
Please do not mistake the map for the terrain.
People believing on Monday that the Earth is flat, then on Tuesday it's a sphere does NOT mean that reality itself changes, that the Earth itself transforms from flat to sphere (technically oblate spheroid).
You are thereby devaluing perception, which I do not.

If a person perceives reality in a certain way (only one way their way) then their perception controls reality and reality is thereby distorted.

The only one (1) reality which I might accept would be the unknown reality.

The only known reality is what each of us perceive.
rikuoamero wrote: To the best of my knowledge, multiverse is at this moment in time a hypothesis, and has not as of yet attained the status of 'theory'.
I do not have that limitation on my perspective, as I can see and imagine farther.

The multiverse does not need to be proven to be viewed as true and as real.

Columbus believed the earth to be round, but after he discovered the land then he no longer believed as then he knew it was round.

A person must first believe before they can know.
rikuoamero wrote: Either way, can it be shown scientifically that what you may or may not describe as heaven or hell are other 'verses within this multiverse, as in detected and shown to exist?
I know about God yes - but I do not believe in Heaven or Hell or most other nonsense from mainstream Christianity.

What Einstein said suits me = "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
rikuoamero wrote:
I would believe a person who said that, and not only is it polite to believe a person but it is a high virtue to believe.
...you believe me? You believe me, right off the bat, there is indeed another atheist user on this site, who has made the claim that he is a powerful wizard?
Not only do you believe me, but you WOULD believe such an individual?
Yes of course I believed what you said.

If you were being untrue then it would be doing damage to your self, and I would not want to openly question your integrity.
rikuoamero wrote: What do you use to filter untrue claims from true? I ask this because it seems to given this statement from yourself that you do not use a filter at all!
I filter my self and my own words and my claims, but I do not impose my filters onto you or onto other people.

If some one says that they saw a UFO - then I might ask if I can see it too for myself? but I do not challenge their claim as untrue.
rikuoamero wrote:
The failure to believe is a defect and a vice.
Substantiate this claim. How is failing to believe that I am black a defect and a vice, for example?
It is a matter of respect for other people to give them the courtesy of my belief in what they say.

Our words are very powerful, and in words we all have the power to bless or to curse, to help or to harm, and so the words require respect from me.

When a person lies then they do great harm to their self.

Matthew 5:37 Let yes mean yes and no means no - and that applies both to me and I must apply it to other people too.
rikuoamero wrote: So emotional desires win out over careful application of logic and examination of evidence?
In some cases emotions have more weight, because perception can be driven by emotions.

I know that I have to govern my own feelings and emotions, but most other people do not, and even foolish other people still count.
rikuoamero wrote: So your starting point is to believe any and all claims made? :?
Yes of course.

It become different when I know the person and know that they told lies in the past then I become far more skeptical, or when I know the person has a mental illness then I consider that too, but even in those cases it is proper to give them the presumption of innocent at first.

For a person who keeps telling lies then by believing them then their lies become exposed and backfires onto them. It is much more fun to play along with a liar then to call them out on the lies.
rikuoamero wrote:
The search for truth is always trial and error.
Which cannot happen if one starts out believing any and all claims made.
I do not agree.

That is the only way or the best way by starting out with belief.

When we start out with un-belief then the search is already half way (or more) finished.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #19

Post by JP Cusick »

Rufus21 wrote: How did you investigate those experiences? What methods did you use to confirm that they are true and accurate? How did you confirm that your perceptions are real? What criteria did you use to reject other people's perceptions?
I use my own eyes and ears and my own judgements, and I apply the teachings of other people too, as like the scriptures and history and science and every experience or happening or piece of evidence gets a different procedure.

I embrace the concept of believing my own eyes and my senses, while many other people do not believe their own eyes or senses.

I respect my own judgement, while many other people do not respect their own judgement.


---------------------------------------------

rikuoamero wrote: More importantly...did Cusick get anyone ELSE to investigate it? Someone starting from the null hypothesis (unlike what Cusick describes himself as doing)?
I have had other people giving their perspective and opinions but I do not need any other person to verify my own findings or my own experiences.

I trust myself, and I have far greater trust in my own perception then I have in any other person.

It is unthinkable for me to have my own perception over ruled by some other person as if they were my judge or jury - hell no.

Other people can offer their advice and their perspective and I will judge theirs for myself.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

Rufus21
Scholar
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:30 pm

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #20

Post by Rufus21 »

JP Cusick wrote:
Rufus21 wrote: How did you investigate those experiences? What methods did you use to confirm that they are true and accurate? How did you confirm that your perceptions are real? What criteria did you use to reject other people's perceptions?
I use my own eyes and ears and my own judgements, and I apply the teachings of other people too, as like the scriptures and history and science and every experience or happening or piece of evidence gets a different procedure.

I embrace the concept of believing my own eyes and my senses, while many other people do not believe their own eyes or senses.

I respect my own judgement, while many other people do not respect their own judgement.
You didn't answer any of my questions. Other than using your opinions, how do you confirm that your perceptions regarding ghosts/spirits are real while other people's perceptions are not?

Post Reply