| Revision as of 05:18, 11 March 2007 view sourceDanski14 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users16,431 edits ←Undid revision 114235204 by Goldknightt (talk)← Previous edit | Revision as of 06:06, 11 March 2007 view source Phenominal22 (talk | contribs)10 edits ←Replaced page with '{{otheruses}} '''Reality''' is a commodity.'Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{otheruses}} | {{otheruses}} | ||
| '''Reality''' is a commodity. | |||
| '''Reality''' in everyday usage means "the state of things as they actually exist."<ref>Compact Oxford English Dictionary of Current English, Oxford University Press, 2005 (Full entry for ''reality'': "reality • noun (pl. realities) 1 the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them. 2 a thing that is actually experienced or seen. 3 the quality of being lifelike. 4 the state or quality of having existence or substance.")</ref> The term ''reality'', in its widest sense, includes everything that ], whether it is ], ], or apparently self-contradictory by ], ], or any other ] of analysis. Reality in this sense may include both ] and ], whereas '']'' is often restricted to being (compare with '']''). | |||
| == Truth == | |||
| {{main|Truth}} | |||
| According to the less realist trends in philosophy, such as ]/], truth is subjective. When two or more individuals agree upon the interpretation and experience of a particular event, a consensus about an event and its experience begins to be formed. This being common to a few individuals or a larger group, then becomes the 'truth' as seen and agreed upon by a certain set of people — the ]. Thus one particular ] may have a certain set of agreed truths, while another group might have a different set of consensual 'truths'. This lets different ] and ] have varied and extremely different ] of reality and truth of the external world. The ] and beliefs of people or communities are a fine example of this level of ] 'reality'. This is well-expressed in the famous quote by ], "It takes two to speak the truth — one to speak and another to hear." However, humans are fallible and are limited to individual experience. Truth cannot simply be considered truth if one speaks and another hears because individual bias and fallibility challenge the idea that certainty or objectivity are easily grasped. For ], the inaccessibility of any final, objective truth means that there is no truth beyond the socially-accepted consensus. (Although this means there are truths, not truth). | |||
| For ], the world is a set of definite ]s, which obtain independently of humans ("The world is all that is the case" — '']''), and these facts are the final arbiter of truth. ] expresses this in terms of the principle | |||
| of ]<ref> Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Michael Dummett</ref>: Lady Macbeth had three children or she did not; a tree falls or it does not. A statement will be true if it ] to these facts — ''even if the correspondence cannot be established''. Thus the dispute between the realist and anti-realist conception of truth hinges on reactions to the ] accessibility (knowability, graspability) of facts. | |||
| == Fact == | |||
| {{main|Fact}} | |||
| A fact or factual entity is a phenomenon that is perceived as an elemental principle. It is rarely one that could be subject to personal interpretation. Instead it is most often the observed phenomena of the natural world. The proposition 'viewed from most places on Earth, the sun rises in the east', is a fact. It is a fact for people belonging to any group or nationality regardless of which language they speak or which part of the hemisphere they come from. The ] proposition in support of the ] ], that the ] is the centre of the ] is one that states the fact of the ]. However during his lifetime Galileo was ridiculed for that factual proposition, because far too few people had a consensus about it in order to accept it as a truth. Fewer propositions are factual in content in the world, as compared to the many truths shared by various communities, which are also fewer to the innumerable individual ]. Much of ], ], ] and ] is done on this level. | |||
| This view of reality is well expressed by ]'s statement that "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." | |||
| == What reality might ''not'' be == | |||
| "Reality", the concept, is contrasted with a large wide, variety of other concepts, largely depending upon the intellectual discipline. It can help understand what we mean by "reality" to note what we say ''is not'' real but usually if there is no original and related proofs it isn't reality. | |||
| In ], reality is contrasted with ] (penguins do exist; so they are real) and mere ] (a mountain made of gold is merely possible, but is not real unless one is discovered). Sometimes philosophers speak as though reality is contrasted with ] itself, though ordinary language and many other philosophers would treat these as synonyms. They have in mind the notion that there is ''a kind'' of reality — a mental or ] reality, perhaps — that imaginary objects, such as the aforementioned golden mountain, have. ] is famous, or infamous, for holding that such things have so-called subsistence, and thus a kind of reality, even while they do not actually exist. Most philosophers find the very notion of "subsistence" mysterious and unnecessary, and one of the ]s and starting points of ] ] has been the forceful rejection of the notion of subsistence — of "real" but nonexistent objects. | |||
| It is worth saying at this point that many philosophers are not content with saying merely what reality ''is not'' — some of them have positive theories of what broad categories of objects are real, in addition. See '']'' as well as '']''; these topics are also briefly treated below. | |||
| In ], ], and the ], reality is often contrasted with what is '']''. | |||
| One of the fundamental issues in ethics is called the ], and it can be formulated as follows: "Given our knowledge of the way the world ''is'', how can we know the way the world ''ought to be''?" Most ethical views hold that the world we live in (the ''real'' world) is ''not ideal'' — and, as such, there is room for improvement. | |||
| In the arts there was a broad movement beginning in the ], ] (which led to ]), which sought to portray characters, scenes, and so forth, realistically. This was in contrast and reaction to ], which portrayed their subjects idealistically. Commentary about these artistic movements is sometimes put in terms of the contrast between the real and the ideal: on the one hand, the average, ordinary, and natural, and on the other, the superlative, extraordinary, improbable, and sometimes even supernatural. Obviously, when speaking in this sense, "real" (or "realistic") does not have the same meaning as it does when, for example, a philosopher uses the term to distinguish, simply, what exists from what does not exist. | |||
| In the arts, and also in ordinary life, the notion of reality (or realism) is also often contrasted with illusion. A painting that precisely indicates the visually-appearing shape of a depicted object is said to be realistic in that respect; one that distorts features, as ]'s paintings are famous for doing, are said to be unrealistic, and thus some observers will say, but with questionable grammatical correctness, that they are "not real." But there are also tendencies in the visual arts toward so-called '']'' and more recently '']'' that invite a different sort of contrast with the real. ] (French, "fool the eye") paintings render their subjects so "realistically" that the casual observer might temporarily be deceived into thinking that he is seeing something, indeed, ''real'' — but in fact, it is merely an illusion, and an intentional one at that. | |||
| In psychiatry, reality, or rather, the idea of being ''in touch with reality'' is integral to the notion of ], since it has often been defined in part by reference to being "out of touch" with reality. The schizophrenic is said to have ''hallucinations'' and ''delusions'' which concern people and events that are not ''real''. However, there is controversy over what is considered ''out of touch with reality'', particularly due to the noticeable comparison of the process of forcefully instituting individuals for expressing their beliefs in society to ]. The practice's possible covert use as a political tool can perhaps be illustrated by the ] psychiatric sentences in the U.S. of black slaves for 'crazily' attempting to escape. See also '']'' and one of its prominent figures, the psychiatrist ]. | |||
| In each of these cases, discussions of reality, or what counts as "real", take on quite different casts; indeed, what we say about reality often depends on what we want to say it ''is not''. | |||
| == Reality, worldviews, and theories of reality == | |||
| A common colloquial usage would have "reality" mean "perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes toward reality," as in "My reality is not your reality." This is often used just as a colloquialism indicating that the parties to a conversation agree, or should agree, not to quibble over deeply different conceptions of what is real. For example, in a religious discussion between friends, one might say (attempting humor), "You might disagree, but in my reality, everyone goes to heaven." | |||
| But occasionally — and particularly in the case of those who have been exposed to certain ideas from philosophy, sociology, literary criticism, and other fields — it is thought that there simply and literally ''is'' no reality beyond the perceptions or beliefs we each have about reality. Such attitudes are summarized in the popular statement, "Perception is reality" or "Life is how you perceive reality" and they indicate ], that is, the view that there is no objective reality, whether acknowledged explicitly or not. These topics will be discussed in greater detail below. | |||
| == Phenomenological reality == | |||
| On a much broader and more subjective level, the private experiences, curiosity, inquiry, and selectivity involved in the personal interpretation of an event shapes reality as seen by one and only one individual and hence is called ]. This form of reality might be common to others as well, but at times could also be so unique to oneself as to be never experienced or agreed upon by any one else. Much of the kind of experience deemed ] occurs on this level of reality. From a phenomenological perspective, reality is that which is phenomenally real and unreality is nonexistent. Individual perception can be based upon an individual's personality, focus and style of attribution, causing him or her to see only what he or she wants to see or believes to be true. | |||
| == Philosophical views of reality == | |||
| Philosophy addresses two different aspects of the topic of reality: the nature of reality itself, and the relationship between the mind (as well as language and culture) and reality. | |||
| On the one hand, ] is the study of being, and the central topic of the field is couched, variously, in terms of being, existence, "what is", and reality. The task in ontology is to describe the most general ] and how they are interrelated. If — what is rarely done — a philosopher wanted to proffer a positive definition of the concept "reality", it would be done under this heading. As explained above, some philosophers draw a distinction between reality and existence. In fact, many analytic philosophers today tend to avoid the term "real" and "reality" in discussing ontological issues. But for those who would treat "is real" the same way they treat "exists", one of the leading questions of analytic philosophy has been whether existence (or reality) is a property of objects. It has been widely held by analytic philosophers that it is ''not'' a property at all, though this view has lost some ground in recent decades. | |||
| On the other hand, particularly in discussions of ] that have feet in both metaphysics and ], philosophical discussions of "reality" often concern the ways in which reality is, or is not, in some way ''dependent upon'' (or, to use fashionable jargon, "constructed" out of) mental and cultural factors such as perceptions, beliefs, and other mental states, as well as cultural artifacts, such as religions and political movements, on up to the vague notion of a common cultural ] or ]. | |||
| The view that there is a reality independent of any beliefs, perceptions, etc., is called ]. More specifically, philosophers are given to speaking about "realism ''about''" this and that, such as realism about universals or realism about the external world. Generally, where one can identify any class of object the existence or essential characteristics of which is said to depend on perceptions, beliefs, language, or any other human artifact, one can speak of "realism ''about''" that object. | |||
| One can also speak of ''anti''-realism about the same objects. '']'' is the latest in a long series of terms for views opposed to realism. Perhaps the first was ], so called because reality was said to be in the mind, or a product of our ''ideas''. ] is the view, propounded by the Irish ] ], that the objects of perception are actually ideas in the mind. On this view, one might be tempted to say that reality is a "mental construct"; this is not quite accurate, however, since on Berkeley's view perceptual ideas are created and coordinated by God. By the 20th century, views similar to Berkeley's were called ]. Phenomenalism differs from Berkeleyan idealism primarily in that Berkeley believed that minds, or souls, are not merely ideas nor made up of ideas, whereas varieties of phenomenalism, such as that advocated by Russell, tended to go farther to say that the mind itself is merely a collection of perceptions, memories, etc., and that there is no mind or soul over and above such ]s. Finally, anti-realism became a fashionable term for ''any'' view which held that the existence of some object depends upon the mind or cultural artifacts. The view that the so-called external world is really merely a social, or cultural, artifact, called ], is one variety of anti-realism. ] is the view that social issues such as morality are not absolute, but at least partially cultural artifact. | |||
| A ] of ] about what exists involves the accurate correspondence of true statements and images with the reality that the statements or images are attempting to represent. For example, the ] can verify that a statement is true based on the observable evidence that a thing exists. Many humans can point to the Rocky Mountains and say that this mountain range exists, and continues to exist even if no one is observing it or making statements about it. However, there is nothing that we can observe and name, and then say that it will exist forever. Eternal ], if they exist, would need some other method to describe them other than the scientific one. | |||
| == References == | |||
| <references/> | |||
| {{Philosophy (navigation)}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 06:06, 11 March 2007
For other uses, see Reality (disambiguation).Reality is a commodity.