[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by alegro

This and the following is just a distraction. You come with some grandiose words about philosophy, but you fail to address my central issue: A couple of observers see a cup falling down and breaking.

You have claimed before there won't be events on which all observer would agree, i.e., no objective reality. I give you an example of what would is objective reality, at least for me.

If the event of the cup falling and breaking is not "objective", some observers would agree that it happened, others would not.

In my perception of the world, there won't be some observers that could continue to use the cup and some observers that could not do so. If it broke, neither could continue to use the cup.

I can really appreciate your frustration. I've been experiencing it for most of this thread.

The idea of a cup. The perception of the cup. The observers of the cup. All of this is subjective. Whether fifty people say the cup broke or no one says it broke doesn't matter. The object does not exist without a subject to perceive it.

There is not a world in which all observers agree. We all have a particular point of view. Each view is imperfect, with holes like swiss cheese in terms of rational objective perception. But THAT is reality.

If all conscious beings - who in this case would also need to have senses and the means to communicate with others - agree on the outcome of the event, it is objective.

The consciousness comes before the objective event. Consciousness precedes the existence of a material world. Change your consciousness and you change the material world. LOA.

Whether or not there are beings who don't have senses and/or cannot communicate their findings is irrelevant.

Were there other material objects in the room when your cup broke? What are their findings? So apparently, it is relevant.

I said I cannot interact with people who could at the same time have the cup broken and not broken. Maybe you can. In which case my view of the world would be wrong. But I would need a little more evidence before I consider such a drastic step.

As it happened, I did break a cup some time ago ... it was my favorite one. And I threw it away. If you could convince me that it didn't break and that I still have it, I might reconsider.

I'm drinking out of a cup right now. Is it your favourite? It isn't broken. I guess if I were you, I would know.

Just because she doesn't know about this forum (and probably wouldn't care if she did) doesn't mean it isn't here. She may learn about it in some years. That doesn't mean it didn't exist before or that she wouldn't have been able to google it if she tried.

There are probably also web forums about knitting and other stuff that neither of us knows about. That doesn't mean they don't exist and are created just at the time when we google them. That just means that we don't read them (at the moment).

And you could extend this thought infinitely. There may be entire dimensions of existence going on that are outside of your awareness or mine. For example, there may be a dimension in which someone is drinking out of your cup. Maybe it's you 15 minutes before you broke it.

I think your question was, how is the concept of subjective reality useful? What it does is it loosens the awareness from what you assume to be real. You are choosing to see the world as you do. If you choose differently, the world changes for you. The point herein is there is no time/space where you are not you. You choose a perspective every moment and no perspective is right or absolute. Including mine.