Be careful what you wish... er... manifest for... you might just get it.

[SmartAlx]

Originally Posted by gigij

Maybe I'm cynical - but I don't believe that for a moment - or maybe it's just me

We may define good in different ways, but (most) everyone agrees that it is good to be good. The mafia hitman, the burglar, the drug lord, the priest. They all have varying understandings of what is good. But they all still stand by what they consider good. The mafia hitman believes that honor and respect is good. Disrespect his boss and you are dead. The burglar thinks that he deserves the luxuries more than the (former) owner of his stolen goods. The drug lord believes that might makes right. And of course the priest believes that obeying God's law is the highest good.

Of course these are just examples. Not all hitmen think this way. Not all drug lords think this way. Some of them are so twisted they really aren't even human any more. (I think when you lose an understanding of goodness, you cease to be human.) But for the rest of us, we do have some understanding of goodness. We might disagree on the definition, but we do not disagree on the goal of goodness.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by StAnselm

The defintion of reality is that which exists outside the mind, separate and apart from ourthoughts about it. If you are referring to something other than reality, then by all means explain it without misusing the language.

That's not what people generally mean, when they talk about reality in this forum. Basically what they usually mean is the sum total of their experiences in life and in this universe.

If however we go by your definition of "reality", yes then "subjective reality" would be an oxymoron, and "objective reality" would be a tautology. More importantly, reality would simply be unknowable and meaningless.

After all, knowledge and meaning both spring from mind. If X exists outside the mind, then X is unknowable and meaningless. Therefore if reality is that which exists outside of mind, then reality is unknowable and meaningless.

Well then, that's that.

[StAnselm]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

If X exists outside the mind, then X is unknowable and meaningless. Therefore if reality is that which exists outside of mind, then reality is unknowable and meaningless.

Only from a monist perspective. The pure materialist denies any reality to consciousness. The pure idealist denies the existence (or relevance) to things other than consciousness. If you accept both mind and matter, you are a dualist.

The pure idealist runs into problems of radical subjectivity and solopsism.

The pure materialist runs into the problems of explaining consciousness and determinism.

The dualist runs into the problem of explaining exactly how mind and matter interact.

There is no answer and no completely consistent and satisfactory explanation for existence and consciousness. You have merely made a choice here among three options.

As a common sense matter, things outside the mind are hardly meaningless. You can trip over things you can't see in a dark room. You can be poisoned by bacteria that won't ever be in your mind. A great deal of research is conducted, not by perceiving the object (the disease, particle, etc), but by drawing conclusions from the events you can see, or even from abstract exercises without any outside reference.

Finally, what is outside the mind may be in a sense unknowable, but if we are confined to what is within the mind, there is no such thing as knowledge. If the world is self-created, then it is arbitrary. What is there to know? There is only mental experience, with no need of interpretation or certainty.