[Discussion] Infinite Tsukuyomi inferior to Izanagi?

[Mr Hiru]

Reverse psychology won't work with me. I was the one who said that reality is subjective, and by transitivity, that I accept the existence of point of views as individual truths. I'm not arrogant, I'm open minded.

As you're the only one here who accepts reality as unique (I don't, and you're still trying to say that I'm in agreement with you, but as your reality makes you think I agree with you you're still acting cocky), I'd have to agree that we disagree, explicitely.

For me: Reality is the perception of truth, perception is subjective, ergo, reality is subjective.

The only thing unique in the world is the truth, but reality is not truth.

Now, if you start to think that reality is not unique, then I would reconsider fully agreeing with you.

 

[SixPathsOfTobi]

Reverse psychology won't work with me. I was the one who said that reality is subjective, and by transitivity, that I accept the existence of point of views as individual truths. I'm not arrogant, I'm open minded.

As you're the only one here who accepts reality as unique (I don't, and you're still trying to say that I'm in agreement with you, but as your reality makes you think I agree with you you're still acting cocky), I'd have to agree that we disagree, explicitely.

For me: Reality is the perception of truth, perception is subjective, ergo, reality is subjective.

The only thing unique in the world is the truth, but reality is not truth.

Now, if you start to think that reality is not unique, then I would reconsider fully agreeing with you.

watch the video i posted in the above post.. please watch it for yourself..

that's what i end this with there's nothing more i have to say, maybe i will respond if you have a review or whatever of the video, but not if i don't have the idea you watched it.

 

[Mr Hiru]

watch the video i posted in the above post.. please watch it for yourself..

that's what i end this with there's nothing more i have to say, maybe i will respond if you have a review or whatever of the video, but not if i don't have the idea you watched it.

I'll watch it and edit here later.

PS: I'll start answering on new post.

 

[young1]

Smh.... Jst slow dwn. you two hve valid arguments.... Dnt try forcing it dwn each other throats, lest u'd choke :-|

 

[Mr Hiru]

I watched the video.

First of all:

The guy uses correctly the word "truth": Proven phenomena. It is what really happened in the past, and what is happening right now. It can be percieved by our organs (which are naturally imperfect). He demonstrated this with his glasses.

He also uses correctly the word "perception": Is the ability for our senses to align with the truth we can percieve. More interceptions = More consciousness. He graphically exposed how this works with the sine waves and their frequencies (which value represents the level of awareness of the perceptor).

But sadly, I beg to differ when he refers to reality. He uses the word reality and truth as they being the same, when there is a fundamental difference that separates them. While truth is "proven", reality is not. Reality exists but it is not something that has been proven, it only exists, and it exists for each individual.

There are two movies which are the perfect example that gives us insight about the fundamental difference between Truth and Reality:

- The Matrix (1999)
- Inception (2010)

The video you bought was good enough as example of how perception plays a role in the interpretation of truth. But it doesn't bring good insight about how reality works, it misinform about the topic.

 

[SixPathsOfTobi]

so we do agree.. the only difference is that your definition (in direct contradiction to the main definitions in dictionaries) of reality is that it is perception, and my definition is that it is that which is real, in other words true., so basically reality is truth. when your talking about your, his, her, mine reality your talking about perception, but if your talking about reality as is you're talking about that which is real, in other words truth.

so apparently all we were arguing about is the definition of the word reality, if we would omit the word reality in stead of we were debating perception vs reality, i was debating perception vs truth and you were debating perception vs perception.

Mark has disected the matrix series too if you're interested..

You must be registered for see links

If you're interested in more from this guy check out his website:

You must be registered for see links

 

[valandil988]

Reverse psychology won't work with me. I was the one who said that reality is subjective, and by transitivity, that I accept the existence of point of views as individual truths. I'm not arrogant, I'm open minded.

As you're the only one here who accepts reality as unique (I don't, and you're still trying to say that I'm in agreement with you, but as your reality makes you think I agree with you you're still acting cocky), I'd have to agree that we disagree, explicitely.

For me: Reality is the perception of truth, perception is subjective, ergo, reality is subjective.

The only thing unique in the world is the truth, but reality is not truth.

Now, if you start to think that reality is not unique, then I would reconsider fully agreeing with you.

I'm sorry but the definition in the dictionary doesn't match your interpretation of the word "reality". Reality is the factual universe for all individuals that exist within it even if they cannot perceive those facts with their flawed perceptions.

By that I mean any number of individuals all with unique points of view on reality can run a specific experiment like say, the spectro analysis of the suns rays and come out with the same answer, even if they use different experimental equipment they all arrive at the same elementary fact but different conclusions.

Also truth does not always equal fact. Truths are subject to perception and certain points of view. Anything may be true given the right interpretation. But there is only one fact on any given subject, ie how the world and ergo the universe actually is not as people perceive it.

For example, people can have beliefs about the universe or theories even well proven theories but there always exists the possibility that the measurements we take could in fact be subject to our own preconceptions/assumptions and therefore are misinterpreted. The measurements are fact but our interpretation of those facts is not always truth.

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

I have to ask what you mean by reality is "unique", everyone's interpretation of reality is of course "unique". Reality itself however is not unique for every person its the same.

 

[SixPathsOfTobi]

Also truth does not always equal fact. Truths are subject to perception and certain points of view. Anything may be true given the right interpretation. But there is only one fact on any given subject, ie how the world and ergo the universe actually is not as people perceive it.

For example, people can have beliefs about the universe or theories even well proven theories but there always exists the possibility that the measurements we take could in fact be subject to our own preconceptions/assumptions and therefore are misinterpreted. The measurements are fact but our interpretation of those facts is not always truth.

you contradict yourself here.
"Also truth does not always equal fact."
"The measurements are fact but our interpretation of those facts is not always truth."

in the first sentence you're talking about the word truth as in his, her your mine truth, which is perception and in the last sentence you talk about truth as in truth which is reality.

anyway truth is that which has occured and that which is occuring right now.

 

[Mr Hiru]

so we do agree.. the only difference is that your definition (in direct contradiction to the main definitions in dictionaries) of reality is that it is perception, and my definition is that it is that which is real, in other words true., so basically reality is truth. when your talking about your, his, her, mine reality your talking about perception, but if your talking about reality as is you're talking about that which is real, in other words truth.

so apparently all we were arguing about is the definition of the word reality, if we would omit the word reality in stead of we were debating perception vs reality, i was debating perception vs truth and you were debating perception vs perception.

It seems like you're confusing the properties of reality then, because I know reality is not truth.

Most dictionaries says reality and truth are the same thing... and guess what: It's for the sake of simplicity. Most people would not easily understand the subtle difference between those concepts, so by agreement most dictionaries would treat these concepts as the same one, so I understand you speak about me being wrong, but I won't leave without making my point clear.

On the topic:

If you add the reality of each witnesses (this is, bring testimonies) and facts (which can be taken as proof), you get as near as you can to truth, that's how trials are decided.

But as these elements are primarily taken from human beings, these things are imperfect, they are not as accurate as they can be, reason of why witness do not always speak about all the details they could when testifying. Because reality is the perception of the truth they witness in a specific moment (I'm understanding that you refer to reality as one big picture taken in all universe by all the possible sensorial abilities, this is a very theoretical scenario... non-realistic. But I'm speaking about a realisting point of view: Reality can't be taken in that way, the only way to see reality is through little parts of that big picture).

...back to the example you gave me about knocking the face: The guy who was faking and me who fell in the act had different realities, but only he knew the truth. This is the esence of Itachi's words: True is a vague term. While my reality may not be synchronized with the truth, the other guy had the upper hand in knowledge, thus, making of reality something subjective (because Truth is always objective, reality is not).

 

[valandil988]

you contradict yourself here.
"Also truth does not always equal fact."
"The measurements are fact but our interpretation of those facts is not always truth."

in the first sentence you're talking about the word truth as in his, her your mine truth, which is perception and in the last sentence you talk about truth as in truth which is reality.

anyway truth is that which has occured and that which is occuring right now.

No you misread.

"Also truth does not always equal fact."
"The measurements are fact but our interpretation of those facts is not always truth."

Truth is not always fact. The measurements are fact but our interpretation of those measurements is not always truth but they can be perceived to be, IE fact is not always truth.

That's a reference of perception vs fact. I don't see truth as equal to fact even if that gentlemen says so. I find the word "truth" to be mired in the judicial theater. Thats why I prefer the word "fact".

There is perception, then there is truth, then there is fact.

Truth is the nearest humans can get to the facts.

Its impossible to truly reach the facts. Because its impossible for us to ever truly perceive them even with advanced experiments because out interpretation will always shape the facts that we discover into truth's that we can understand.

Those truths may be wrong because we colour them with our own ideas.

Don't get me wrong, the truth and the facts can be pretty damn close to each other, we think. Its just we should never be 100% sure of what we discover no matter how compelling the evidence may be towards a particular idea.

 

[SixPathsOfTobi]

i can keep repeating that we have different definitions of the word reality, though i'm 100% certain that my definition is what the word reality is intended for.. everywhere you look my definition is named, except for some alternate translation like the one you posted. also massive amounts of people almost all people using it like you are.

EDIT: with valandil i have the same argument only then about the word truth..

lets keep it at this.

edit2: @valandil

You must be registered for see links

 

[Draven]

lol this thread is turning out to be more philosophy then manga now lol

 

[Mr Hiru]

I'm aware your definition is based on objectivism, that reality exists outside our minds. But that is philosophy, it is a complex scenario, it needs to take in mind concepts such as consciousness and existence.

 

[SixPathsOfTobi]

I'm aware your definition is based on objectivism, that reality exists outside our minds. But that is philosophy, it is a complex scenario, it needs to take in mind concepts such as consciousness and existence.

nothing in your mind becomes reality if you don't put it into action by actually doing something.the world still exists wether humans exist or not.

 

[Xlad]

Hiru and Katkitsu said it for me.

 

[konoha s beautiful beast]

Well....it's infinite and global...how is it a let down? We haven't even seen the dreamworld yet, only the people affected by it.

Patience, B. Patience.

completely agree

 

[valandil988]

i can keep repeating that we have different definitions of the word reality, though i'm 100% certain that my definition is what the word reality is intended for.. everywhere you look my definition is named, except for some alternate translation like the one you posted. also massive amounts of people almost all people using it like you are.

EDIT: with valandil i have the same argument only then about the word truth..

lets keep it at this.

edit2: @valandil

You must be registered for see links

I understand, but to be perfectly honest my perceptions are going to rule me on this one

In the dictionary truth = fact. But the word "truth" to me has connotations of human perception with regards to judicial "truth". That's just my own perception of my language. You have to make allowances for other peoples interpretations.

I would never use the word truth to describe any scientific theory which is probably as close as we as humanity would ever get to the facts. I could define theories as this: Slightly bias ideas that the measurements and mathematics fit.

Its just personal preference. If you want to debate the English language well I won't be so eager lol

 

[Mr Hiru]

nothing in your mind becomes reality if you don't put it into action by actually doing something.the world still exists wether humans exist or not.

Under the point of view of reality being perception of truth, nothing can become reality if we can't percieve... the same can be told about truth.

Now we can argue about the four concepts:

Existence
Truth
Reality
Perception

But what we percieve in reality is something that really exists?

Existence just is, it always is.
Truth is the proven phenomena that occurs in the plane of existence.
Reality exists only if living beings can percieve truth. Add all these subjective, individual realities and you can get as near as you can to truth.

Existence: Pokemon
RealityA: Human world
RealityB: Cartoon world
Truth(Existence, RealityA): false
Truth(Existence, RealityB): true

Summing it up: Reality sets the context for Truth to use in determining whether the existence statement is true or false. Truth is therefore a function that takes in both Existence and Reality.

---

Thanks, now the discussion can be more complex Lol.

my brain hurts...

 

[ObitoGokuKakashi]

Well....it's infinite and global...how is it a let down? We haven't even seen the dreamworld yet, only the people affected by it.

Patience, B. Patience.

I just gave you another Bar. ; D

OT: What he said.

 

[Mattek2008]

I just gave you another Bar. ; D

OT: What he said.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ty ty