Riddle Me This...
What makes more sense:
That there is an objective physical reality that we inhabit as an abstract consciousness that only flames into brief existence from nothing and then disappears back into nothing, or that an abstract intellect has imagined an entire universe with exquisite consistent detail?
How can you prove or disprove either?
If the former, all is meaningless:
Random elements slammed together to create fleeting consciousness and identity.
If the latter, no physical reality exists.
If the former, the concept of infinitely branching timelines and alternate universes runs into the problem of where the necessary energy and matter to create such universes comes from; with the latter these are all easily explained as imaginings of the same abstract intellect.
So that brings us back to “this” reality.
We see / hear / feel / experience…something.
We have in this reality a concept of psychosis –- a break with reality so severe as to create a new reality unto itself.
In our reality, those suffering from psychosis see and experience inaccurate and unreal things, and yet to them those experiences are wholly rational / consistent / believable / reliable reality right down to their own sense of identity.
If they think they are Napoleon, in their perception of reality they are Napoleon.
Who then are we to say we are sane and rational and in full possession of the facts? May we not also be psychotics living in the figments of our own imagination?
These then are the questions:
What is the nature of reality? Is this universe we experience real or imaginary? Are we alone -- specifically am I alone and imagining a “you” is reading this, or are you alone and imagining "I" wrote this? If we are alone, then what is the meaning / purpose of any of this? And if we are not alone, how then shall we live with one another?
© Buzz Dixon