Consensus reality

Consensus reality is an approach to answering the question "What is real?", a 
philosophical question, with answers dating back millennia; it is almost 
invariably used to refer to human consensus reality, though there have been 
mentions of feline and canine consensus reality.[1]

 It gives a practical answer—reality is either what exists, or what we can 
agree by consensus seems to exist; the process has been (perhaps loosely and a 
bit imprecisely) characterised as "[w]hen enough people think something is 
true, it... takes on a life of its own." 

The term is usually used disparagingly as by implication it may mean little 
more than "what a group or culture chooses to believe," and may bear little or 
no relationship to any "true reality," and, indeed, challenges the notion of 
"true reality." 

For example, Steven Yates has characterised the idea that the United States 
Federal Reserve Notes (not "backed" by anything) are "really worth a dollar" as 
"part of what we might call our consensus-reality, [not] real reality."[2]

The difficulty with the question stems from the concern that human beings do 
not in fact fully understand or agree upon the nature of knowledge or knowing, 
and therefore (it is often argued) it is not possible to be certain beyond 
doubt what is real.[3][4] 

Accordingly, this line of logic concludes, we cannot in fact be sure beyond 
doubt about the nature of reality. 

We can, however, seek to obtain some form of consensus, with others, of what is 
real. 

We can use this to practically guide us, either on the assumption it seems to 
approximate some kind of valid reality, or simply because it is more 
"practical" than perceived alternatives. 

Consensus reality therefore refers to the agreed-upon concepts of reality which 
people in the world, or a culture or group, believe are real (or treat as 
real), usually based upon their common experiences as they believe them to be; 
anyone who does not agree with these is sometimes stated to be "in effect... 
living in a different world."[5]

Throughout history this has also raised a social question:

What shall we make of those who do not agree with consensus realities of 
others, or of the society they live in?

Children have sometimes been described or viewed as "inexperience[d] with 
consensus reality,"[6] although with the expectation that they will come into 
line with it as they mature. 

However, the answer is more diverse as regards such people as have been 
characterised as eccentrics, mentally ill, enlightened or divinely inspired, or 
evil or demonic in nature. 

Alternatively, differing viewpoints may simply be put to some kind of 
"objective" (though the nature of "objectivity" goes to the heart of the 
relevant questions) test. 

Cognitive liberty is the freedom to be the individual's own director of the 
individual's own consciousness and is fundamentally opposed to enforcement of 
the culturally accepted reality upon non-conforming individuals. 

Effects of low cognitive liberty vary from indifference to forced-medication 
and from social-alienation to incarceration to death.

Read More:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_reality


      

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"WebTV Dawgs/Dittos" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/webtv-pals?hl=en.

Reply via email to