Mike,

There is no "our reality". There is only one reality. You can't define reality 
as YOU like. It is self defining...

Edgar



On Jul 8, 2013, at 8:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:

> Edgar,
> 
> You still haven't answered. You seem to be far more interested in 
> metaphysical entanglements than reality. Like I said previously, reality has 
> many definitions, but the one that counts is the one that affects our mental 
> processes and how we respond to them. Trying to figure out whether an 
> external object is what you think it is is beside the point because It's 
> impossible to determine in all cases. However, how you react is real in 100% 
> of cases and how you react will determine whether you suffer, or not, from 
> that reaction. This is our reality. 
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
> 
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]>; 
> To: zen group <[email protected]>; 
> Subject: Re: [Zen] "It's as plain as the nose on your face" ... but how plain 
> is that? 
> Sent: Mon, Jul 8, 2013 1:32:37 AM 
> 
>  
> Edgar,
> 
> Seriously, I have no idea what you're trying to say here. How would I know if 
> it's a snake and not a piece of rope - especially if my reaction was to avoid 
> it believing it to be poisonous? What if i killed it believing it was a snake 
> I believed to be poisonous, but it turned out to be someone's harmless pet 
> snake? Again, my reactions are central - not what it actually is - if that is 
> all I have to go on at that time. They're all I have 'control' over. It's 
> really not a difficult point to grasp.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
> 
> From: [email protected] <[email protected]>; 
> To: <[email protected]>; 
> Subject: Re: [Zen] "It's as plain as the nose on your face" ... but how plain 
> is that? 
> Sent: Sun, Jul 7, 2013 10:39:57 PM 
> 
>  
> 
> you could try that, but it'd just be more of the same.  
> 10,000 things and counting...
> 
> Hong
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Edgar Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
>  
> Mike,
> 
> 
> OK, I finally managed to pick myself up off the floor!
> 
> What difference does it make??????
> 
> OK, I hope I really have managed to stop laughing now.....
> 
> Try stepping on a piece of rope and then a rattlesnake and maybe, just maybe, 
> you might understand the difference!
> 
> Jeeeez....
> 
> Edgar
> 
> 
> 
> On Jul 7, 2013, at 10:44 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
>>  
>> 
>> Edgar,
>> 
>> Sorry, I'm not following. What difference does it make whether it's a snake 
>> or a piece of rope if thats what I sincerely perceive at the time? It's my 
>> reaction that is important. 
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
>> 
>> 
>> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>; 
>> To: <[email protected]>; 
>> Subject: Re: [Zen] "It's as plain as the nose on your face" ... but how 
>> plain is that? 
>> Sent: Sun, Jul 7, 2013 2:25:37 PM 
>> 
>>  
>> Mike,
>> 
>> 
>> Funny! Because Bill's (and now apparently your) "just this" at night would 
>> have been the snake that was really a piece of rope!
>> 
>> That's why "just this" JUST doesn't cut it. I can imagine Bill at the magic 
>> show yelling "just this" as every illusion is performed believing they are 
>> all real because they are his direct experience!
>> 
>> By claiming the immediate experience of "just this" is reality you mistake 
>> illusion for reality..... In the cases above it's obvious, but if you 
>> understand the biology of perception you understand it happens EVERY TIME....
>> 
>> Edgar
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 7, 2013, at 9:50 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Edgar,
>>> 
>>> There many gold standards for what reality is, but surely what we 
>>> experience as humans is all we have to go on? If I see a snake at night, 
>>> how I react at that time is far more important than in the morning 
>>> realising it was just a piece of old rope. 
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>; 
>>> To: <[email protected]>; 
>>> Subject: Re: [Zen] "It's as plain as the nose on your face" ... but how 
>>> plain is that? 
>>> Sent: Sun, Jul 7, 2013 1:29:39 PM 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> Bill,
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The point is that Bill's "just this" is something produced by complex 
>>> sensory and cognitive processes. It does NOT correspond to raw reality as 
>>> he would have us believe. It's the RESULT of a very complex sequence of 
>>> processes.
>>> 
>>> That's why Bill's just this is actually "just this ILLUSION mistaken for 
>>> reality"....
>>> 
>>> True you don't experience reality like this. Because you ARE NOT 
>>> EXPERIENCING REALITY AT ALL!
>>> 
>>> Edgar
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jul 7, 2013, at 9:14 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Edgar,
>>>> 
>>>> But you don't experience reality like that. Do you have to understand the 
>>>> endocrine system to take a pee?
>>>> 
>>>> Mike
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>; 
>>>> To: <[email protected]>; 
>>>> Subject: Re: [Zen] "It's as plain as the nose on your face" ... but how 
>>>> plain is that? 
>>>> Sent: Sun, Jul 7, 2013 12:58:56 PM 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> Bill,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> That's very bad biology. There are 3 general stages involved. Raw sensory 
>>>> experience which occurs separately in each different sense organ. There is 
>>>> considerable pre-processing there where eg. edges and motion are 
>>>> preferentially detected. 2nd there is perception in the optic lobes, 3rd 
>>>> the brain itself makes what is perceived into objects in the context of 
>>>> one's internal model of reality.
>>>> 
>>>> You can't just make things up that are contrary to the way biology 
>>>> actually works...
>>>> 
>>>> Edgar
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jul 7, 2013, at 8:27 AM, Bill! wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>> Edgar,
>>>>> 
>>>>> What's causing confusion is you continue to look at experience only from 
>>>>> a pluralistic POV. From a pluralistic POV there is a distinction between 
>>>>> sight, sound, taste, smell and touch. From a monistic POV there is no 
>>>>> distinction. It's just experience. Experience is only separated into the 
>>>>> different senses when pluralism arises along with perception. It's then 
>>>>> that you see, hear, taste, smell and touch. Before pluralism there is 
>>>>> just experience - Just THIS!
>>>>> 
>>>>> It doesn't matter if my perception is different (worse or better - like 
>>>>> eyesight or hearing) than yours. For example blurry vision doesn't 
>>>>> produce a different experience than clear vision. The vision being blurry 
>>>>> or clear is a perception, not an experience. The same goes for vision and 
>>>>> touch. If a person is blind but can feel then they are sentient and do 
>>>>> experience; BUT a blind person or deaf person does not have the same 
>>>>> perception as a person who sees and hears well.
>>>>> 
>>>>> ...Bill!
>>>>> 
>>>>> --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > So why is the experience of you different from someone who needs 
>>>>> > glasses, or a blind person?
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Which has the 'true' experience of the 'true' reality?
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Which is the true 'just this' when you have 3 different just thises?
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > Edgar
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > On Jul 7, 2013, at 6:46 AM, Bill! wrote:
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > > Edgar,
>>>>> > > 
>>>>> > > Experience (awareness of the 'real world') is not dependent upon 
>>>>> > > eyeglasses, corneas or eyes. It is however dependent upon what we 
>>>>> > > call senses. If you were not sentient then you could not experience 
>>>>> > > and would have no awareness.
>>>>> > > 
>>>>> > > There would be nothing.
>>>>> > > 
>>>>> > > ...Bill!
>>>>> > > 
>>>>> > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > > Panda,
>>>>> > > > 
>>>>> > > > Good point. Which is the REAL world Bill. With or without glasses? 
>>>>> > > > With or without corneas? With or without eyes?
>>>>> > > > 
>>>>> > > > After all reality does NOT consist of focused light images of 
>>>>> > > > 'things'....
>>>>> > > > 
>>>>> > > > Edgar
>>>>> > > > 
>>>>> > > > 
>>>>> > > > 
>>>>> > > > On Jul 7, 2013, at 1:43 AM, pandabananasock wrote:
>>>>> > > > 
>>>>> > > > > Are you wearing glasses right now?
>>>>> > > > > Can you see the frames in your periphery?
>>>>> > > > > Did you see them before I asked?
>>>>> > > > > 
>>>>> > > > >
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > 
>>>>> > >
>>>>> >
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to