Quote:
|
Originally Posted by robbdn
Objective Reality: something that exists within and tries to explain the realm of phenomena. Not to be confused with 'absolute' or 'true' reality. Concerned with separating the impossible from the possible, i.e., something that was considered impossible based on objective reality several hundred years ago is now well within the limits of the same objective reality, like flying an airplane. On the flip side, magic is no longer possible, but at one time was defined by the rules of objective reality (in certain societies) as clearly as physics is today.
|
Ahh, I see the misunderstanding, what you are calling Objective Reality I would call a flawed model of Objective Reality or Subjective Reality. I was treating "Objective" as meaning "Having actual existence or reality" and "Subjective" as "Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world" as per their definitions. I am going to have to suggest that we use the generally accepted definitions of words, otherwise futher discussion will become most difficult.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by robbdn
True/Absolute Reality: something outside the realm of sensible phenomena, but has absolute influence over it and is absolutely consistent. In the Lacanian sense, this can be considered the Real and the objective reality merely that, Reality. Because it does not exist in the phenomenal realm, we can never prove or disprove its existence, but we sometimes suspect that it exists without ever having obtained evidence of it.
|
I don't really understand the first sentence. You say it is outside the realm of sensible phenomena (e.g. it cannot be sensed) but has absolute influence over it (e.g. anything that is sensed is based solely on it). These seem to contradict themselves. Also, please explain in what manner we can suspect the existance of something that is completely undetectable, without having obtained any evidence to point toward it.