Who created the world?
 

OK, I' a bit tipsy, but this came to me while reading a description of the life and ideas of Tolkien, C.S Lewis, and a fellow yclpt Prowicke:

God did not create the world, I did. I did it every moring and all day and destroyed it in my bed every night. If all goes well, I will do it again tomorrow, and so will you.

A corrollary to this is if enough of us create the same world one morning, maybe it will be a better one.

Agreed. Funny thing is when I saw your thread title, I had the words, "I create my world and I figure you create yours." in my head as my intended response...

A corollary of that is also that you are the most important thing in the world and all was created solely for your benefit.

A dangerous corollary don't you think?

That's not a dangerous corollary in my created world. There are a lot of ways it can be interpreted even if it is a corollary in others' created worlds. Some might see that as a Darwinian truism - nothing more. If it has any place in my world, that is its place. It's a Darwinian truism.

Thats just assuming we didn't think of free will but it really does exist.

Does that mean that my world is destroyed when i blink my eyes?
Maybe you create your world, but you did not create the world.
I think you interpret and interact with the world, rather than create it.

We construct our perception of the world individually. The act of merely perceiving is an act of creation.

this is a interesting thread.

i dont really have an opinion on who created the world but if i was pressured i would say that you create your own world with in this world.

People are not creative enough to have created the world as it is.

None of you could create something of this complexity, therefore none of you created the world.

Speak for yourself.

I speak for myself when I say you lack the creativity. These are the words of truth, glory be to me.

This is an interesting subject because it touches on a tenous issue I see with humanity. I simultaneously think that we inflate what people can do and have access to, and think that we don't pay enough attention to what really is in our power. In a lot of ways, I think that our ability to create is the only good thing we really have going for us.

There is a difference between creating a perception and creating a universe. I can "perceive" that everybody i interact with on the tfp is actually a really advanced a.i. program. That doesn't mean that you all are in reality computer programs. I can also "destroy the world" when i go to sleep, but i'm pretty sure that the world still exists for my more nocturnal friends. I think that that perspective on reality leads only to crazy mumbling and unshaven wandering through downtown america.

You're talking about the difference between objective reality and subjective reality. This is an age-old topic of discussion that everyone from Spinoza to Kant to Nietzsche covered. If there is an objective reality, I argue that none of us have any access to it. Like the "Veil of Maya" behind which all that is real exists. We have our own biological systems of perception as well as our mental constructs and creative links that we make. In the end it is all metaphors and at least one step removed from "objective reality".

Even so, my perceptions alone do not create whole worlds of my own. There is still a difference between perception and creation. I think many people could verify the fact that this world existed before i did. If i created this world, how could it predate my own existence?

If it were obvious that I created the world to my benefit, then you would be right, that would be dangerous. However, I look about me and find that many of the demons of my mind that I would rather have exorcised are out there in my world playing about most infelicitously. You have read my take on things on Tilted Politics and know I am not best pleased with the tenor of domestic and global events.

So what I am getting at is that I create the world of the possible. I know what happened yesterday, and - and here is where the lack of imagination you postulate enters - I lack the imagination and force of will to stringently impose upon the continuity of creation from one day to the next too radical a change in direction. Just you wait til November, though. ;)Sure the world exists for your nocturnal friends; they create it every afternoon. Willbjammin has it right: The act of perception is indistinguishable from the act of creation. I merely deny that there is such a thing as an objective reality. All is subjective. Even physics enshrines this in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle,which, to put it as broadly as possible while maintaining the gist states that the simple act of observation has an effect on the observed. (Of course, it also has an effect on the observer, but he either hadn't fully appreciated wht he had come up with, or he felt it was too obvious or, more likely, too mathematically challenging even for one of the great mathematical geniuses of all time, to state that.)

Now, it may seem I am leaving myself open to a charge of soplipsism. I am not. I said at the beginning that each of you also creates the world. And here's where a Catholic up bringing is handy. If Three can be one, well then why not 3 billion (or whatever the global population is these days.) Coextant yet distinct worlds, and each of us lives primarily in the one we create, but is influenced by all of them.

The more one talks about it the more trivial it becomes. There is an empowering shift of perception to be had here if one is prepared to grasp it.

We're talking about two totally different things. Many people could verify just about anything, but that doesn't disclude any of us from experiencing the vibrant individuality each of us has. We all exist in our own world, and construct it in similar ways. And as similar as it all seems, it is totally different for everyone. It's like the saying "I'm unique just like everyone else" - well, that is true, because each of us are our own worlds. There's an internal reality that is applied on this external reality that we see. Here's a question that I would ask to show you how different we are, and how much we create our own worlds - look at about a dozen pieces of art and talk about what you see, what different things mean to you, what they make you think of, what you like and don't like about them, and what you feel. Compare that to anyone's. This will give you an idea of the world that you create.

Perception is reality.
Reality is not what you perceive.

Tiltled Politics I think proves this nicely.

everything around us creates our world. We can only change it.

Okay, so i'm talking about the world where we get our perceptions from. Where one is one.
You're talking about the world that is created by our perceptions. Where one is the loneliest number. In essence our own personal shroud of delusions.

That's fine. I'm familiar with that concept. I know we don't individually create the world i'm talking about. And i am fairly certain that very few of us have it in ouselves to create out of nothing or destroy into nothin the world that you are talking about.

No one of us has created our subjective reality, it is a group effort. So much of our perceptions are hand-me-downs from the socialization process. I didn't come up with language on my own yet it is a vital part of my personal reality. Through occurences in reality and my perception of it my subjective reality can change, but i cannot just change it willy nilly. My own personal reality still has to conform to the laws of actual reality.

I guess where i disagree is in my belief i an objective reality. You can't have perception without something to perceive. I can ask you what time it is and odds are you'll tell me a time within 15 minutes of what my watch says(if you take time zones into account). Now, if there wasn't some sort of objective reality we couldn't have that sort of exchange. You could come back at me by saying that our different realities share certain common characteristics. We all set our watches the same in this reality. That's fine. You could just say, "well, you never know" and it would have the same resonance with me. You have the ultimate argument though, because it amounts to the idea that nothing is real. How do you prove to someone who is convinced nothing is real that something is real? "We could all just be part of some massive computer program designed to use our bioelectrical power to power its army of robots"

Ooh, I love that.

Good thread btw.

And, for me- I'll make it short and sweet.

God created, we recreate in every given moment.

Ouch! Some blatant egocentrism going on in this thread.

The universe does not revolve around the earth, let alone rely on you for it's existence.

I will always firmly believe that when a tree falls in the woods, it will make a sound, regardless of the presence or not of onlookers.

Of course, you will reply that, that is not really what you are talking about. But then you must realise, that what you are actually talking about is completely trivial:
You are responsible for the interpretation of your perceptions.
Nothing remotely profound about this statement.

Objective Reality -> Senses -> Perception -> Qualia -> Subjective "Reality".

Ultimately, you remove any of the links in the chain, your subjective "reality" will disappear, but the objective reality will always be there with or without you.

It will make a series of vibrations that will carry through the air at different frequencies, which, if encountered by a sound perceptory interface (i.e. - ears) and then processed through a system somehow to make coherent sense (i.e. - processed through a brain) it would be a sound. Otherwise, it is merely vibrations that could be heard if anyone was there to listen.

There is a degree of egocentrism to my existence, because without my body and mind the world would not exist to me.

I don't see there being an "objective reality" because there is no objective way to view reality. If we all see the same things slightly differently, and the meaning of the existence of those things hinges on how we see them, then it really isn't the same thing.

No, actually, that is exactly what I am talking about. It may be the world continues when I go away, but I know I will not continue to care about it. You say ego-centric like it is a bad thing. Well, lemme flip that on it's head for you: The golden rule only works if you are self interested. I want peole to do unto me what I want done unto me, not what they think is good for me, and therefore I will do that unto them. Ego centrism is what drives it. If you start being selfless about it you get paternalistic, nanny morality, and that makes me gag.

Now, as to perception and creation, argue semantics all you want, and the more you get away from "I create the world" the more trivial it becomes. If you let this way of looking at it empower you, then thamaturgy is in your grasp. That is what Crowley was all about, that is what Leary was all about, that is what Wilson is getting at, and that is what I'm saying: By an act of will I create the world - I take responibility for my perceptions and I can make things happen.

Well said.

If there is no objective reality how can you even be sure that you're typing on this computer? What if you're just completely misinterpreting your own actions because "no one has any way to perceive anything objectively"? What if instead of actually typing at a computer you are taking a shit in a dirty ass gas station bathroom in the middle of northern wisconsen. You just think you're at a computer due to the fact that you lack the ability to percieve the objective reality.

It isn't all in how you see it. I know i can misperceive things. I know that my perceptions alone do not a reality make.

All you're doing is taking the idea that everyone has their own perspective and pretending that it is profound. It is not. It is about as profound as the idea that my blue might be your red.

You can't make anything happen that someone who believes wholeheartedly in an objective reality couldn't. Certainly you have some amount of control concerning your actions, but the idea that you control the world is a little far-fetched. I think the closer you move towards "i create the world" the more trivial it becomes. How can you not take everything for granted if you look at the world as your creation?
If leary was so onto something real why did he need to take lsd to get there?
You didn't will this world into existence and you can't will it away.

There's a big difference between creation and control.

As we didn't will ourselves into existence (existence precedes essence), our continued existence after gaining an essence is a creative process. If I were to will the world into negation (which I guess is a philosophy of exile) I can functionally end the world for myself.

I guess i misunderstood. What
did you mean by "I take responibility for my perceptions and I can make things happen."?

You could "functionally" end your world, but you couldn't end the world. You could close your eyes and plug your ears and "will your world into negation" but you'd really just be ignoring reality.

I think there is a certain amount of confusion in using "the" and "my" interchangably in this context.

I know what your are saying, believe me. I just don't believe that it is as meaningful as you do and i think it is innacurate to use "my world" and "the world" interchangably..

Um... I didn't say that. The find-function proves it. If you believe that I say something that I didn't say, it will be much easier for you to disagree with me.

Quote:

You could "functionally" end your world, but you couldn't end the world. You could close your eyes and plug your ears and "will your world into negation" but you'd really just be ignoring reality. I think there is a certain amount of confusion in using "the" and "my" interchangably in this context. I know what your are saying, believe me. I just don't believe that it is as meaningful as you do and i think it is innacurate to use "my world" and "the world" interchangably..

No confusion for me. I don't know any world but my own - to me it is the world. I understand your resistance towards what I'm saying; I just don't see any reason towards orienting myself towards something that I don't have full access to. I like grounding myself in my own existence.

Oops, my mistake. I had you confused with senor tophat.


I see what you're saying, just have a different philosophy.

Wow, alot covered here so far.

Perception- how you perceive events, experiences, life, others, and yourself is how it is to you, but it is different to another.
Perception of life as true reality is an illusion. See beyond the naked, human eye & thought perception, and you will realize more, as you will know it intuitively.

Creation & Control- Within a thought, you are creating. You create this world every day, with your thought, which conclude to perceptions, then to actions. We act upon our thoughts, most of the time, automatically- subconsciously. It's like we brainwash ourselves with our thoughts and perception. We create our world's state and how we are, therefore, we have control over it all.
In a widespread conscious thought of something, we make something happen. Fear is the #1 thought of creating our world's state.
I wanted to repeat that again, as it applies well with my post.
The Essence of the Source, in which we are all made up of, created Himself into smaller pieces, with a physical form. As we experience life as humans, we are recreating the Source with every word, action, experience, and thought. But only the physical world of life can wither away, pass, and change, not to ever damage or deteriorate the Source itself.