Not really.
My coffee cup can hold coffee in the entire volume of its interior. Yet I do not need to check the entire interior of it to determine if there is coffee in my coffee cup. All I need to do is check the very bottom of it. If there is no coffee there, I can be sure that there is no coffee above it.
But you can see the entire bottom of your coffee cup and its not obscured in any way to determine if its got coffee in it.
But most of the possible locations for any Israelite camps in the Sinai desert are covered in sand and have not been dug up yet. Unless we can see the entire floor of the Sinai desert we cannot be sure there is no evidence down there.
Would you be interested in starting a thread for this discussion then?
Yeah why not, its an interesting topic.
Why does a real world object need to "represent" something?
You sound like an English teacher asking what the blue curtains in a story represent.
No that would be a psychiatrist lol. Believe it or not we do make meaning out of things. We may not realize it but we do. We are constantly taking in information and mapping meaning to the world. Things matter to us and we want to know whats going on, why it is so.
Because we experience it, and we are conscious of that experience.
Is that not obvious?
But you were saying consciousness can fool us using the diffracted stick as the example. I said that's more about perception. Our perception can be altered by many things, light, water, location ect. But that's all about the mechanical processes involved. Consciousness is not about the mechanical processes and their outcomes. Its just about qualia. In other words its about what its like to have mental states
But what we can do with our experience of the world is imagine outside the objective world which helps being creative with ideas. From that we get greater insight into what is reality and extract from this truths about how we live in the world.
Science has achieved a great deal when it comes to the study of consciousness. So I don't know what you're talking about here.
Not really. No matter how science understands what part of the brain lights up, how light waves work and how all that works neurologically and biologically it still doesn't explain conscious experience because its not a physical thing.
Advances in science won’t help us understand consciousness
Advances in Science won't help us understand consciousness
Why can’t the world’s greatest minds solve the mystery of consciousness?
Why can’t the world’s greatest minds solve the mystery of consciousness? | Oliver Burkeman
I agree that consciousness can be fooled. Quite easily, in fact. But I don't see any justification for your position that it's some amazingly different way of viewing things that is akin to achieving transcendence or something.
I am not claiming its all about achieving some amazing experience. Experience is what it is and its part of being human. Though the fact we can achieve amazing experiences as part of being a conscious being is something amazing in itself.
Conscious experience is the filter we use to move through the world and its the only thing we can be sure of that is real because we are in the midst of it and know it its real. We can't just say its unreal because that would be undermining our very existence. So therefore its an important fact in what makes up reality or what is true and real in the world.
So a person's instincts are never subjective? They are always objective?
Not sure what you mean by instincts. I think its more about biological inputs and outputs. You can't change how your body works only nature or some sort of intervention beyond nature can do that. People may be born with variations to the normal functioning but there is always an objective reason for that.
No, I'm talking about our experience of colour. You've said that our experiences are subjective, so on what basis can you claim our experience of colour is not subjective?
After all, you can not prove that the colour you perceive as Blue is the same as the colour I perceive as blue.
If colour is about light illumination and how our eyes and brain work out what colours we see then yes that would be evidence if there was science to support these claims. Which there is.
Why do people see the same colours differently?
Science of 'the Dress': Why We Confuse White & Gold with Blue & Black
Do we all see the same colours?
Do we all see the same colours?
You've been watching too much Star Trek. Our experience creates reality?
How about you prove it by experiencing a few million dollars into my bank account, then?
Lol if gaining money was so easy to get. But I would say its not the money that creates the experience its the imagining what the money can give you. That's why they sell money through imagined lifestyles, pics of successful sellers with a Porsche siting on a tropical island etc.
But the idea that reality may be something we help create or that Mind and consciousness as a fundamental part of reality is supported across a number of disciplines like physics, psychology, spirituality.
Quantum physics: Our study suggests objective reality doesn't exist
https://phys.org/news/2019-11-quantum-physics-reality-doesnt.html
In Quantum Physics, “Reality” Really Is What We Choose To Observe
In Quantum Physics, “Reality” Really Is What We Choose To Observe
Does Consciousness Pervade the Universe?
Does Consciousness Pervade the Universe?