[infinity]

The five senses are highly important in defining my reality and the only reality that I can be certain of is that of the present.
If I use my senses and assume nothing and observe some of modern man's activities, I can see a very strange world created by our 'convenient' technologies.
My questions are as follows

1. If see a human talking on a mobile phone do I assume that they are talking to someone, or are they (in my sense based reality) simply talking to an inanimate object?

2. If I see a human wearing ear pods, do I assume they are listening to music or are they simply not listening to my reality?

3. If I see a tree fall on youtube have I actually seen a real tree fall? or am I simply staring at a glowing screen?

I ask this because when I stop assuming things I see a very strange kind of reality in which humans fail to see the world around them in all its beauty and ugliness because they are too occupied in 1. talking to inanimate objects, 2. listening to something that is not actually there and 3. staring at glowing screens

Have we lost our sence of community as a result? Are we in stuck in our own little worlds denying our communal reality?

Please comment/advise me on this

[Poor Richard]

infinity, on 08 July 2010 - 11:41 AM, said:

The five senses are highly important in defining my reality and the only reality that I can be certain of is that of the present.
If I use my senses and assume nothing and observe some of modern man's activities, I can see a very strange world created by our 'convenient' technologies.
My questions are as follows

1. If see a human talking on a mobile phone do I assume that they are talking to someone, or are they (in my sense based reality) simply talking to an inanimate object?

2. If I see a human wearing ear pods, do I assume they are listening to music or are they simply not listening to my reality?

3. If I see a tree fall on youtube have I actually seen a real tree fall? or am I simply staring at a glowing screen?

I ask this because when I stop assuming things I see a very strange kind of reality in which humans fail to see the world around them in all its beauty and ugliness because they are too occupied in 1. talking to inanimate objects, 2. listening to something that is not actually there and 3. staring at glowing screens

Reality is manifold--omnidimensional and omniperspectival. None of the perspectives you describe is the full reality. Your sense-based reality may or may not include a "wire tap" on the phone you see someone talking into. The video of the falling tree may have been a fake cgi animation or a digital record of a real event. You never have the "whole picture". The value of any partial picture depends on its supporting evidence and its suitability for a particular purpose.

infinity said:

Have we lost our sence of community as a result? Are we in stuck in our own little worlds denying our communal reality?

Maybe. Not necessarily. It all depends.

You obviously have your own opinion, but it may be more shallow than you think.

[krosbowe]

infinity, on 08 July 2010 - 09:41 AM, said:

The five senses are highly important in defining my reality and the only reality that I can be certain of is that of the present.

Can you actually be very certain of the present reality based on your senses? How well does one understand the current "Reality", of which they are a part, by depending only upon their perception of it? How many times have you thought that you understood what you were perceiving, only to discover soon thereafter that you were mistaken? Is there a unique reality for each one of us who perceives it? Or, is there a single "Reality" of which we each have a different experience? In the words of the renowned philosopher of science, Karl Popper, "Our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite."

I subscribe to the concept that we are a part of vast (if not totally infinite) universe about which we individually can be aware of very (so very) little. But, that's okay. After all, concerning just "The World of Mankind", only one six-billionth of this is about you.

Quote

If I use my senses and assume nothing and observe some of modern man's activities, I can see a very strange world created by our 'convenient' technologies.
My questions are as follows

1. If see a human talking on a mobile phone do I assume that they are talking to someone, or are they (in my sense based reality) simply talking to an inanimate object?

2. If I see a human wearing ear pods, do I assume they are listening to music or are they simply not listening to my reality?

3. If I see a tree fall on youtube have I actually seen a real tree fall? or am I simply staring at a glowing screen?

I ask this because when I stop assuming things I see a very strange kind of reality in which humans fail to see the world around them in all its beauty and ugliness because they are too occupied in 1. talking to inanimate objects, 2. listening to something that is not actually there and 3. staring at glowing screens

Is a telephone conversation less real than one in which both parties are near each other? Perhaps in person, a conversation is enriched by the addition of body language, but aside from that, the technology merely replaces our dependence on air waves to transmit our spoken conversation and is therefore no less real. So, community and interpersonal connection is not only ever about proximity.

Also, I think that our concept of what is real is very dependent on what we have learned from our culture throughout our lives. Without that knowledge, we would have much less ability to accurately interpret what we are seeing and hearing, etc. So, we benefit greatly from being able to be a part of the world of ideas and knowledge that we share with our fellow humans. So, to the degree that communications technology increases our ability to share in the world of ideas and knowledge, it helps to expand our perception of reality. Unfortunately, many people communicate ideas that are B.S., like religion that do not help us improve our understanding of the actual part of the universe that we can perceive and interact with. So, we have to be discerning about what we are told, like considering the source.

Quote

Have we lost our sence of community as a result? Are we in stuck in our own little worlds denying our communal reality?

Does communications technology necessarily cause us to lose our sense of community, because it removes us from actual reality. If we notice a sense of loneliness, alienation and lack of community connection, is that the fault of technology or are we responsible for the circumstances giving rise to this perception? It sounds to me like you are concerned with feeling a lack of community connection in the area where you live. Unfortunately, the CoR website seems to offer no community connection aside form this forum. However, if you are wishing to find more community connectivity, might I suggest that you consider investigating "Intentional Communities" in your part of the world? http://www.ic.org/

Also, I've known a number of "Wwoofers" (W.W.O.O.F. - Willing Workers On Organic Farms) who say that they have found the experience of "Wwoofing" to be wonderful and connecting. I used to live in an "intentional community" called "Redwood Circle Community" in the Santa Cruz Mountains of northern California and we sometimes had Wwoofers helping us out. Mostly college folks do it, but some people do it merely as a cool, inexpensive type of alternative to a conventional vacation. I think there are Wwoofing opportunities in your part of the world if you're interested. http://www.wwoof.com.au/ http://www.wwoof.org/

Good luck.

[infinity]

thanks for the links krosbow

[avatar4281]

This may be getting off your topic a little, but I think that as we become more plugged-in to our virtual worlds we are becoming closer to a super-multi-celled organism. Not in the Gaian sense, but in the sense that we are acting like a large neural network. Where does the individual cell end, and the multi-celled organism begin? Or rather, it is quite easy to see where the individual cell ends, but, from the perspective of the cell, difficult to see the organism. Perhaps we are loosing our sensation of community in favor of actually becoming something greater. Nothing metaphysical, like the Gaian philosophy, but REAL, like the internet. At some point, if you believe evolution, single-celled organisms started working together. Two billion years later, here I am contemplating the existence of a super-multi-celled organism. It is at least possible that the merging of man and technology will create this super-being. It is even possible that this has ALREADY happened and you just don't know it.

[Poor Richard]

krosbowe, on 12 July 2010 - 01:00 PM, said:

Can you actually be very certain of the present reality based on your senses? How well does one understand the current "Reality", of which they are a part, by depending only upon their perception of it? How many times have you thought that you understood what you were perceiving, only to discover soon thereafter that you were mistaken? Is there a unique reality for each one of us who perceives it? Or, is there a single "Reality" of which we each have a different experience? In the words of the renowned philosopher of science, Karl Popper, "Our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite."

I subscribe to the concept that we are a part of vast (if not totally infinite) universe about which we individually can be aware of very (so very) little. But, that's okay. After all, concerning just "The World of Mankind", only one six-billionth of this is about you.

Is a telephone conversation less real than one in which both parties are near each other? Perhaps in person, a conversation is enriched by the addition of body language, but aside from that, the technology merely replaces our dependence on air waves to transmit our spoken conversation and is therefore no less real. So, community and interpersonal connection is not only ever about proximity.

Also, I think that our concept of what is real is very dependent on what we have learned from our culture throughout our lives. Without that knowledge, we would have much less ability to accurately interpret what we are seeing and hearing, etc. So, we benefit greatly from being able to be a part of the world of ideas and knowledge that we share with our fellow humans. So, to the degree that communications technology increases our ability to share in the world of ideas and knowledge, it helps to expand our perception of reality. Unfortunately, many people communicate ideas that are B.S., like religion that do not help us improve our understanding of the actual part of the universe that we can perceive and interact with. So, we have to be discerning about what we are told, like considering the source.

Does communications technology necessarily cause us to lose our sense of community, because it removes us from actual reality. If we notice a sense of loneliness, alienation and lack of community connection, is that the fault of technology or are we responsible for the circumstances giving rise to this perception? It sounds to me like you are concerned with feeling a lack of community connection in the area where you live. Unfortunately, the CoR website seems to offer no community connection aside form this forum. However, if you are wishing to find more community connectivity, might I suggest that you consider investigating "Intentional Communities" in your part of the world? http://www.ic.org/

Also, I've known a number of "Wwoofers" (W.W.O.O.F. - Willing Workers On Organic Farms) who say that they have found the experience of "Wwoofing" to be wonderful and connecting. I used to live in an "intentional community" called "Redwood Circle Community" in the Santa Cruz Mountains of northern California and we sometimes had Wwoofers helping us out. Mostly college folks do it, but some people do it merely as a cool, inexpensive type of alternative to a conventional vacation. I think there are Wwoofing opportunities in your part of the world if you're interested. http://www.wwoof.com.au/ http://www.wwoof.org/

Very good points and good sources, K. Have you ever been a teacher or a counselor?

avatar4281, on 21 July 2010 - 09:08 PM, said:

This may be getting off your topic a little, but I think that as we become more plugged-in to our virtual worlds we are becoming closer to a super-multi-celled organism. Not in the Gaian sense, but in the sense that we are acting like a large neural network. Where does the individual cell end, and the multi-celled organism begin? Or rather, it is quite easy to see where the individual cell ends, but, from the perspective of the cell, difficult to see the organism. Perhaps we are loosing our sensation of community in favor of actually becoming something greater. Nothing metaphysical, like the Gaian philosophy, but REAL, like the internet. At some point, if you believe evolution, single-celled organisms started working together. Two billion years later, here I am contemplating the existence of a super-multi-celled organism. It is at least possible that the merging of man and technology will create this super-being. It is even possible that this has ALREADY happened and you just don't know it.

Theories of consciousness or theories of mind are not complete without considering the transpersonal aspect of social creatures, especially humans with our deep, immersive cultural matrix. I like to make a mycological metaphor: people are the reproductive organs (mushrooms) of the culture (mycelium). Communication technology only magnifies what has been a distinctive feature of human behavior for at least 50,000 years and probably far longer. I think the real measure of our social evolution is the quality of our active institutions. These are analogous to organs in a very real way.

You might be interested in Living systems theory (Wikipedia: "a general theory about the existence of all living systems, their structure, interaction, behavior and development. This work is created by James Grier Miller, which was intended to formalize the concept of life. According to Miller's original conception as spelled out in his Living Systems, a "living system" must contain each of 20 "critical subsystems", which are defined by their functions and visible in numerous systems, from simple cells to organisms, countries, and societies...")