5 ms·

Hey wjnc. That's actually part of the problem I have with it. When you say: > ...for me 'constructing reality' really drives home that reality is subjective, a

Hey wjnc. That's actually part of the problem I have with it. When you say: > ...for me 'constructing reality' really drives home that reality is subjective, a construct. That is a large part of why I take issue with the phrase: the idea that 'reality is subjective, a construct' is one philosophical stance, but by no means the only one possible (afaik, it's quite uncommon for those outside the humanities and certain social sciences to believe this), so it's problematic to have it assumed as true, and to encode that assumption subtly into the language you're using (it's a phrase made up of common words, so unless you're familiar with it, you won't know it has a special meaning).

barrkel 9y ago
'reality is subjective, a construct' is one philosophical stance, but by no means the only one possible I'm not so sure about that. I find Kant is pretty convincing; scientific realism is pretty vulnerable when faced with the fact that theories change. Science is best viewed with an instrumentalist perspective, that's where it is most solid. We simply don't know if we're brains in vats, or creatures in a simulation. The real reality is unknowable.
tigerBL00D 9y ago
You wrote "afaik, it's quite uncommon for those outside the humanities and certain social sciences to believe this". This is an example of a fragment of your constructed reality. It's something you choose to believe, because it coheres with your other beliefs. It is clearly not a true statement, because the supposed objective reality is constantly updated with new knowledge acquired across all domains of human thought. No single individual possesses the complete view of all the knowledge. In other words any subjective reality is constructed, and the objective reality is not known. A "constructed reality" is not the same as a lie (or incomplete truth). A lie can stand alone in contradiction with facts and proofs, as your statement above does, by definition. A lie can be integrated into a coherent view of the world, a constructed reality, composed of truths and other lies.
- westoncb 9y ago
  > In other words any subjective reality is constructed, and the objective reality is not known. Yes, agreed. The only issue I have here is about the contortion of language to support a particular philosophical viewpoint. If the phrase were 'the social construction of subjective reality', there would be no problem. Instead, this underhanded usage of 'reality' is an attempt to remove the distinction between objective and subjective reality. Not only does it do that functionally, but it was also promulgated by people who do not believe in the existence of an objective reality (comically, in part because of then-vogue linguistic theories and bad interpretations of quantum and relativity theories).
  - andybak 9y ago
    To a certain degree the list of people who don't believe in an objective reality includes Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche. In fact probing the rather complex and contradictory nature of objectivity has been part of almost every philosophical school of thought or tradition I've ever read about. It's funny - I find myself violently opposed to epistemological relativism right up until the moment I hear someone else use the term "objective reality". ;-)
    - barrkel 9y ago
      Thing is, I think our brains effectively run on epistemological relativism -- it describes the map the brain builds about the world outside -- but "objective reality" indirectly measured via action and reaction is what keeps it honest. You might believe you're the leader of your country, and you are as long as everybody else also thinks you're the leader - and as soon as they stop believing it, it's no longer true. This is shared, constructed reality in action, and it's also "objectively true": if you imagined a disinterested observer looking at a human society through a set of powerful instruments, they could identify you as the leader. It still doesn't stop you coming down to earth with a bump if you believe you can fly, of course.
      - andybak 9y ago
mirimir 9y ago
"Reality" is ambiguous, I agree. What we experience, even at a basic sensory level, isn't reality. Rather, it's a model that's based on limited perceptions. In an context based on natural selection, at scales from evolutionary through developmental to experiential. And further, what we experience as reality depends on our model of reality. And then we act, which reinforces whatever reality we think exists.

barrkel 9y ago

'reality is subjective, a construct' is one philosophical stance, but by no means the only one possible I'm not so sure about that. I find Kant is pretty convincing; scientific realism is pretty vulnerable when faced with the fact that theories change. Science is best viewed with an instrumentalist perspective, that's where it is most solid. We simply don't know if we're brains in vats, or creatures in a simulation. The real reality is unknowable.

tigerBL00D 9y ago

You wrote "afaik, it's quite uncommon for those outside the humanities and certain social sciences to believe this". This is an example of a fragment of your constructed reality. It's something you choose to believe, because it coheres with your other beliefs. It is clearly not a true statement, because the supposed objective reality is constantly updated with new knowledge acquired across all domains of human thought. No single individual possesses the complete view of all the knowledge. In other words any subjective reality is constructed, and the objective reality is not known. A "constructed reality" is not the same as a lie (or incomplete truth). A lie can stand alone in contradiction with facts and proofs, as your statement above does, by definition. A lie can be integrated into a coherent view of the world, a constructed reality, composed of truths and other lies.

westoncb 9y ago
> In other words any subjective reality is constructed, and the objective reality is not known. Yes, agreed. The only issue I have here is about the contortion of language to support a particular philosophical viewpoint. If the phrase were 'the social construction of subjective reality', there would be no problem. Instead, this underhanded usage of 'reality' is an attempt to remove the distinction between objective and subjective reality. Not only does it do that functionally, but it was also promulgated by people who do not believe in the existence of an objective reality (comically, in part because of then-vogue linguistic theories and bad interpretations of quantum and relativity theories).
- andybak 9y ago
  To a certain degree the list of people who don't believe in an objective reality includes Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche. In fact probing the rather complex and contradictory nature of objectivity has been part of almost every philosophical school of thought or tradition I've ever read about. It's funny - I find myself violently opposed to epistemological relativism right up until the moment I hear someone else use the term "objective reality". ;-)
  - barrkel 9y ago
    Thing is, I think our brains effectively run on epistemological relativism -- it describes the map the brain builds about the world outside -- but "objective reality" indirectly measured via action and reaction is what keeps it honest. You might believe you're the leader of your country, and you are as long as everybody else also thinks you're the leader - and as soon as they stop believing it, it's no longer true. This is shared, constructed reality in action, and it's also "objectively true": if you imagined a disinterested observer looking at a human society through a set of powerful instruments, they could identify you as the leader. It still doesn't stop you coming down to earth with a bump if you believe you can fly, of course.
    - andybak 9y ago

mirimir 9y ago

"Reality" is ambiguous, I agree. What we experience, even at a basic sensory level, isn't reality. Rather, it's a model that's based on limited perceptions. In an context based on natural selection, at scales from evolutionary through developmental to experiential. And further, what we experience as reality depends on our model of reality. And then we act, which reinforces whatever reality we think exists.