Everyone creates their own reality

[LoBagola]

Someone said this and as someone who has come to consciously accept three axiomatic concepts of existence, consciousness and implicit in the first two identity and the primacy of existence, I don't see how the statement can be true.but I always have trouble showing why these type of statements are contradictory.

 

So let me try here and hopefully get some input. If anyone knows any other common statements, similar to the above, which they frequently hear - I'd appreciate you sharing them with me so I can think about them.

 

"Everyone creates their own reality"

 

Talking to person who stated this:

 

Everyone: Please define.

 

Every person? What is a person? am I a person?

 

 

Reality:

 

What is reality? that which exists.

 

So then what does that make me? an illusion in your own mind? Yes.

 

 

I feel like there are holes in my knowledge if I can't reason through statements like this. If I've properly understood and consciously validated axioms and their corollaries I *should* have no problem with this.

 

 

 

[Harrison Danneskjold]

Don't beat yourself up about it; you seem to be making some serious progress.

 

As for everyone 'creating their own reality'; try replacing "reality" with "experiences, memories and thoughts".  I think you'll find that what they're actually referring to is the fact that nobody else can do their thinking for them.

 

It's another variety of the Primacy of Consciousness; when they say "everyone lives in their own world" they mean "everyone experiences their own mind, and nobody else's".

 

And if you consider your mind to be the extent of your entire world then, yes, that makes you alone in the universe (hello subjectivism).  Probably won't have any luck helping them with that one, though; checking that premise would mean reexamining everything they think about the entire world.

[LoBagola]

As for everyone 'creating their own reality'; try replacing "reality" with "experiences, memories and thoughts".  I think you'll find that what they're actually referring to is the fact that nobody else can do their thinking for them.

So they mean something else? "No one can do the thinking for me". When I asked him "why are you unable to fly?" ... he said that that wasn't the point and I was just being too philosophical. But it slightly annoys me that people can say what they want and have it "mean" something different than what is actually said/written.

Anytime I've tried to break down a contradiction I am able to do well, I might get the reply "your like everyone who studies philosophy, they just try to define everything out of existence and essentially tell me I know nothing" (I'm a uni student).

 

And if you consider your mind to be the extent of your entire world then, yes, that makes you alone in the universe (hello subjectivism).  Probably won't have any luck helping them with that one, though; checking that premise would mean reexamining everything they think about the entire world.

What do you mean re-examine everything they think? None of them have jumped out of windows thinking they can fly. They all work jobs even though they should just be able to conjure up cash in their pockets. Since they don't actually do that or think they can I don't get how they can say that it is true.

Edited June 27, 2013 by LoBagola

[Harrison Danneskjold]

So they mean something else?

 Yes.

But using 'reality' to refer to 'my consciousness' isn't lying or being intentionally coy; if someone makes such a statement in full honesty then they don't grasp the difference.

 

 

When I asked him "why are you unable to fly?" ... he said that that wasn't the point and I was just being too philosophical.

Anytime I've tried to break down a contradiction I am able to do well, I might get the reply "your like everyone who studies philosophy, they just try to define everything out of existence and essentially tell me I know nothing" (I'm a uni student).

 And THAT, right there, is the point- the response he gave you.

 

He made an assertion and you asked for clarification- which is the usual process by which people who disagree with each other exchange their ideas, compare them and come to some form of agreement (or in the very least understand why they disagree).

When he accused you of being "too philosophical" what he meant was "too specific". 

You asked him to define what he meant and the sad truth of it is that, if he really means it, he cannot define it for anyone.  You define things by their relations to other things (white-black, quiet-loud, et cetera) and it's impossible to coherently define the universe or define existence, which is why he can't tell you exactly what he means.

 

Keep on defining.  Precision and clarity of focus are all that's necessary to expose most fallacies for what they are.

 

 

What do you mean re-examine everything they think? None of them have jumped out of windows thinking they can fly. They all work jobs even though they should just be able to conjure up cash in their pockets. Since they don't actually do that or think they can I don't get how they can say that it is true.

 Exactly!

 

Think about it- if everyone literally created their own reality then, by definition, everyone has godlike powers- and acting like a sane human being proves that this isn't what they mean.

 

But if everyone experiences a different reality (my white is your black, my up is your down, my food is your poison- my good is your evil) then reality changes itself, depending on who's paying attention at any given moment; what is food today may be deadly poison tomorrow.

Again, it's the result of failing to separate existence from consciousness.  And it's slightly tangential but, while existence=consciousness may seem at first glance to be a declaration of omnipotence, it ends up accomplishing the exact opposite.

 

A world which responds to your very thoughts would be one way while you were watching, and another when you weren't; you'd see things in the corner of your eye that would vanish just in time and everything around you would move and seethe in synch with your steadily-rising nausea.

You have experienced a fusing of existence and consciousness before; it's the distinctive trait of a nightmare.

[Grames]

So they mean something else? "No one can do the thinking for me". When I asked him "why are you unable to fly?" ... he said that that wasn't the point and I was just being too philosophical. 

You were not being "too philosophical", you were simply being philosophical and he was not.  The real psychological point of reciting these little sayings unexamined is to give himself permission to not think about them.  Hence the resentment when you insist on examining them.