The Really Real World: A Closer Look At Reality's True Constituents

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
Find out the only fact. What do you 'know' for sure without it being negated?
You are having an experience. You can say 'I am' but you can not say 'I am not'.
Everything else is hypothetical.
Then you can examine what it means to experience.
If you want to know reality, you have to start with something that you know is real.

Well I know relating and communicating with others is real, and I know you can do that through a website or chat mics on a video game while you shoot your online 'buddies' and yell at people who call you racial slurs. I know you can do the same thing in the streets except that you actually learn tough lessons out there...Sometimes life gets a little to real sometimes life gets a little too easy. I know that. How do you differentiate real from not real?

ETA: I would define real as my inner being being affected emotionally/spiritually by outside influences...the more astounding effect the more real...

reply to post by FinalAccount2008


In a dream you see 'others' as real, when you wake you know you experienced 'other' people but it was just one thing, a dream.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by FinalAccount2008

 

In a dream you see 'others' as real, when you wake you know you experienced 'other' people but it was just one thing, a dream.

edit on 25-2-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

Yeah it's kinda like you experience your idea of how they are, and then interact with it. The weird part is, you don't always get the reaction you think you'd expect from the people you're dreaming of. Unless it's a lucid dream, in which case you kinda conjur up an image and do whatever it is you were planning on. But alot of the dreams I write down in the morning seem kinda objective, like I was just talking back and forth with my own brain. But It was, as you say, just "one" thing, a "dream"!

ETA: In a lucid dream, I never picture a face very well, but in "autopilot" dreams, I can not only tell the faces but even the voices and impressions of the people in them. I usually only dream about people that have been in my life in major ways for quite some time.

Life is a video game. Girls, Friends, Jobs, Schools, Psychological Bridges and Cars all serve as the objects we play with and use. Life is the game. You can create or destroy. Music is math.

Why is this thread so small? It's such an interesting premise to me and seemingly well needed and rare that this OP just isn't getting the notice it needs IMO.

Where the birds at?

reply to post by FinalAccount2008


'Real' life is no different than a dream. You may believe there are 'other' people but all you will ever really know is your experience. It is not really 'your' experience though, it is just experience.
Here is a great video which really makes you think:
youtu.be...
I highly recommend watching all of Peter Brown's youtube clips.

OP, I assume you've read Nick Bostrom's Simulation Argument?

ABSTRACT. This paper argues that at least one of the following propositions is true: (1) the human species is very likely to go extinct before reaching a “posthuman” stage; (2) any posthuman civilization is extremely unlikely to run a significant number of simulations of their evolutionary history (or variations thereof); (3) we are almost certainly living in a computer simulation. It follows that the belief that there is a significant chance that we will one day become posthumans who run ancestor-simulations is false, unless we are currently living in a simulation. A number of other consequences of this result are also discussed.

Essentially, Bostrom makes a convincing argument that if it is possible to simulate reality then chances are we are already living in one, since simulated realities vastly outnumber 'real' ones. It's actually the best argument for god I've ever heard, and it didn't even come from religion.

On a related but whimsical note, I was thinking about how realism in games is seen as desirable, and yet it is usually quite possible for the protagonist to be 'reborn' after dying. Art reflecting life or vice versa?

Interesting post OP.

Originally posted by FinalAccount2008

Well I know relating and communicating with others is real, and I know you can do that through a website or chat mics on a video game while you shoot your online 'buddies' and yell at people who call you racial slurs. I know you can do the same thing in the streets except that you actually learn tough lessons out there...Sometimes life gets a little to real sometimes life gets a little too easy. I know that. How do you differentiate real from not real?

ETA: I would define real as my inner being being affected emotionally/spiritually by outside influences...the more astounding effect the more real...

edit on 25-2-2012 by FinalAccount2008 because: (no reason given)

You have, rather quite well, summed up the definition of an "endogenous reality". Meaning that, the more crossover there is in what affects you on your deepest levels, the more validated that reality is. There is no other measure.

You've sort of accounted for the emotional side of what I was trying to figure out on a physical level. Cool on you.

Originally posted by AlienAnthropologist
OP, I assume you've read Nick Bostrom's Simulation Argument?

I haven't but you definitely convinced me to, thanks. I'll hopefully get back to this after I read it as you already made it sound like it's up my alley.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by FinalAccount2008

 

'Real' life is no different than a dream. You may believe there are 'other' people but all you will ever really know is your experience. It is not really 'your' experience though, it is just experience.
Here is a great video which really makes you think:
youtu.be...
I highly recommend watching all of Peter Brown's youtube clips.

edit on 16-3-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

I'm a check that out, thanks!

I've seen a couple things in my dreams that came true later, so i'm gonna continue recording them.It reminds me that there is way more to this experience than I have willfully acknowledged.

Originally posted by smithjustinb
In the time you spent playing video games, what did you do to help other people or benefit society in any way?

edit on 1-7-2011 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)

why would you think that?

it is not his job nor responsibility to do so..

in the time you spent judging other peoples lives what have you done for society or to help other people in any way?

what, your super power is "smart a$$"?

so by dishing out unwarranted guilt you feel you help the world?

what a joke.

reply to post by reeferman


by playing the good they mean guilt concept destruction, so there cant b existing but opportunists, never objective conscious neutral obligations to state what is goin on really or what they are real about

only opportunists splited in two sides, one is eager never have enough food n pleasures, the other side is godish style, repeating no no it is not good we must b superior n give good example of how we eat the food

So I read an article articles to be more precise where Zhrodingers uncertainty principle had been observed in a lab somewhere.But at the macro levell not micro levell.Must admitt my feeble brain found it difficult to rationlise or even imagine the concept of what I was reading....I will paraphrase bert I can.Researchers observed a solid line act as a wave an single line simultanously..What this solis line was made from was not explained or the wave either,Neither was how its even possable for a human eye/brain to comprehend this duelality in matter .Anyway that led on to a disscusssion about quantom computers nano technallagy and how with the advent off quantom computing .It would be possable to store all the data in every computer in the world today in a chip the size off a pinhead.Then went on to say that within 20 years of the worlds first qauntom computers.We will have ones that are capable of storing more info than exisits in the Universe.An that doesnt mean every planet sun blacknole ect.No it will be able to acount for every particle in the universe an still have memory to spare.That got me thinking as soon as they have this tech someones going to start runnning simmulattions on the Universe.Now if the things inside said simmulation are unaware of the sittuation.They can evolve get technolagy ect invent there own quantom computters an run there own simulation an so on add infiniteum.We may well be within a russion dolls house of pc computers running simulations..

It makes you think, if all that is possible how possible is it that it's already become probable, and happened?? and is happening.

All those or these particles....meshing....

:Mindblown:

Hello all, I would just like to throw out there that video games can be used as a learning tool...
I learned to drive by playing racing games. I am confident i can shoot a zombie thanks to Call of duty. Don't ignore the usefulness of video games, but i advise not to spend more than a couple hours a day playing video games.

Source: Ex-Vidiot (me)

As an avid gamer myself I have a bit of input for this excellently put together and well thought out thread.

For the OP, I think you may have been underestimating peoples (and maybe even your own) emotional attachment to Real Time Strategy games or other games that don't necessarily draw you in with a storyline and emotional attachment to a main character. In single protagonist games the strategies at your disposal are practically laid out for you in advance, and there is very often a best way to beat the stage or scenario. In games where you control multiple protagonists, (ie. RTS games, Final Fantasy Tactics, Chess) you start from scratch and build your own personal strategical build up, employ tactics often based on your personality (aggressive, defensive) and employ a great deal of personal effort. Rarely is there a single best strategy to use, there are so many options that you can create your own with great effect.

After spending hours building what you consider to be an impregnable defense, and having produced an army you consider to be on par with the Roman Empire in its prime, what do you think happens to ones mind when your opponent wipes you out with hardly any effort? It can be devastating and failure in this kind of game effects me and many others much more deeply than failure or success in a FPS or single character game. I used to be a big chess player and the same principle applies, perhaps to a higher degree than any video game I've ever played, and I've played many hundreds. In chess when your seriously competitive, it feels like your intellect is directly challenging another persons. This can directly effect your self esteem and make you question your own intelligence when you lose. Being able to build a set up in chess that is uniquely yours, one that you didn't directly learn from a book or by studying the greats is an awesome feeling and can be aesthetically pleasing to observers. Many great chess players have also had mental breakdowns due to losses or mistakes made while playing.

I just think there may be something (perhaps) pretty important that you missed in breaking down the different genres in games and how we respond to each. Namely, ones personal investment into their own unique creation. Conversely I have felt a great deal of emotional investment in single characters, mainly because I spent hours/days/weeks building that character up and giving it a build that I made up and suited my personal style of play. I've also had the pleasure of jumping on games before over powered builds were discovered and published, and just ad-libbing my own, with the intention of making the character both fun to play and being highly effective in combat.

To sum things up, I would suggest that the brain would respond more to a game that involves personal investment and ability to create and customize, then a game with effective storyline, cinematic sequences and a single protagonist whose abilities and choices are mostly pre-set.

It could be a matter of preference, but I'd wager that the brain lights up more and becomes more emotional the more personal the gaming experience. The more the layout, strategies and tactics of the game itself feels like its YOURS, the more attached to it we become.

reply to post by Cuervo


Read the first 3 paragraphs.......really interesting.

Going to read the rest later because I like the way your presenting this topic.

Wow, and I thought I was the only one who saw it in that perspective. If you have any more sources please list them, I'd like to look deeper into this. I won't state my reasons why my perspective is similar to yours, but I will say I'm curious as to what sources helped you acquire this conclusion.

Good thread, thanks for plugging it on the other thread. Bumping just to bump it along.

a reply to: smithjustinb
I know you've been rebutted a couple times already, but I want a shot as well.
You failed to respond to the OP's comment about video games being as beneficial to society as reading a book, etc..

Playing video games is very similar to reading a book, such that you immerse yourself into a different reality, which is what a lot of book readers claim to do. You are acting as if someone doesn't "benefit" society 100% of the time, then they are wasting their time. Which is very untrue. You are coming off as a huge bigot, and probably got # talked by a 12 year old in an FPS game.

And then you bring God into it.
Look at it this way.
"God" created us, and is watching all of us. He can "interact" with us in the form of miracles, natural disasters among other things. That, to me, sounds like "God" is playing a video game in which all 6.8 billion of us are characters.

I know you won't see it this way, but please don't hate on someone because they have different hobbies than you.

ON-TOPIC:

The fact that our brains and bodies react to digital interactive art in the same way it does to situations in reality, really makes me think we may be living in some sort of a simulation. Maybe a simulation brought on by electromagnetic forces and nuclear forces interacting with matter, sending things into a spin, creating gravity, and then billions of years later, we pop up. It almost gives me a headache to think about that.

We really do not know much about the universe besides some physics. It will be interesting to see what develops as our physical knowledge grows and more and more minds get together to put new theories together. We might discover that we really have no purpose in the universe, that we are simply here due to sheer luck on how things have come forth to the current point.

That being said, how much more can games progress, until we have a game which perfectly models reality, such that you start a new life in the game, and you progress him/her to whatever you want, while REALLY CLOSELY modeling reality with the mistakes made, knowledge/skills gained, and the consequences of such.

We live in a wonderful time.