"How do we know…"

Excerpt taken from a book: 

So then, the statement that we cannot find (or demonstrate to others) one “deep reality” (singular) that explains all relative realities (plural) measured by our instruments -and by our nervous system, the instrument that “reads” (interprets) all other instruments - does not mean the same as the statement “there is no deep reality.” Our inability to find one deep reality registers a demonstrable fact about scientific method and human neurology, while the statement “there ‘is’ no deep reality” offers a metaphysical opinion about something we cannot test scientifically or experience existentially. 

In short, we can know what our instruments and brains tell us (but we cannot know if our instruments and brains have reported accurately until other researchers duplicate our work…)

What our instruments and brains tell us consists of relative “realities” or cross-sections of “realities”. A thermometer, for instance, does not measure length. A yardstick does not measure temperature. A voltmeter tells us nothing about gas pressure. Etc. A poet does not register the same spectrum as a banker. An Eskimo does not perceive the same world as a New York cab driver. Etc. 

The notion that we can find “one deep reality” underlying all these relative instrumental/neurological “realities” rests upon certain axioms about the universe, and about the human mind, which seemed obvious to our ancestors, but now seem either flatly untrue or - even worse - “meaningless”. 

- Robert Anton Wilson’s Quantum Psychology How Brain Software Programs You & Your World

"How do we know…"

Excerpt taken from a book: 

So then, the statement that we cannot find (or demonstrate to others) one “deep reality” (singular) that explains all relative realities (plural) measured by our instruments -and by our nervous system, the instrument that “reads” (interprets) all other instruments - does not mean the same as the statement “there is no deep reality.” Our inability to find one deep reality registers a demonstrable fact about scientific method and human neurology, while the statement “there ‘is’ no deep reality” offers a metaphysical opinion about something we cannot test scientifically or experience existentially. 

In short, we can know what our instruments and brains tell us (but we cannot know if our instruments and brains have reported accurately until other researchers duplicate our work…)

What our instruments and brains tell us consists of relative “realities” or cross-sections of “realities”. A thermometer, for instance, does not measure length. A yardstick does not measure temperature. A voltmeter tells us nothing about gas pressure. Etc. A poet does not register the same spectrum as a banker. An Eskimo does not perceive the same world as a New York cab driver. Etc. 

The notion that we can find “one deep reality” underlying all these relative instrumental/neurological “realities” rests upon certain axioms about the universe, and about the human mind, which seemed obvious to our ancestors, but now seem either flatly untrue or - even worse - “meaningless”. 

- Robert Anton Wilson’s Quantum Psychology How Brain Software Programs You & Your World

Notes:

  1. whiskeysonkittens reblogged this from fuckyeahquantumystics
  2. fuckyeahquantumystics posted this

About:

http://www.rosicrucian.org/home.html
http://www.osho.com/library

Following: