only approximation

Why don’t you two move this to debate

Objective reality would have to be based on what it is. Not what you preceive it to be at any point in time.

^

@Malt_Hitman yes the senses perceive if not feelings

if we are both in the same room and i think its too hot and you think its cold what is reality

Before you can have reality, you have to exist. Can you proove you exist, can any of us?

Reality would be the temperature in the room.

@Ronald McFunkytown✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ that of course it more complicated because that's motivated by feelings

Reality would the room tempature yes

Those are both your perceptions on the temperature in the room. The room's temperature is objective.

@Antireal perceptions motivated by feelings to form a concept

And this disproves reason how?

Recent discoveries done with the universe have destroyed objective realities once believed.
In fact a lot of them completely turned everything on its head.
But at the time that was logically consistent and objectively measured.
Yet it was wrong.

and thats the forefront of science and thinkers

What recent discoveries are you referring to?

@tritrium sure but we advanced so did our technology and understanding

Its not like the reality changed

No

But our approximation to it has

Yes it was disproven but we used reason to get closer

Who made the tools?

higgs, dark matter, red shift, etc malt

How'd we make them?

our idea of whats true is true until it isnt

Im not arguing about reason booled

@Ronald McFunkytown✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ until its contradicts

Im arguing that we can only approximate objective reality

To some extent yes I guess

We cant know reality to a certain degree without time

objective reality itself doesnt change, our ability to approximate it does however.

and i think thats probably the best we can do as far as i can think

But the premise doesn't change for reason or objective reality so that's all that matters really I concede

We can still know reality through reason I might add

in a more general sense yea, otherwise we wouldnt be able to function

you assume the ground underneath you will hold your next step etc

but in a more abstract sense no

tritrium, it sounds like you agree with objective reality and are only stating that humans are falliable and can't accurately depict reality as it objectively is.

Yeah

pretty much

@Malt_Hitman id say with enough time this will be overturned