(March 13, 2015 at 10:39 pm)bennyboy Wrote: I've often talked about truth only being contextual. For example, in the context of everyday life, Aunt Ethel is definitely very real. In the context of QM mechanics, you'd be hard-pressed to find her anywhere. In the context of QM, things are intrinsically unpredictable. In the context of mundane reality, billiard balls bounce the right way every time no matter what.
But here's my question. Should something that we take as real in context, like love or beauty, be called real? Or must reality be based on an ultimate truth, something which holds true in ALL contexts?
*shrug* I live in a mundane, large-scale framework, not a quantum one. When my wife walks up behind me, grabs me bum and whispers, 'Let's get sweaty', I don't waste time wondering whether the experience is real, or just some quantum impingement on a false reality.
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
