I've said it loads of times by now, but I have adopted the absurdist position. I don't think "real" has any objective meaning; at least, not one that we could ever be sure we are using correctly.
I prefer instead to sort things into groups which are "as real" as each other. This could turn out to be "not real at all", and they could also turn out to be real in exactly the same way, but we just don't understand how yet. This even allows for the possibility that nothing at all is real. It's my uber-solipsism accordian model.
So we are all as real as each other. Or rather, our physical bodies (assuming we do have them) are as real as each other. They are real in relation to the framework they are in, and really, that's as real as anything can be.
For real this time.
I prefer instead to sort things into groups which are "as real" as each other. This could turn out to be "not real at all", and they could also turn out to be real in exactly the same way, but we just don't understand how yet. This even allows for the possibility that nothing at all is real. It's my uber-solipsism accordian model.
So we are all as real as each other. Or rather, our physical bodies (assuming we do have them) are as real as each other. They are real in relation to the framework they are in, and really, that's as real as anything can be.
For real this time.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum