Arcanus,
Good question, I would think that they are very closely correlated but, using logic circles, I would say that "exist" would be a large circle that "real" would almost fill. Almost all things that exist are real but some things that exist are not real because they are concepts like imaginary numbers, square root of -1, false emotions, and hallucinatory experiences. Now if you are asking if there are things that have physical form but are either not real or do not exist I would have to say that physical things are always both.
According to geometric dimensioning and tolerancing "true" things are never real because "true" refers to nominal values which are imaginary and unatainable. Hassan I. Sabbah was correct when he said that, "Nothing is true, everything is permitted."
I'm an Engineering Technician, so I don't even want to play at constructing an argument, but given that definition of "true" which is an industry standard according to National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), that should give you something fun to think about.
Crafting a definition for "exist" and "real" and deciding on how those two concepts interact could be a lifelong goal because they are just such overarching concepts; even moreso than even god. Using logic circles god would either be a circle outside of both, according to some theories I have read, or non-existent, or encompassing both. I think there would be no circle.
Rhizo
Good question, I would think that they are very closely correlated but, using logic circles, I would say that "exist" would be a large circle that "real" would almost fill. Almost all things that exist are real but some things that exist are not real because they are concepts like imaginary numbers, square root of -1, false emotions, and hallucinatory experiences. Now if you are asking if there are things that have physical form but are either not real or do not exist I would have to say that physical things are always both.
According to geometric dimensioning and tolerancing "true" things are never real because "true" refers to nominal values which are imaginary and unatainable. Hassan I. Sabbah was correct when he said that, "Nothing is true, everything is permitted."
I'm an Engineering Technician, so I don't even want to play at constructing an argument, but given that definition of "true" which is an industry standard according to National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), that should give you something fun to think about.
Crafting a definition for "exist" and "real" and deciding on how those two concepts interact could be a lifelong goal because they are just such overarching concepts; even moreso than even god. Using logic circles god would either be a circle outside of both, according to some theories I have read, or non-existent, or encompassing both. I think there would be no circle.
Rhizo
