DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Amarok]

As we both know, definitions are important.  I have no doubt that you know that already, even in terms of study, and based on the conversation so far.

As far as reality, I believe it can be both objective and subjective.  One of the emerging (I think) trends is virtual reality.  If you experience something with a VR headset, is it reality?  Is it factual as an experience if I stated this phenomenon in terms of "truth" and "reality."

Your experience is real, the sensory input is real.
But the origin of the experience is virtual.

The same can be said of dreams. Some dreams are too vivid. Some dreams get stored in memory as real events and experiences. But they pertain to events that never happened in reality.
I don't think that our experiences should hold too much weight in ascertaining reality, as they can easily relate to non real events.

But does the conception of the stimuli, the feelings, the visualization, and everything else involved make it real?  If you took a blind poll, I can imagine many would say "yes" and likewise many would say "no" based on how they perceive the world and attribute value to things. 

Is the reality inside the Matrix real?
(using the word "reality" here on purpose )

I don't think "truth" allows for that same option. Did I have an experience with a shark as defined by a dictionary?  (A: No, I had an experience with a computer simulation that attempted to replicate a shark.) If I claimed it was a "real" shark, people would probably tell me I was off my rocker.   Regardless, both concepts are important and I believe they can both be used to validate one another.  Additionally I'm sure I missed some variables in explaining this because there's so much that can go into discussing such a thing.

It's interesting that you would say that you'd be "off your rocker" when you claimed that the shark was real.
Nonetheless, you experienced a shark. It felt real to you. You would speak the truth when you say the shark felt real (had you not been aware that you were in a VR setup), but the shark would never be real.

I think this is the sort of thing that happens with many so-called divine experiences.
Something happens that is erroneously attributed to a paranormal event and, mostly due to society, that paranormality is connected with the divine as its only possible source.

Anyway, regardless of what you find favorable, I don't think my view is necessarily better than your view.  It's how I view life. If I was raised differently with and in regard to different variables, my conclusions may very well be different and match more closely to your views.  We are all subject to something.  Some say it's "God" and others say it's "Randomness" or even something else.  But regardless, I think humanity is optimal when we attempt to become "solution-based" rather than "problem-based."  That way we're looking for answers to things rather than just looking to make more problems.

Yes, I too think that our upbringing is the greatest drive towards a particular view. That alone informs us that our biases stem mostly from that upbringing, from the society around us.
Whether we attribute a divine cause or a physical one to a particular event, comes from the way each of us has experienced the world... makes you wonder at how many events that we have received from the ancient world have been tainted by societal biases... how many are trustworthy...

You realize your simply in circles with him