Is there any real difference between reality and a dream?

[Buckethead]

I define reality as what I can perceive and reason based on these perceptions. Nothing to do with because it is stable or because it is always around. If I woke up and my perceptions told me I was in China I would not think I wasn't in reality.

If you are having what is called a Lucid Dream or fully conscious dream, then you are in a position to "perceive and reason based on these perceptions". If you can agree on that then you will have to redefine your definition of reality otherwise you will have included Lucid Dreams in your definition.

Of course it's because how 'real' it feels we do call it reality. How else would reality feel, fake? How could you make such a comparison anyways?

If you are someone suffering from schizophrenia the imaginary person you are talking to seems very real to you so if you define reality as something that "feels real" then again you might be surprised.

The bottom line is, it's not that easy to define reality.

 

[Buckethead]

Is the world you see after you take a psychotropic drug "reality" ?

Are hallucinations defining a new reality ? Is seeing and talking to your long dead uncle a reality ? No matter that you are the only one who can see it ?

Is a schizophrenic experiencing reality ?

Is dreaming that you make sex with the weather girl from TV reality? No matter the reality is that you don't stand a chance in hell to score her ?


Reality is independent of perceptions and beliefs. It simply is. It doesn't need validation in the mind of a human. The weather girl is safe.

I will agree that it is independant on perceptions and beliefs, and it simply is. However, that does not help in defining what reality is as there is much that fits these definitions that is not considered in the mainstream to be reality.

For one example take Schrodinger's Cat. Before we look in the box is the cat dead or alive? Which is real? Is it both dead and alive and is this real? There is speculation that matter is made up of Strings. Are Strings real or are they just a math model? If they are just a math model does this translate into reality at the smallest levels of matter? In other words are strings just non-real pieces of information that on a macroscale reveal themselves as what we perceive to be real?

With regard to hallucinations, one would have to define reality carefully before answering that question. If someone sees an elephant in their living room and 9 other people don't and if reality is defined as what 9 out of 10 people see, then the one person in the room is not seeing anything real. But if 9 people see that elephant and one doesn't then the definition of reality here dictates the elephant exists even if it doesn't. I don't think this is a very good definition of reality either.

So I guess I'll give you my definition of reality (subject to change) and invite you to chime in with your own. Reality is something that requires two things: Mind and Matter. Mind is required because without it, there is simply no existence and there simply is no reality. Matter is required because just having a Mind is like having a spaceship and no planets or stars to go to. It is actually less than that because if there is no Matter, then there can be no thoughts, no thoughts, no reality. So reality is the interaction of Mind and Matter on the grandest scale of the definition. From this point one can break the definition of reality down into sub catagories such as stable waking reality which is the reality I am currently experiencing while I am typing this post. Then there is alternate waking reality which could include visual hallucinations or a a more subtler level how I feel if I am taking something as simple as a Prozac. Then there is reality as experienced when one is asleep which can have various degrees of importance. If one is conscious during a dream and one has the ability to examine (touch, smell, see, hear, taste) matter in that environment, then according to my initial defintion this is also reality. You might argue here that the "matter" in a conscious dream is not real, but there is no way for you to prove that and at the time this is occurring, all tests that I can perform indicate that there is indeed matter here. In addition everyone in the dream can verify that there is matter around them as well. Now I awaken and the matter falls from my view. Did it exist? Suddenly there is a Big Crunch and Earth and the universe is wiped out and we are all dead, Did the Earth exist? Was it real? Well, if this explosion ends up taking with it all matter, and if mind is all that's left, then it is a reality that exists no more. And then there is a Big Bang, mind once again has matter and now we have a new reality.

 

[DaveC426913]

If you are having what is called a Lucid Dream or fully conscious dream, then you are in a position to "perceive and reason based on these perceptions". If you can agree on that then you will have to redefine your definition of reality otherwise you will have included Lucid Dreams in your definition.


If you are someone suffering from schizophrenia the imaginary person you are talking to seems very real to you so if you define reality as something that "feels real" then again you might be surprised.

The bottom line is, it's not that easy to define reality.

Yes it is.

If you knock over a chair in a lucid dream, you will wake up to find that you didn't knock the chair over. While the dreamer may have difficulty determining that he's in a dream while he's in it, that does not prevent him from realizing his mistake once he's awake.

A schizophrenic will hear voices but it can be demonstrated that those voices are internal, not external. His reality includes voice, yes, but that is what makes him delusional.

What you're failing to see is that reality is not simply what the subject thinks it is. Indepedent verification can correct one's misperceptions.

For one example take Schrodinger's Cat. Before we look in the box is the cat dead or alive? Which is real? Is it both dead and alive and is this real?

Invalid example. Schodinger's Cat is recognized as a thought experiment, and is not applicable to reality.

If someone sees an elephant in their living room and 9 other people don't and if reality is defined as what 9 out of 10 people see, then the one person in the room is not seeing anything real. But if 9 people see that elephant and one doesn't then the definition of reality here dictates the elephant exists even if it doesn't.

This is overly-smplistic. Reality is not simply determined by a show of hands.

 

[kote]

What you're failing to see is that reality is not simply what the subject thinks it is. Indepedent verification can correct one's misperceptions.

...Reality is not simply determined by a show of hands.

How do you propose that this independent verification is performed, if not by a show of hands? Science is done exactly by a show of hands: Everyone jump from 1m and time how long it takes you to land. Okay, cool, looks like gravity is 9.8m/s. You got 12m/s? We all got 9.8. You must be wrong.

It seems pretty clear from the problem of induction, however, that it is invalid to infer anything conclusive about objective reality. When you are living your normal life you use certain unjustified operating assumptions, like the assumption that you aren't dreaming. When beginning from a position of doubt and questioning these assumptions, you find that you have no logically valid justification for their belief. That's what makes it hard to define reality, and that's why we're basically limited to a show of hands or some other unjustified method.

How do you, personally, verify that you aren't just imagining the "show of hands?"

I'm assuming here that we're talking about knowledge of an objective materialist reality, as seems to be the trend in the thread.

 

[Sorry!]

Regardless of if it seems absurd that to a person while they dream may think that a lucid dream is reality it is definitely real. Are you trying to say that what they are dreaming is fake... I don't understand they are having a dream and those actions are taking place in this dream.

Whether or not they know they are in the dream doesn't matter. They will soon wake up and realize soon enough it was a dream. If it were say a coma and during a coma you dream then yes that because your 'new' version of reality.

If 1 person out of 10 sees a elephant in a room and uses his reasoning skills to determine that the other 9 other people are incorrect and the elephant is in the room with them then yes this is reality to him. The other 9 people will probably conclude he is delusional but it doesn't change the fact. Instead this helps my definition of reality as being perception based.

The definition of reality that you give seems suspiciously close to the one I gave. Just a few words are altered and a few assumptions are made further than mine (I don't think I grant any assumptions other than we perceive and reason but these are minor assumptions because regardless of your ability to perceive and reason you still live in your reality).

 

[magpies]

The truth about reality is that none of us are actually living in it :) So it could very well be true that this is really just a dream world... Just not like you would think it is. What I wouldn't give to have a full night worth of dreams one day. I don't know if I could control my glee if I did though. Just imagine 8 hours of dreaming of being on sandy beach and fun! I would suspect that I wouldn't wake up as refershed if I did have that experience though. I think the refreshed part comes from having xyz hours pass without realizing it or at least that's what I am most glad about when I do fall asleep... Not having to spend the last 4-6 hours trying to find something interesting to do...