Feynman on knowing the name of something

[UnbornTao]

What if we apply this principle to everything that is conceived and perceived? 

[Joseph Maynor]

This is a good insight but most people think knowing the name or class of something is knowing what it is in essence.  Even physicists like Feynman.  

[UnbornTao]

50 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This is a good insight but most people think knowing the name or class of something is knowing what it is in essence.  Even physicists like Feynman.  

Is it possible that all of us do the same when it comes to perceiving any given object?

In other words, do we assume our perception is reality or the same as what exists? (Not as a philosophy but as a factual happening?)

How can we even recognize this as such, if it is true?

Based on this assumption, it's virtually impossible to see a contrast for us to estimate what reality is other than our perception of it - except as an intellectual possibility that doesn't touch or alter what's experienced, or assumed.

[UnbornTao]

12 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Is it possible that all of us do the same when it comes to perceiving any given object?

In other words, do we assume our perception is reality or the same as what exists? (Not as a philosophy but as a factual happening?)

How can we even recognize this as such, if it is true?

Based on this assumption, it's virtually impossible to see a contrast for us to estimate what reality is other than our perception of it - except as an intellectual possibility that doesn't touch or alter what's experienced, or assumed.

what the fuck are you talking about Jesse?

[Osaid]

"What something is" seems to require something other than what is. The question itself seems to be mistaken.

I had a strange experience where I could clearly and factually see that we don't know anything. All notions were void and essentially seen as complete nonsense. Greatest day of my life. Visually everything stayed the same (no substances involved), but at the same time everything felt/seemed very different, like very playful and "alien". Thoughts would pop up like "grass" and yet it was obvious it wasn't actually describing anything, the notion that it was seemed completely ridiculous. All ideas and descriptions were like sounds or images popping up with no relation. When people talked it was obvious what they were saying doesn't exist. I think this is always true and it's just a matter of "tapping into it" right now.

[UnbornTao]

15 hours ago, Osaid said:

"What something is" seems to require something other than what is. The question itself seems to be mistaken.

See an object, then close your eyes. Visualize it in your mind. Is your experience of that thing the same as before?

In the experience that you shared, there would be no encounter with "grass" to not think about if you had your eyes closed. Just pointing out some basic mechanisms of perception, if you will.

15 hours ago, Osaid said:

Visually everything stayed the same (no substances involved),

Good, no need for artificial fireworks.

15 hours ago, Osaid said:

I had a strange experience where I could clearly and factually see that we don't know anything. All notions were void and essentially seen as complete nonsense. Greatest day of my life. Visually everything stayed the same (no substances involved), but at the same time everything felt/seemed very different, like very playful and "alien". Thoughts would pop up like "grass" and yet it was obvious it wasn't actually describing anything, the notion that it was seemed completely ridiculous. All ideas and descriptions were like sounds or images popping up with no relation. When people talked it was obvious what they were saying doesn't exist. I think this is always true and it's just a matter of "tapping into it" right now.

Thanks. Even prior to or independent of thinking and labeling, you likely still differentiated between one thing and another. The relationship with this or that particular thing would've mostly stayed the same. You might not have 'thought of' grass but in the background you knew that it wasn't a cat, or a cloud, or cancer. Trying to ground this a bit. 

I guess one of the goals here is recognizing that we don't know what anything is for real. Lots of "distractions" that make it seem as though we do but deep down we likely remain apprehensive that these are adopted and artificial in a deep sense.

[Osaid]

7 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

See an object, then close your eyes. Visualize it in your mind. Is your experience of that thing the same as before?

No. "Same as before" would be a present thought. Like "tomorrow".

7 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

In the experience that you shared, there would be no encounter with "grass" to not think about if you had your eyes closed. Just pointing out some basic mechanisms of perception, if you will.

Right, it's totally independent. But when we open our eyes we think it isn't, lol.

7 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Even prior to or independent of thinking and labeling, you likely still differentiated between one thing and another. The relationship with this or that particular thing would've mostly stayed the same. You might not have 'thought of' grass but in the background you knew that it wasn't a cat, or a cloud, or cancer. Trying to ground this a bit.

I think the entire realization was that knowing is symbolic. You definitely do not need to know or symbolize anything to see "grass". It's just a given. There's the thing by itself, then there's the "knowing" of it which introduces something else. When you say "this is grass" it's as if what you're perceiving is put into a relationship, but it was very clear that there isn't actually any relationship.

You can invent any sound or image or symbol or thought that you want, like "cat" or "this isnt a cat" or "this is grass" and you will not get closer to knowing what anything is, because what actually exists is not symbolic or relational. You could say "grass" or "rock" or "phone" and it would "slip off" of what you're perceiving in a way where it's very obvious that you don't actually know anything about what you're perceiving. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Osaid