Survey: Why is it that the "very real objective reality" of our indivi

Question: Survey: Why is it that the "very real objective reality" of our individual "psyche/personalities" are!.!.!.!?

!.!.!.so well established, that the "entirety of our ethical being" rests on that fact, and yet, the "true nature" of our "inner person" is so intangible, that the whole description of the Universe in mechanical terms, has had no need to take account of it, and in fact has been!.!.!.

!.!.!.successfully scientifically completed in deliberate disregard for "Its" reality!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

I was thinking about painting my nails pink!. But then I decided red!. But after I put it on, I realized that red neither matches my complexion nor the clothes that I own!. So now I have to take the stuff off and start anew!. Or go shopping for coordinating clothes!. I could just wear a necklace with red and pink in it!. That would certainly tie the whole thing together!. Oprah would know what I should do!. I wish I knew Oprah!. If only I had finished A New Earth and or applied it to my life!.

Anyway!. I feel pretty connected with the universe!. It keeps giving me what I need even though it's not what I want!. It's like it somehow knows me personally!. It's kind of like it was created just for me!. And it was!. I'm almost completely convinced that none of you are real!. Maybe I'm Jesus!. But that wouldn't make any sense, because I'm pretty sure I'm UnJesuslike!. I do have the want to walk on water though!. I kind of expect to!. And it's all about THAT!.

I'm sorry you had to read this!. I would ask for forgiveness!. But I know you do not exist!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

To whom do you ultimately answer for your actions in this world if not yourself!?
To say that science has ignored this quagmire is to ignore certain branches of science, neurology for starters!.
Suffice it to say that some apparent objects in reality are enduring that we have cause to conclude that they are real!.
If by chance you were able to establish that certain aspects of a psyche/personality were equally enduring then you may make a case based upon those aspects!.
It may be considered "intangible" simply because there exists no single tangible entity but the dynamic operation of several such entities that are considered objects in that they endure independently after the "self" ceases to be!.
Thus it can be said that the self is dependent upon them and not that they depend upon the self!.
Accepting this may be difficult for some but it can be demonstrated as the most rational conclusion beyond compare!.
It is simple really, what becomes of this "self" when a person dies and that self no longer benefits from the support of the tangible but dynamic functions of the physical living body!?
If this self is the source of reality then where has it gone that it can avoid detection of the senses and elude in depth observational analysis!?
I take issue with this line of conjecture for it centers is self directly opposed to common sense!.
If you insist that you will are the source of reality then you might be able to conclude this, but why should it be considered rational when your mind objects that are very similar in form and behaviour to "you" that you will endure where they do not!?
Last but not least ethical concerns are based solely upon the fact that we do not simply answer to ourselves because we recognize that we are not the only existant "beings" or selves!.
There would be no ethical concerns about "how ought we treat others" if you were the only human on earth!.
Ethical virtues stem from abstract concepts that can not be said to exist without a social concept that stems from expereinceing social sturcture!.
An individual can not reasonably from the idea of justice or ethics if that individual has no social experience further without a social structure that individual will not likely mature beyond infancy if left to their own devices!.
This as a foundational ethical reasoning is insuficient and invalid for these reasons, the only way it may be valid is to concede that it is an incomplete ethical philosophy but could still serve as a practical philosophy once a foundation had been established!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Very humorous!

By "cherry picking" selected terms, improperly employed and contrasted against one another, you have successfully said nothing!

What you appear to think of as you "psyche/personalities" (oddly plural!?) does not possess a "very real objective reality"!.

There is no "so well established" anything as the vast majority of persons choose to view the same, which is, in fact, more often a subjective view!.

"The entirety of our ethical being" , as a statement of the essence of being/non-being is misleading, and incorrect as a descriptive phrase!.

The "true nature" of our "inner being" is not intangible! It is very knowable!.

"Successfully scientifically complete"!? No physicist would agree to this terminology and outlandish statement that misconstrues the facts as they are currently understood in that field,

Thank you for the "laugh of the day"!.

Might it not be a usually wiser course to only speak of that which one knows, to only ask questions so as to gain knowledge, rather than to present something in such a manner that clearly demonstrates one ignorance and over blown ego!?

What is the old adage about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing!?

Be well, my friend!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

How can you be sure that the universe came about without any connection at all to all it has living in it!? There wasn't us and then the universe was there!? On the other hand it may have been successfully scientifically completed and deliberately to accommodate us!? Some physicists refere to our univers as the 'Antropic Univers' ie from its initial Big Bang state it is all primed so that we can live in it the way we do and who we are!. And do not forget the complexity of our bio/mechanical/chemical structure too who is its product and made from the dust of the stars; and all that houses the intangible intellect too!. Even if it is too remote for us to follow all the connections clearly our intuition and our basic knowledge can imagine a way past the molecules of life to that intangible core we refer to as the soul where all our faculties meet!. Scientifically,deliberately the universe and us included are consiouse of each other; in my view!.

PeaceWww@QuestionHome@Com

It is the incessant questioning that breeds more questioning!. When there is no answer except to just be, then the questioning should just stop and we could relax and just be!. When we question our "being" how can be relax in just being!. We can't help who we are anymore than we can understand it or change it!. If we change at all it will be due to our circumstances at any given point in time and we will build on that circumstance and the next and the next and the next until we have built a stairway to heaven!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Very deep content PP!.
"Linguistic diffidence can take various forms!. One is what we call euphemism!. This is the tendency to call a spade “a certain garden implement” or women's underwear “unmentionables!.” It is stronger in some eras than others and in some people than others but it always operates more or less in subjects that are touchy or taboo: death, sex, madness, and so on!. Thus we shrink from saying “He died last night” but say instead “passed away,” “left us,” “joined his Maker,” “went to his reward!.” Or we try to take off the tension with a lighter cliché: “kicked the bucket,” “cashed in his chips,” “handed in his dinner pail!.” We have found all sorts of ways to avoid saying mad: “mentally ill,” “touched,” “not quite right upstairs,” “feebleminded,” “innocent,” “simple,” “off his trolley,” “not in his right mind!.” Even such a now plain word as insane began as a euphemism with the meaning “not healthy!.”Www@QuestionHome@Com

You have committed so fallacious points of argument it is impossible to argue for or against you!.

Some of the fallacies are using "Loaded (Prejudicial) Language,"; "Questionable Premise"; "Far Fetched Hypothosis"; and unexplained terminology!. http://www!.iep!.utm!.edu/f/fallacy!.htm#topWww@QuestionHome@Com

Quite a curious thought!.They have no reflections left and are in a space like the outer universe they are in a moment they can not define, they have reached their end of the tool!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I think the real issue here is why in Monopoly is Baltic Avenue cheaper than Ventnor, when everyone knows Baltic is in a better location!. ?Www@QuestionHome@Com

I think you're the same insignificant dumbass on the inside as you appear to be on the outside!. Get me a beer out of the kitchen before you leave!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Perhaps because, as individuals, we want to believe that we are deeper than we are!.
(Survey question as case in point!.)Www@QuestionHome@Com

!.!.!.!.!. it's a small world aaaafter all
!.!.!.!.!. it's a small world aaaafter all

ha !.!.!.!.!. did you say something!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

Wow, people are taking themselves a bit too seriously here aren't they!? Kinda proves a point!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Read Daniel Dennett!.!.!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I'm hungry!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I like pieWww@QuestionHome@Com

I will feed ya BukWww@QuestionHome@Com

You're contemplating on whether to take the trash out or not!.!.!.don't you!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

i just threw upWww@QuestionHome@Com

i looked hot in my fur bikini, emailing pics as we speakWww@QuestionHome@Com