Ontological thinness (idealism)
Hello Rabbi,
Why doesn’t the rabbi take the idealistic approach (from the Berkeley, Castrop, and Co. school) to understanding reality? There is seemingly no reason to think that objects exist outside of consciousness, since everything we experience, we experience through consciousness. Furthermore, our consciousness in a dream is evidence that consciousness can establish a sense of actual reality.
Shouldn’t the method that strives for thinness, which the rabbi adopts in everything that concerns theology, also guide us in ontology?
thanks
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
A. The dispute is not about whether something exists, but about the space in which it exists. An idealist does not believe that the world does not exist or is an illusion; he simply thinks that the world exists in consciousness and not outside it. There is no space “outside” where things exist as they are.
Apparently, the belief that things exist “outside” is a superfluous belief. If so, why should we continue to hold this belief?
B. On the contrary. In a dream, people feel that this is the ’real’reality.
I agree with “Student”. I also felt during the dream itself that it was an absolute reality.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
