dream
In the SD
Hello Rabbi,
There is the famous question: who said that not everything is a dream, or at least not at this moment?
We usually don’t settle for negative content, as Ein Ayah says there. And we’re not bothered by all the bad name-calling of the French philosophers.
But the idealists, as is their custom in the sacred, try to show that this is a positive doubt following two main arguments:
I) The dream feels completely like reality and only “when you wake up in the morning” do you discover that it was a dream. Therefore, this shows that it is unreasonable to trust intuition regarding reality “and that it is a flawed system.”
Although the narrator may make it difficult that this is actually evidence to the contrary, because we all understand that it was a dream, and in general, even in Peta Morgana, we tend to do the right thing and continue to trust our senses and not abandon everything.
But the idealist will argue that this is precisely a rare and isolated case, but in a constant and regular case like every 12 hours, it is absurd to argue so. Rather, it is a flawed system.
II) Following Ockham’s razor, all the features of reality can be explained by the claim that it is an illusion. This is a simple theory and assumes only one entity (“I”) so it is preferable. Although it does not sound particularly intuitive, it is much simpler and explains all the data in its illusionary way.
There is no and cannot be an answer to this famous question, except that I know there is no answer. I also disagree with the assumption (also expressed in a similar thread here a day or two ago) that in a dream there is a sense of reality. Absolutely not. And even if when you wake up you realize it was a dream and not reality, that’s enough.
There is an even simpler theory that nothing exists. Simplicity selects theories on equal footing. It is not a consideration in itself. This is a common misconception regarding the razor principle.
A. Doesn't the Rabbi think that if we ask the majority of the dreaming public to explain their feelings during the dream (when they reconstruct it retrospectively) they would say that during the dream they felt that they were experiencing the true reality?
B. The fact that we recognize after the dream that it was ‘just a dream’ is irrelevant, because with regard to the ’real’reality; there is no time when we can say that it was indeed real. We do not awaken from it to a different kind of consciousness as long as we are alive. Only after death may we determine retrospectively what we actually had here (it seems to me that there are idealists who maintain something like this).
C. In short, idealists do not deny the existence of reality, but simply deny its existence outside of consciousness. Reality according to this explanation is understood no less well than the realistic explanation, so why assume that it also exists ‘outside’?
D. Further reinforcement of the method can come from mysticism, from the Kabbalists and the like. Simply put, it seems that superior delusions, miracles, etc. are much more plausible according to idealism. It is plausible that the individual consciousness has the power to change reality or reach superior observations (which Kabbalists and their ilk have said they experienced) if reality is not separate from it (from consciousness). According to realism, this is much less understandable. And even the rabbi accepts that Kabbalists and mystics may have real intuitions.
Thank you
A-B. I don't think so. But even if it is, it is only a retrospective report and does not say what one feels while dreaming. And if waking is also a dream, then the report of the waking person about what happened in his dream is nothing more than a dream about a dream. It's like challenging vision because there is a pete morgana. The fact that sometimes we have bugs does not make us think that everything is a bug. Beyond that, the very concept of real reality and the distinction between it and a dream is drawn from somewhere, right? And hence there is a difference in experience between a dream and reality. In our waking state, when we feel that the dream is not real, it is done on the basis of a comparison with the waking state itself, which is indeed real.
D. Mysticism and Kabbalists are not evidence for anything. Sometimes they have good intuitions. So what? The assertion that they have good intuitions is made by someone who is not a mystic and is not Kabbalist.
In short, a delusional discussion that I see no point in engaging in.
Rabbi, I also tend to think that the dream does not feel like actual reality at all, maybe there is a feeling of one-sixtieth of reality in it. But reality itself feels much more “full” and thinking is also much, much better… (and even if there are nightmares that feel really, really like reality, it is no more than Peta Morgana and completely unusual).
In any case, I think that the Rabbi should once conduct a complete discussion on this subject from beginning to end (or until the water is clear) because to this day I think that the Rabbi almost always has not survived beyond 3 messages…
——–
I did not really understand the claim that as long as someone accepts that half of their life they imagine that they live in reality and the other half it is revealed to them that it is just a dream, they still have reason to assume that they have the ability to distinguish between a dream and reality? Doesn't this show that the machine is completely screwed up and not worthy of trust?
The only option I thought of was to divide between the two, because even if in a dream you feel like you're in reality, you don't have enough ability to *understand* whether you're in reality at all, because I don't remember ever being able to perform any kind of recursive thinking in a dream. On the other hand, in reality itself you can ask yourself if you're sure you're dreaming. Then it turns out you have a certain way of distinguishing between the options (for example, do your eyes work, etc.)
As mentioned, I see no point in discussing this. I wrote here what I had to say. The issue is really not interesting or relevant to me.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
