My thoughts on a stimulating discussion of YouTube on whether there is a real external world out there or is it something we can never know?
https://youtu.be/HOEFxD5mSLc?si=eXouSVBnMukch4hh
SUMMARY
Main Question:
Is there a real external world, or is reality dependent on consciousness
Mr. Deepak Chopra's View:
-Observer-independent reality is unprovable
Consciousness is required for any perception of reality.
-Reality is a "species-specific qualia gestalt"—our experience shaped by our biology and consciousness.
-Therefore, what we consider "real" is subjective and constructed by our minds.
-I Am the Universe.
COUNTERARGUMENTS TO CHOPRA’S VIEW
1. Consciousness is not required for all physical processes:
- Non-conscious objects (e.g., stones, water) undergo changes (like evaporation or movement) regardless of being perceived.
- The sun affects unconscious things—proof that it exists independently of conscious observation.
2. Consciousness does not have causal power over the physical world:
-Merely observing something doesn’t cause it to change physically.
-You cannot evaporate water with your mind alone.
3. Perception is not equal to Reality:
-While perception is shaped by consciousness, this does not mean reality is created by it.
-Reality shows consistency across observers (e.g., an elephant is large whether or not it is seen by someone blind).
4. Contradiction in the idea of a universal or supreme consciousness:
-If such a consciousness existed and observed everything, perception would be uniform—but it’s not.
- Different observers experience different versions of the same thing—proof against a single, all-seeing consciousness.
5. Consciousness is likely a product of fundamental reality, not its source:
- If consciousness cannot create or shape matter, it must emerge from the same underlying reality that gives rise to everything else.
- Therefore, it is not fundamental.
6. Reality is not dependent on observation:
-Differences in perception do not change the external world.
- A stable, shared physical reality across consciousnesses supports the idea of observer-independent reality.
DETAILED ANALYSIS
Robert asks: Is there a real external world out there or is it something we can never know?
Mr. Deepak answers: 'An observer independent reality is impossible to prove. How can you have empirical evidence in the absence of consciousness? What we call perceptual reality ' is a species specific qualia gestalt
There's a big problem with Mr. Deepaks theory. Consciousness is generally an attribute that is associated with sentient beings. We don't say that a stone or a drop of water is conscious and yet they transform and change regardless of our perception either conscious or unconscious.
If something is real, it must explain the effects it produces on both conscious and unconscious things.
You may say that the sun exists only because we see it. We perceive it. But non sentient objects react to it too and transform due to its presence.
My conscious observation will not for example evaporate a pool of water no matter how hard I try. I see that the glass of water that is in front of me remains in the same state for hours and yet a pool of water exposed to the sunlight and air evaporates even though it was unobserved. I did not have to perceive the evaporation.
The sun proves its existence through the effect it produces on things that are unconscious and could not possibly perceive them.
I could accept the fact that we perceive only a portion of reality. Our perception shapes our experience.
Many philosophers have argued that the true nature of the world can only be discerned through reason. But claiming that the physical world is unreal and there is a fundamental reality that supersedes it stretches it a bit too far.
Consciousness can't create a physical world. Consciousness can't transform the physical world. By saying that fundamental reality is something separate from what we perceive what this theory is essentially saying is that there is a fundamental reality that creates the stuff that we perceive. Now because consciousness can't create the physical world that would mean that consciousness too is created by that fundamental reality and thus is not fundamental in itself. It emerges from that reality like everything else.
And this contradicts with another assertion of there being a supreme consciousness that could observe everything. Because if everything was already observed things would be the same for each and everyone of us and perception of the world would be uniform. That is clearly not the case.
Do we need to observe the consciousness to make it real? If it is the consciousness that observes what are our bodies for then? Why can't it observe everything on its own considering that it is the fundamental truth?
If as you say 'I am the universe' then I must be all observant. I must observe all that is in the universe making it all observed and hence determined and hence static and unchanging.
You may also argue that we don't perceive everything but that wouldn't make it unreal because it's a part of me and 'I'm the universe' as you say and thus real.
You could say that the universe is not real but then I'm not real because I'm the universe.
Differences in perception do not imply differences in reality. The consistency of the physical world across observers is strong evidence for an observer-independent reality. If a universal mind existed then reality should be the same for everyone.
On the contrary if everyone has their own consciousness and observe their own reality then there would never be a uniformity which is again not the case. An elephant is an elephant whether perceived by a blind man or a man with vision.
Some philosophers posit the existence of the universal mind that is the sum of all perceptions.
If the universal mind contained different perspectives then they would also be contradictory. But truth is not contradictory and we don't see several opposing versions of reality. The adult elephant is not both big and small at the same time. But to our perceptions it may look small when viewed from far.
If the universal mind is the orginator of reality then it must contain only the truth. Which would mean that reality is real independent of what our consciousness would observe. And hence consciousness does not create reality.
CONCLUSION
While consciousness shapes how we experience reality, it does not create or determine reality itself. The existence of a stable, consistent physical world—which operates independently of observation—strongly supports the idea of an observer-independent reality. Consciousness is likely emergent, not fundamental.
Comments
Post a Comment