— SteemCN

Hey thanks for such an in depth reply!

So looking at it from the perspective you've presented, we understand that Plato insists upon the existence of an objective reality apart from perception and aims to live as closely in accordance with that objective reality as possible.

But consider a fixed object in space, a sphere for simplicity.

The sphere is the "objective" reality, without the presence of an observer. But this begs the question "from what angle is the sphere 'most' objective? From what position? From what point in space? etc.."

and if you add in the perspective of the observer, the sphere may still look from one point as it would from any other point, but what is to say that that "sphere" from any point or angel is the true objective reality?

I suppose the point I'm trying to make is this: Because we exist as observers of our reality, even if there is a fundamental objective reality, it must first pass through the filter of the observer to gain any form of relevance. And simply by being observed, it loses its complete and total objectivity.

Would love to hear your thoughts on this.

RE: Reason and Emotion: The Children of Desire - Part I

You are viewing a single comment's thread from: