I'm very happy to see you.
And more than a little excited too.
But to answer your question, don't we have to agree upon truth? Is truth reality?
Is reality collective agreement?
"...in reaction against the eighteenth-century Enlightmenment values, the Romantic poetrs condemned Newton for banishing mystery from the universe, and reducing everything to fact and reason. 'Art is the Tree of Life. Science is the Tree of Death,' proclaimed William Blake. John Keats agreed that Newton had 'destroyed all the poetry of the rainbow by reducing it to prismatic colors'- an opinion he versified in Lamia:
We know her woof, her texture; she is given
In the dull catologue of common things.
Philosophy will clip an angel's wings,
Conquer all mysteries by rule and line...
(I'm skipping part of the quote because I didn't write the book)
But let me get to the point about my confusion regarding truth and reality:
"There is no light or colour as a fact in external nature. There is only motion of material. Again, when the light enters your eyes and falls upon the retina, there is only motion of material. Then your nerves are affected and your brain is affected, and again this is merely motion of material...The mind, in apprehending, experiences sensations, which, properly speaking, are qualities of the mind alone."
from The Faber Book of Science
edited by John Carey
and yep, it just confuses me all the more...
but it's lovely that my mind perceives you back!
(edited by me: TYPOS, I tell ya! TYPOS!)
[This message has been edited by serenity blaze (03-19-2009 10:08 PM).]