What if the fundamental nature of reality is a timeless ocean where every possible bundle of qualia - first person sensory experiences - exists within it? Time doesn't actually exist, but the illusion of it could, as bundles could have false memories and expectations.
11 Comments
slazer2au@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 321d
I don't know what you are on, but did you bring enough for everyone else?
whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 321d
also, how doesn't it get wet under the shower?
slazer2au@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 321d
By holding it below the shower. But I don't know if that is just an Aussie thing with how our water works
Acamon@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 321d
I guess if that was the fundamental nature of reality, then stuff would be exactly as it is.
mike_wooskey@lemmy.thewooskeys.com · 3 pts · 321d
Isn't that an oxymoron? If every possible first-person sensory experience exists, then time exists (we experience time).
TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 321d
The experience of time would exist, but each individual moment would in reality be timeless - just with a false experience of time for some of them.
owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 321d
There's a possibility, but I don't see any practical implications.
Also, what strand?
Amir@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 321d
Qualia is a stupid man-made thing that doesn't even scientifically exist
TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 320d
Can you expand on what you mean by that? As I thought, the scientific method was about empirically testing things, and the empirical world is defined by what we can sense - ie our qualia.
Amir@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 320d
My understanding is that qualia are how a "consciousness" experiences something, and I disagree with the notion of a consciousness being a definable thing in general. It's not a scientific meaning so you can never unambiguously talk about anything in the context of qualia.
TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works · -1 pts · 320d
Ok, maybe you're not conscious then. I know that I am.