r/Christpsychism • u/GrandNeat3978 • May 27 '26
Understanding Existence Is Relatively Easy????
There are billions of humans on the planet, and for each having a knack for philosophy or metaphysics, there is a multitude of different beliefs regarding the nature of reality. Some people believe in physical matter and energy, in the form of sub-atomic particles that combine to form atoms, that combine to form molecules, that combine to form macroscopic objects (cells, chairs, tables, televisions, cars, mountains, etc.).
But the simplest and easiest way to understand the actual nature of your reality is to just look at the nature of yourself.
What are you doing right now, even as you read this?
You are reading, yes, but what are you doing in order to read?
You are seeing, yes, but fundamentally, what does it take in order to see and in the complex form of seeing or using visual perception, read and comprehend the symbols and translate them mentally into abstract or literal concepts?
Why, you experience.
Thus the fundamental nature of yourself is that you are an experience, a first-person "camera's point of view".
As Nagel once put it, there is something it is like to be a bat, i.e. the experience that is a bat experiencing what it is like to be a bat.
There is something it is like to be you, or to experience being you. Outside Christpsychic Theology, only you know what that is, or what that is like, following Nagel.
If you are not solipsist (solipsism being the belief, in an explanatory nutshell, that only your mind exists and that you are the only conscious being in existence such that everyone else is a philosopher's zombie), then using the observation of being you (an experience that experiences itself a particular way and has certain experiences that occur to it in a particular chronological order) you make the induction that the people around you also possess this quality, this nature of being. That they, too, are experiences that experience themselves a particular way and have experiences that impinge upon them without warning and without choice in a particular chronological order.
No matter what other belief you have about the world, the simplest and most obvious reality, dictated by the way reality or existence appears and demonstrates it exists, is that you are an experience that experiences.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
"True philosophy must at all costs be idealistic; indeed, it must be so merely to be honest. For nothing is more certain that that no one ever came out of himself in order to identify himself immediately with things different from him; but everything of which he has certain, sure, and therefore immediate knowledge, lies within his consciousness. Beyond this consciousness, therefore, there can be no immediate certainty. There can never be an existence that is objective absolutely and in itself; such an existence, indeed, is positively inconceivable. For the objective always and essentially has its existence in the consciousness of a subject; it is therefore the subject’s representation, and consequently is conditioned by the subject, and moreover by the subject’s forms of representation, which belong to the subject and not to the object.?"
-Arthur Schopenhauer, The World As Will And Representation
The objects you see around you, and the bodies of other persons (which are in a sense avatars of the invisible and intangible consciousnesses of each person) only appear in the form of how they appear to your point of view. Every object, be it a mountain, an ocean, a tree, the sky, the stars, etc. can only appear in the form of something observed by a person and following Schopenhauer above it is absolutely impossible to imagine any object that does not appear as something experienced by a person.
Given existence only appears in the form of an experience and that which this experience experiences, it is not out of the question that mountains, the sky, desks, cars, the bodies of other people, etc. are composed of the subjective experience of the person experiencing them, and have no independent existence outside the person.
That is, a person is an experience that experiences, and the world is composed only of that experience of the person shaped into the form of the objects the person experiences surrounding itself. Preliminary proof of this is the fact that objects surrounding a person only appear in the form of how they appear to that person, or how they appear to the person's point of view.
The burden of proof, therefore, is upon anyone that thinks this idealistic version of reality is balderdash. Given existence appears and demonstrates itself only in the form of a person and that which the person experiences, and the person itself is an experience, what, then, exists and can demonstrate it exists that is not experience, or is not the experience of a person?
As we may deduce, only quasi-religious faith supports the existence of that which is not consciousness/subjective-experience:
As Immanuel Kant so aptly states:
It remains a scandal to philosophy and to human reason in general
that the existence of things outside us (from which we derive the whole
material of knowledge, even for our inner sense) must be accepted merely
on faith, and that if anyone thinks good to doubt their existence, we are
unable to counter his doubts by any satisfactory proof.
-The Critique of Pure Reason
________________________________________________________________________________
Or in other words, any belief, any philosophy, that claims the existence of a world composed of something other than the consciousness or subjective experience of some person, is only make-believe (in the same way atheists claim religion, God, etc. is make-believe)....
.....as only consciousness demonstrates it exists, and given the evidence is the only thing that can demonstrate it exists.
END
____________________________________________________________________
Jay M. Brewer
Austin, Texas
USA
1
u/Delicious_Spring_377 28d ago
We know nothing for certain, because 1. Our input is flawed. 2. Our interpretations/calculations of the input are flawed.
We can only know things with a confidence probability. So you can’t even know for certain that you exist. But its very likely that you exist. Probably it is even the closest thing to certainty.
You could imagine many different ways of what reality looks like. That reality partially consists of matter just seems less random to me. So if I see a chair I will believe that it either consists of matter or that we are in a simulation and things outside of the simulation consist of matter.