You’re really positive that a manticore worshipper actually exists? That’s quite an extraordinary claim. I don’t think you can back that up.
Don’t want to sound picky, I just want a clarification. Are you saying that ‘it only to you it seems like everyone sees the same thing’? It’s just that the way you use ‘objective’ is throwing me a bit.
How is it supposed to effect the body?
Reality is self referential, one example being that we are a part of reality that is referencing reality.
He was not assuming a manticore is reality.
If you had the same person in a different lab it would be repeatable as those same filters would apply in either lab, so the lab is irrelivant. If you got a different person in either lab it would still be repeatable as the second person would never know anything other that what he saw through his different set of filters and as far as he could tell the repeat would go exactly as the first scientist described.
Earlier I said:
This is were that entire word thing started. Calling God a manticore is a derogitory form of ‘God’ if that is how you are using it, just as ‘Idiot-Box’ is a derogitory form of "Television’. Being a derogitory word changes the nature and therfore the difinition of a word, and so while it is a reference to the same thing each word you used did have a different meaning
And in reference to all this slack use of language, a quote from the greatest philosophers of all time, Monty Python: Just because all of Al McKogan is dead does not mean that all of the dead are Al McKogan.