allow me to say that this is the examination of a metaphor… and how it holds up in…
now to the metaphor:
There is a room… in the center of this room there is a two-sided mirror… there are two men standing on each their side of the room facing the mirror and eachother…
Neither man knows that the mirror is two-sided… and nither man can take their eyes off of their own reflections at any point in time… so they are effectivly stuck where they are… but the man can hear eachother…
Man1 says: The mirror is reflecting my image!!
Man 2 says: No! it is relfecting MY image!!
the mirror reprisents reality and absolute truth… and the men, us humans…
which man is right?
What is your interpitation of this?
(I want to hear some responses before I reveal my own answer)
that holds up until one of the men sees his lips moving in the mirror reflection and figures it out.
But in all seriousness, if by that metaphore you are implying people only percieve what they want and are able to from their repective subjective interpretations of reality, then I would agree. If That is not what you are saying, refer to the prior sentance for my opinion.
Sounds like my “Reality is relative to its subjectivity” theory. I don’t want to take over the thread… but I will… after trying to respond to the initial post.
It seems like Mad Man’s example supports the theory. The mirrors are reality, or what we perceive, and as Mad Man already clarified, the two men represent humanity. The theory [my personal theory] stipulates that all reality is subject to the perceiver. It goes further, committing to the idea that all reality is, thus, a myriad of subjective agreement–linguistic convention to be more exact.
There is no way, without a series of subjective agreements, to prove that any truth exists objectively. i.e. a chair is not there unless there are a series of conventions that decide that it is there.
Nothing is real outside of [the] consciousness.
Those things that are, indeed, deemed real, are primarily subject to acknowledgment.
Would it not be true that the men would realize they look different from one another, look/feel at their own facial features/clothing not in the mirror but in physical form as if searching for a concrete truth (but that’s probably beside the point). They are both wrong, as perception is everything. I doesn’t reflect who you are, but what you percieve yourself to be. However, if the mirror is absolute truth, no amount of logic can break the glass.Thus in a sense they are right in that perception is their reality(what they think is their image actually is because perception, is all that matters, all that humanity can grasp)… but not necessecarily truth.
You ceartainly show humanity’s self-centeredness though. lol.
I feel like I just talked myself in a circle… great question. I want to hear what you think.
The trickster god was walking by a village where he knew two hotheads lived. He took the form of a tall noble man and walked past the house of one of the hotheads with his right side presented to the man. Now the trickster god was wearing his multicolored hat that day with red on the right side and yellow on the left side.
So next the trickster god goes walking by the other hothead this time only showing his left hand side.
Later on one of the hotheads hears the other telling the story of how he saw some strange but noble man walking abound. Then he get to the part about the hat color. “It was red.â€
The other man angrily interrupts, “No, you got it wrong it was yellow.†They get into a big row, each insistent upon what he saw.
This went on until the trickster god can take it no more. He revealed himself and proudly displayed his two-color hat.
Reality and absolute truth is not just a mirror. It is a hall of mirrors.
Both men are right from their perspectives. They see their reflections in the mirror. This is truth but it’s relative truth. The mirror, which represents ultimate truth is merely reflecting the men. When the men’s reflections are gone, the mirror remains, reflecting nothing. Relative truth is impermanent whereas Truth is permanent. Truth can contain within it all things, yet in reality no-thing exists.
Boy, I don’t know LA, sounds pretty fuzzy to me. Two guys and a mirror. Pretty straight forward stuff isn’t it? This isn’t some more of that ‘mystic’ talk is it?
I’m amazed how everyone managed to see their own reflections in this metaphore…
answer is: BOTH MEN ARE WRONG!!
the mirror is not reflecting anything… nor has it ever reflected anything… it is the men who are reflecting the mirror… men or no men… the mirror will never reflect anything…
Everything is a reflection of the mirror… everything reflects the ultimate truth… not the other way around…
but hey… I might be wrong…
But basicly… this metaphr proves that people will see what they want when they look at things… however, in the end… what they see depends on the mirror… NOT themselves… we are all right and wrong at the same time… we all know what we are… but we don’t all know what the mirror(ultimate truth) is…
We should realize that the more we look at the mirror… the more we learn about ourselves… and the more we look at ourselves… the more we learn about the mirror…
Very profound, but to answer that you need to take it out of a metaphorical state. I’m impressed and in complete compliance with your theory. But actually, everyone is right (everyone who challenged their mind enough to formulate a conclusion ): Perception = reality but not necessacarily truth. As absolute truth is almost unattainable, it is the reality we are concerned with.
Absolute truth is the beginning of understanding…both men were right and wrong…and the whole scenario with the mirror is so true…yet if one of the men understood this truth then he would have known all, thus giving him the ability to move!
): Perception = reality but not necessacarily truth. As absolute truth is almost unattainable, it is the reality we are concerned with.