Reality indescribable, something else is describing it?

Reality indescribable, there must be something else making it describable?

‘If’ we cannot make a reality map which describes what the whole of reality is, then something else must be making an effect upon what is otherwise absurd, such that existence is made describable!

Perhaps we can describe the entire reality map, we have many theories ~ none of which hold up to close inspection imho, but we soon come across contradictions in the fundamental nature of it; how can there be infinity and finite/quantum, how can we describe the cardinality of that, what size is it comparatively and as compared to what, what speed is it going and compared to what. What are the fundamental measures? We have none and cannot make any! Everything seams to end up being empty!

Thus it is reasonable to assume that something else other than reality is that which makes existence describable! Or anything which is describable derives its essential limits and other definitions from beyond reality ~ even the experiencer itself.


Couldn’t the potential for something to be described just be an illusion?
Sometimes I think the brain in a vat or the simulation argument are the arguments that makes most sense.
Pardon the following over simplification but it’s like when you wake up from a dream. You immediately recognize why it was a dream and how certain things in it didn’t make sense.But while you were dreaming, you were not able to realized these things, not usually at least.
In a simulated universe, the nature of reality could only make sense to someone outside of the simulation.
Unless of course, the universe where someone created the simulation was a simulation itself.
Shit, my brain hurts.

What do you mean? like even the idea is false?

Maybe but we still have a reality to wit the simulation and that which makes the simulation is in.

There are only 1 kind of reality, other realities are created in the minds of the mentally ill.

Perhaps one of the major problems is that in trying to define anything infinite any finite definition is relatively zero in nature. Thus any description cannot satisfy as a full description and we will only ever have partial discriptions or maps…

I think that in the future the nature of understanding how there is a finite and infinite nature may be one of the major contributors to spiritualism or mysticism…

It may well come down to our inability to fit our languages to meaning, it may be that there is no way to make either fit reality!

I am beginning to think there is no ‘reality’ in the sense we ascribe the term, there is no one thing to wit all other things belong [even if that’s something abstract like e.g. ‘god’]. I know in the past I have said that if there were say two realities then they would both naturally be contained within another {one} reality.

Perhaps then existence is an area of reality which mostly acts as one entity [universe], but our assumption that the greater reality is equally bounded or unbounded may have no grounds.

At a level of subtlety near the base of existence things become increasingly less defined, amorphic and interchangeable. The base then does not ‘exist’, it has less shape than formlessness. Formerly I had thought that that ‘space’ was something, an infinity or what-have-you but something from whence existence sprang.

Perhaps the base and fundamental level of reality is not real, it not only isn’t something, but it also isn’t an un-manifest source from which the manifest world derives?

Thus we can state that reality does not describe itself because fundamentally it isn’t something. It isn’t infinite nor anything else, there are no terms to ascribe to its meaning because there isn’t anything there to match them too. This aside from the fact that infinity cannot define reality if it is also finite etc.

So now we have to imagine that as it doesn’t describe itself, there is something else making existence describable! Perhaps think of this as like how our minds make our material existence describable [the material has no way of knowing itself], we think ourselves into existence and in doing so define what that existence is.

“The nameless is the beginning of heaven and Earth.
The named is the mother of the ten thousand things.” Tao Te Ching…

To be named requires a perceive thus the mother of the ten thousand things (the infinity, the all, or the universe,) are percievers… the nameless is the beginning of it though…but the namelessness the absence never existed as absence of absence is presence…perception has always been…I would think…