If reality exists outside of our perceptions, doesn't that mean we also have part of our existence outside of our own perceptions?
as long as you're not a solipsist, yesthink about it this way.this post was created by YOUi am reading YOUR posttherefore, i can interface with you through realitythat's only possible because your existence extends beyond yourself
>>85853755reality is a part of your perception, perception being ordered by the formal media of space and time. existence (a modality) outside of our perception is general considered to be ideal content, of which we can have ideas that hold true in virtue of our perception
>>85853815Look at a star. What does it look like independently of perception? If it has no form, then we, as physically real objects, have a "no form" existence more fundamental than our conscious perceptions. How can this be? It's like the rug is being pulled from underneath us, but we're still in the same place.
>>85853847It must be formless information or something.
>>85853847we can test the reliability of things by the order of the impressions they impose.seeing an object is one thing, being able to interact with it is another, being able to make predictions based on its properties is another, etcyou should read critique of pure reason by Kant though, it basically solves this science of understanding vs impression and is western canon for a reason
