The Gate

So how would you react if somebody insulted you ?

So how would you react if somebody insulted you ?

Sometimes I will have feelings of anger or defeat. I would return insults or discard myself from the situation.

So you wouldn't see that they were expressing their thoughts about their story of you ?
You would respond to your thoughts about their thoughts as if their thoughts might modified your thoughts about your story of you ?
Isn't all of this imagination ?

So you wouldn't see that they were expressing their thoughts about their story of you ?

Yes.

You would respond to your thoughts about their thoughts as if their thoughts might modified your thoughts about your story of you ?

Yes.

Isn't all of this imagination ?

We use language for practical purposes to define/describe experience. The other person doesn't like something about this organism so he expresses it.

His thoughts of me can be distorted so some of it can be imagination.

I can't see that all of this is imagination.

I can't see that all of this is imagination.

Which bits are real ?

I can't see that all of this is imagination.

Which bits are real ?

Experience and accurate thoughts about it(?).

Experience and accurate thoughts about it(?).

Real expereince, real thoughts, but the content of the thoughts you would have to admit are always going to be a poor reflection of anything. Always open to interpretation and bias. Everybody with their own slant.
Wouldn't you say that the content of any thought has to be colored by such things as history, preferences, other thoughts etc ?
Have you ever played the game called the "Chinese Whisper" where a simple sentence is given to the first person in a line and they tell it to the next person and so on down the line and the last person then tells what they heard ?
It is always radically different to the original message.
No two people would describe a scene the same way. Scene is real, thought contents cannot be.

Wouldn't you say that the content of any thought has to be colored by such things as history, preferences, other thoughts
etc ?

No.

If I were to say a tree is green, nobody who can see it can deny that.

Have you ever played the game called the "Chinese Whisper" where a simple sentence is given to the first person in a line and they tell it to the next person and so on down the line and the last person then tells what they heard ?

Yes, but I think some changed the message deliberately :)

If I were to say a tree is green, nobody who can see it can deny that.

Well, i've had a disagreement with my wife about a car that she said was green and it looked blue to me. Even though the broad term green is used, everybody is having a different experience of it. If you stay at a gross level then you are right, but burrow down a little and differences emerge.
The point is that everybody's experience of anything is unique because of no only different acuity of the sense organs but the different history and even the different attention brought to it. An audiophile hears totally differently to 'normal' people, both because they have trained their hearing process and because they pay much more attention to detail than others. An artist is cognizant of perhaps hundreds of shades of green, whereas you and me might say there is light green and dark green.

If I were to say a tree is green, nobody who can see it can deny that.

Well, i've had a disagreement with my wife about a car that she said was green and it looked blue to me. Even though the broad term green is used, everybody is having a different experience of it. If you stay at a gross level then you are right, but burrow down a little and differences emerge.
The point is that everybody's experience of anything is unique because of no only different acuity of the sense organs but the different history and even the different attention brought to it. An audiophile hears totally differently to 'normal' people, both because they have trained their hearing process and because they pay much more attention to detail than others. An artist is cognizant of perhaps hundreds of shades of green, whereas you and me might say there is light green and dark green.

Ok.

So, no objective reality aye ?
Every organism has its' own reality. (yet they are not separate)

So, no objective reality aye ?

Yes.. just not 100% certain

Every organism has its' own reality. (yet they are not separate)

I don't see how we are not separate.

I can see there is only senses as experience..and then the thought stuff makes a story out of it.

But the story is true and it is happening to someone, that is this separate organism labeled "me."

But the story is true and it is happening to someone, that is this separate organism labeled "me."

This seems to be our sticking point, doesn't it.
i say that at best any story can only be an approximation of reality and that it is always ABOUT it. That it can never BE it & you say that stories can be true. By true, i take it that you mean that they can be an accurate representation of reality.

This seems to be our sticking point, doesn't it.

Maybe.

By true, i take it that you mean that they can be an accurate representation of reality.

Indeed.

Is there a logical fallacy in my story, what is it?

Do you agree that the thought itself is reality, but that it's content can only ever be ABOUT reality ?
Then do you agree that the content can change according to lots of conditions, even the mood you are in ?
That each person will have their own subtle (or not so subtle) variations on the same 'objective' reality ?