Food For Thought

Science is the discipline that models and explains reality. Scientific effort can be divided into two primary thrusts, hard and soft. Hard science is concerned with 'outside' reality: planetary science, atomic physics, etc. Soft science is concerned with more abstract issues such as consciousness and perception.

Science satisfies curiosity by providing explanations and descriptions; technology applies scientific knowledge to provide 'things' (tools, methods). Technology has been most successful in the hard-science realm: non-human reality is more amenable to trial-and-error R&D.

As science and technology advance, the distinction between hard science and soft becomes more tenuous. Reality is not as concrete as it seems; quantum physics research indicates that reality is a function of its perception. Meanwhile, perception and consciousness remain a mystery. The term 'solid matter' has been made an oxymoron by the findings of subatomic physics. The unprovable (but reluctantly accepted) assumptions of philosophy are again being considered.

Science has been a top-down discipline (relative to our place in the universe). The deeper we dig toward the foundations of reality, the more tenuous that foundation appears.

Matter is not solid, it is mainly space occupied by clouds of subatomic particles, which are themselves not solid, but tightly bound packets of energy which behave in a somewhat predictable manner, but not at all deterministically.

The universe itself seems divided into two levels, quantum and (for want of a better term) macroscopic. The two seem to have little to do with one another, although the quantum level is the (known) foundation of the level we occupy. The laws of the quantum universe are not intuitive, despite being predicted by math and confirmed, in part, experimentally.

What will happen when the internal-external distinction breaks down?

Let's not get hung up on the artificial vs. real distinction. There is no clear boundary between the two, nor is one more good or evil than the other. One may state that human-generated 'realities' are artificial, and 'nature' is real, but then one must conclude that all human culture is artificial. The preferable perspective may be that a thing's degree of 'reality' is a spectrum measuring its grounding in the external, i.e., the concrete aspect of hard science, as discussed above.

A middle ground is necessary, for just as one cannot survive on atoms, or the basic elements (fire, earth, and water), neither can one survive on MTV and The Cajun Gourmet. We cannot depend solely on the artificial and neglect the concrete; the artificial cannot exist without concrete foundation.

A common conception of self is

self = body + mind + soul

The concept of body is accepted; well-known. The mind is a more abstract conception, frequently lumped in with the brain. One cannot box 'mind', but the results of 'mind' are evident in many subjective impressions of consciousness, intellect, and emotion. The soul is even more abstract; purer expressions of humanity (love, forgiveness, etc.) are said to be manifestations of the soul, but there is no objective evidence to support existence of the soul. (Then again, there is no objective evidence to support the existence of matter.)

Can mind exist independent of the body?

What will happen when virtual reality (VR) becomes more attractive than concrete reality (CR)? This is not a disingenuous question; consider the number of people who spend more time with the television rather than with other people. Advancements in immersive VR promise future custom worlds indistinguishable from CR, absent pain, boredom, and other negative aspects of day-to-day life.

One final thought: how do we know that this has not already happened? The reality we perceive could be an artificial creation we've entered to escape an unendurable reality; it could also be a reality to which we have been exiled as a form of control or reward and/or punishment.

Reality has had to be accepted as real because there was no way to prove that it wasn't. As science advances, humanity may acquire the means to debug the program. We've always had clues (telepathy, ESP, coincidence), and are acquiring the tools that may someday reveal gaps and limitations in the software (electron accelerators, mind drugs).