Maybe he assumed that post wasn’t real, John… 
Every time Liberal asks if the universe is real pinch him upon the nose (or ass if you prefer).
It is subjectively real, and that is about as good as it gets 
Heh, I can try to make it a little better… if the universe isn’t real, then neither is subjectivity. Thus, if any pro-real argument is dismissed for being subjective, that’s a de facto concession that the universe is, indeed, real!
(I love philosophy threads. They leave me thinking for hours. Expect continued intermittent additions from the SPOOFEster.)
That’s the question I wanted to ask too. If the universe is not real, what is? Let’s look at the two definitions:
- The common definition — “Being or occurring in fact or actuality” (American Heritage)
When used to determine whether the universe is real, this definition seems circular. If the universe isn’t real, neither is “fact”, “actuality”, or, for that matter, the American Heritage Dictionary. If we are indeed within a nonreal universe, how can anything ever be determined to be or occur in fact or actuality, and if nothing can, is there any difference between real and nonreal? If we are within a real universe, well, then it’s real. Either way, this definition is of little help.
- The philosophical definition — “Existing objectively … regardless of subjectivity or conventions of thought or language” (Ibid)
This is where it gets tricky. Does the universe exist regardless of observers? I can’t even begin to think of a way to prove or disprove that, except to say that it certainly seems to. I’m reminded of the counterargument to Young Earth Creationism: Either God made the Earth to appear to be billions of years old, and made everything exactly as if it were billions of years old, and made every living thing exactly as if they had evolved during millions of years, and created what looks exactly like a vast system of interlocking processes that have been going on during billions of years… or everything is as it seems. In other words: do we have any reason to believe that the universe didn’t exist until something came along to observe it?
Meh…it seems real enough to me.
If I read the OP correctly, he believes that God is real, but the universe is not.
Is that correct, Lib?
If that’s the case, I would love to hear an objective argument that indicates God’s reality over the universe’s.
I believe this to be the case, and if it is, Hoodoo Ulove’s objection is correct: we cannot discuss the reality of the universe without bringing God into it.
Oh dear. puts on helmet
It’s a fair request. I’m having a hard time coming up with an objective argument that my desk knock knock is real. I can’t even detect God with my potentially nonexistent senses. Color me flabbergasted.
SentientMeat’s summary of the modal ontological proof, which Lib accepts as analytical proof of the existence of God: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4599618&postcount=6
No!!! Not the modal ontological proof. I’ll tell you anything you want to know. Anything!!!
Ah, I see. Different standard of proof, as far as I can tell. With the cards stacked against it, the universe never really had a chance.
Not really. I don’t accept the proof, for pretty much the same reasons as SentientMeat, but it is the same kind of proof that Lib is asking for about the universe.
Elaborate?
A metaphysical argument to explain the physical? Doesn’t sound like it fits, to me. It’s like expounding on the horrors of human suffering to explain why McDonald’s exists.
The universe, though big, is relatively mundane compared to God. It seems to me that a metaphysical proof would, by definition, not be up to the task of explaining the universe.
I’ll save this thread from hi-jacking by not responding, at least not until Lib comes back.
Fair enough… I’m not even sure why I’m suddenly so fascinated with this thread.
I believe that the universe, which I believe can be described (although humans have not yet learned how) as one possible branch in an infinitely branching mathematical creation, is precisely as real as the number 4. Nothing else can be more real than that. Nothing real can be less real than that.
I’ll expound at greater length if anyone is curious.
Go ahead. I have a couple of hours to kill.
Could be interesting, so please, go for it.
Just FYI, I don’t believe in the number 4.