Reality and Mirage
_I: Between the concepts of Logic and Illogic, the doubt arises as to what is real and what is unreal. If the Mind is the pulse that creates and the Emotion is the impulse that the Mind receives to understand itself through experience, then everything is a reflection, everything is something mental, something unreal that is not really there. So… What is real?
_AM: Reality comes from the Latin “res” which means “thing”. Real is, therefore, the attribute of being a thing, of identifying as an object perceptible by all the senses or at least one of them. “Thing”, in Spanish, arises from the word “Cause”, that is, source that originates an action. In English, “Thing” comes from “phzing”, which means “assembly”, where the “Causes” of things are discussed. As you will see, the concept of reality stops being something tangible and becomes a collective convention, an idea generated about a cause. Reality stops being tangible and becomes consensual (which comes from the word “Consensus”, from Latin): “with sensation, with meaning, with sensory capacity”. That is to say, reality is nothing more than the assembly of different people who analyzed the common sensations arising from the same cause. The “rule of 3” establishes that if 3 different people from different angles perceive the same sensations, the cause becomes an object, and therefore begins to have the character and quality of a thing, that is, of Reality.
_I: This completely changes what we consider real.
_AM: Reality is a mirage. When you go through the desert, the heat generated by the energy of the photons of sunlight is reflected on the crystals and minerals that make up the sand, which reflects the light in different directions, distorting it in the vapor in the air. Sand is the base to create a mirror, that's how it works in nature itself. The sensation it produces is that of a reflection of the sky flowing in waves like water, creating the perception that there is an oasis. However, no matter how much you walk, you will never reach it. Mirror comes from the word “specio” which means “to look”, also from Latin which means “to admire”. Origin of the English word “Mirror”. Thus, Mirage is something that you look at and that moves (ism: movement), something that is not fixed, that cannot be a target to aim at, nor be perceived objectively, since it is not an object. Although all 3 people see it, all three can also see different things, at different distances.
_I: But this same thing happens in Reality, that is, from the same event, 3 people can see totally different things. If I put a car in front of you, there is one who will see the color, another the model, another the value. And perhaps neither sees what the other sees. The same in a more complex fact, such as immigration, the economy, abortion, racism, education... It is very difficult for people to agree on something because everyone has their own vision of how things work, of what Which should be, but even worse than it is. The other day I saw someone who had written historical facts to explain why Latin America was so Catholic. He explained from Constantine's agreement in Byzantium, to Jesuit education in the Amerindian colonies, which forced the natives to convert in the face of the option of hell and death. And yet, I saw how many American Catholics said that these data are lies, unreal, and that whoever had explained the historical facts really knew nothing. This worried me, because I thought: then how can there be a consensus on what is good for a society if not even historical or scientific facts are taken as objectives? Speaking of Global Warming: there are thousands of data that show that in the last period the Earth is having an imbalance. Warming is Real, but it is also true that the Earth's cycles of cooling and warming are natural, so many cling to that to remove responsibility from humans in their work. It's, like, very complex. If everything is illusory, if everything starts from a mirage and what is real is a consensus, how is a consensus achieved in such a divided, polarized and individualistic society?
_AM: You can't.
_I: How? Just like that?
_AM: Yes.
_I: But... There has to be something that leads us to order...
_AM: Yes, of course. They are called Laws, Civil Codes, Social Justice, Democratic Community Consensus.
_I: But… Something else… I don't know, spiritual?
_AM: Oh, no, there isn't.
_I: Hahaha, I don't know whether to laugh or cry...
_AM: Well, I'll try to be more didactic. What is normality?
_I: What we interpret as the objective in life, what is common, what everyone accepts as logical.
_AM: Normal comes from the word “norm” which means “law or rule.” The norm is what is established by one group over another group by collective and cultural consensus, established by moral parameters. Morality comes from the Latin “moris” which means “custom”, which gives rise to the concept of “way of living”, as in the word “dwell”, “dweller”. That is, one who usually inhabits a specific space. Morality is linked to a culture that inhabits a specific place and that, based on customs, has established its rules of coexistence, which they have called “normality.” But Normality is different for each territory, according to its customs and geography. For this reason, the more a town grows, creating a kingdom, country, empire, colony, by covering too much territory and too many people, it needs to establish a common regulation of coexistence, and creates the “civil code”, “the law”, and the “constitution”, as ways of establishing that moral normality. Why does he do this? To maintain order among so many differences. Reality does not exist outside of perception, since reality is a consensus based on regulations. Not even science can tell you what is real and what is not, since everything is always changing from the point of view you see it. From geology, from chemistry, from physics, from quantum, each theorist or practitioner will reach a consensus with the others and establish the standard, even knowing that the laws of physics are only applicable to the macrocosm and not to the microcosm, who is the one who sustains the cosmos. It is illogical, as you will see, for something outside of physics to constitute physics, making physics nothing more than mere perception. Today this is called “quantum physics”, but it is still “metaphysics” (beyond the physical). Therefore, the reason why each individual is different from each other is because “metaphysics” needed balance to see a cause and experience it in physics. It is as if the Universe were a drunk who walks dizzy and tries to get out of his hangover by trying to fix his eyes on an object. Everything moves like a mirage in multiple dimensions, but he makes the effort to refine his eyes by looking at a fixed point, finding equilibrium, balance, and finally being able to unite all the mirages and lateral visions to create an "objective", and thus be able to contemplate the object in front of you. Every living being that is capable of admiring existence is like an eye in this great drunk you call the Universe, drunk with sensations and ideas. Everyone sees something different, and they try to find a consensus among themselves that allows them to put together Reality. They do it through the regulations that they will end up calling Normality. So you can't make everyone see reason and accept a view, because maybe yours is wrong too. Don't waste time trying to change someone's vision, use your time and energy to empower her vision by expanding it.
_I: That's the key, broadening the vision. As?
_AM: Well, making your point of view useful. Wanting to change another person's point of view is a fight that will end in defeat on both sides, or in feeding the selfishness of one of the parties that went out of its way to invade the presence of the other. The only way to achieve practicality is in praxis, in action, in giving the possibility of doing something good with it. We are not in the third dimension to talk about utopias, in the third dimension we act, do, plan and manifest. You can't expect to change someone's perspective, but you can give them the option to test the usefulness of their point of view. If it is not applicable, if it is not useful to others, if it does not generate a common good, then it stops being consensual, and becomes involutive, which sooner or later will disappear by nature.
_I: I understand… It makes sense. If what I think is not useful to the world, is not applicable in the practicalities of life for other people, or if my action is devastating to the common good, then my point of view will be destined to become extinct. But why, for example, does racism prevail as a recurring idea for thousands of years? Is it perhaps a useful idea, its practicality?
_AM: Racism arises from the concept of races. Breeds are native to specific places. When people move from their places to new ones, locals historically interpret this as an invasion of their lives, disrupting their “normality.” Thus, for a local, everything that is external will be “abnormal”, outside the norm established in its customs. What is different breaks with normality, threatening the stability of the group, which causes fear. The fear of the unknown, of what may violate the norm, builds all types of xenophobia (fear of the external), homophobia (fear of the same), heterophobia (fear of the different), misogyny (hatred of women ), misandry (hatred of man), and so many other relationships of hate and fear that are nothing more than the fear of breaking the comfort zone. A people educated in inner empowerment, in transcending fear; A people capable of being educated in the capacity to constantly transform will never need teaching about racial integration, gender diversity or respect for the sexes, since the difference between individuals and the capacity for transformation will be their “normality.”
_I: Thus, the Real is subjective, it is a mirage that depends on the consensus of the eyes that contemplate it... And the greater the capacity for vision, the broader the gaze, then the more options I will see...
_AM: Reality is objective only when subjectivities have agreed to call it “normal.” This is why life is a constant game of imagination. The greater the imagination, the greater the ability to see new facets of reality. What we sometimes consider a deception, the “illusion”, is nothing more than the ability to immerse oneself in the game, since its origin is the same as that of the word “ludic”: from the Latin “ludo” (game). Playing with others in the subjective to build the objective is to set clear objectives of turning what is imagined into action.
_I: I am a real mirage, making your idea a game applied in action.
_AM: This is where you understand the phrase “you are the creator of your own reality.”