Reality Defined Differently

             Philosophers, scientists, psychologists, and lay people define reality differently.

             In general, philosophers define reality by two primary methods.  The first, as articulated by Aristotle in the third century B.C., concerned sensory knowledge.  That is, Aristotle defined reality as that which can be detected by one of the five human senses, i.e., touch, taste, smell, hearing, and seeing.  Aristotle also contributed to the second method of determining reality, reason and logic.  Building on Aristotle’s work, modern philosophers use agreed-upon rules of reasoning, logic, and argument.  Thus, reality is that which can be shown to exist through logical argument.

            Scientists on the other hand, define reality by starting with the definition of what is called ‘the universe.’  The universe is the term that encompasses all of reality.  From that starting point, scientist then form hypothesis and conduct experiments in order to determine reality, its boundaries, properties, and dimensions, and aspects.  A thing must be able to be identified and measured if it is to exist.

            Psychologists define reality through human perception.  To the question,

“is there a sound if a tree falls in the woods when no one is there to hear it,” the psychologist would generally answer ‘no.’  Because reality for the psychologist is what people believe and are able to perceive.  Given the wide variation of human beliefs, psychologists do not concern themselves as to an ultimate definition of reality but the human response to the reality they report.

            Most lay people follow Aristotle’s insight and accept as reality what they can determine through their senses.  Lay people also rely on the collective wisdom of mankind, through myths, folk wisdom, community, family, friends, and through more recent developments, like books, schools, and mass media.

            In sum, there are different methods for determining reality, and some people, through their education and training, have developed specialized methods in defining a long human inquiry into the question of “what is real.”

JR