Philosophy/reality;state of mind;change
hi. i believe that reality is a state of mind, and it can only be in two states, negative and/or positive. by positive it can range from a peaceful to a euphoric state. by negative it can range from mild displeasure to downright negative feelings/emotions.
the mind is powerful that is why i say this. take a red marble for an instance. red may just mean red but inside the redness resides positive or negative energy/emotions. red is a superficial physical quality masking actual positive and/or negative vibrations.
when i say a state is positive it could be a person in deep sleep(unconscious) to having a delicious meal(conscious). one may say a stone on the seashore is just a stone, but everything that exists is connected by it existing. it is part of the universal mind.(the Mind = Reality)
when one states that something changes, for example, a red apple turns into a green apple, is the force behind this change the same behind all changes in nature? are all change the same?
i know an apple is still an apple despite the change in color. some changes are more extreme then others, such as a living person becoming nonliving.
thanks for reading.
Sorry for the delay in answering this -- I had the whole response written out, then fumble-fingered it right off the computer. At any rate --
Philosophers have learned, to their sorrow over and over again during the three thousand or so years that philosophy has been around, that defining terms at the start of an argument is crucial.
You say that reality is a state of mind, Mind=Reality, and that everything that exists is part of the universal mind. Your third paragraph implies that there are experiences (e.g., of the dreaming individual) that are not experiences of the universal mind (although, presumably, the universal mind, being universal, would be aware of them.) If so, whose (individual/universal) mind experiences the positive/negative emotions? Both? Only one?
Does the positive or negative emotion flow from the object to the mind, or the reverse, or both? What happens if one mind is observing the redness of the red stone and getting positive emotions and another is observing the same thing and betting negative emotions? Who's right? Is there a "right" here at all?
How could one tell whether a red stone masked positive or negative emotions? By scanning one's own reactions? If so, what if two different observers came to two different conclusions? What could be used to get the "right" answers?
Certainly all change is to some extent the same since "change" is a category that is meaningful for us. Even so, I think changes are best understood using Wittgenstein's concept of the "family resemblance" -- see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_resemblance
In other words, there is not one and only one "change" but a set of things that closely resemble one another enough for us to call them by one name. Thus, an apple turning from green to red and an a person changing from alive to dead would both be instances of change, but not of a universal type of change.
Hope this helps,