© 2019 Tomasio A. Rubinshtein, Philosopher


Distinguishing Truth from Illusion

How can we differ between truth and illusion? How do you know, for example, that food is real? You may know that food is real when you become hungry. When you are hungry, you need food. After the food is eaten by you, the hunger stops, or at least have its power of sensation lowered. In that way, you may know that food exist - you need food to survive, and therefore you have to approve the existence of food in order to survive in the first place. You cannot eat and digest illusions, and that’s how you can distinguish between nutrition and illusions.

How do you know the music you may be listening right now is real? At the same time, you could simply create an illusion of a melody or a song, and then, allegedly, there may be no difference. However, you may know to differ actual music from illusionary music because the first type of music is external to you, and whatever you may be thinking, you cannot alter it simply by thinking about something else. This is when you may know that a music has an existence which does not rely entirely on you, and thus that music is actual.

How do you know people are existent, and not mere illusions of what the consciousness presents to you? The figures you may be watching on T.V may be nothing more than puppets or digital characters, portrayed so good that they seem to be real. How is it possible to know that your consciousness does not deceives you like a T.V screen can? You ought to find the various differences between “illusionary” people and “real” people. Just like one is able to distinguish food from illusion and music from illusion, it is possible to distinguish between people and illusion.

But how can one do it? I’m not going to answer it. Instead, I’m going to write some tips, because those tips can be applied to anything possible which is existent or non-existent. With those tips I've managed, for example, to disproof the physical existence of togetherness and society:

· What makes something real? For something to be physically real, it has to be prone to the various laws of science and physics, which illusions are independent from. All real things are not only prone to science (because THEY ARE scientific in the first place), but can be mathematically measured, whether by size, development, or amount. They are ought to be in a certain state of physics: solid, fluid or gas. They ought to be constructed from particles, and not break the laws of physics. This is how you can know, for example, that the environment of video games isn’t real, because it can be so glitchy it may not make sense.

· What makes an illusion? Illusions do not exist out-of-the-blue. For an illusion to “exist”, it ought to be created by a biological being or any other being that possesses consciousness. They do not obey any law of physics, are not prone to science, and are neither solid, fluid, gas nor anything in between. When an illusion is not taught of by anyone, it disappears, and when they are thought again, they are “revived” out of the subconsciousness, and “exist”. The only way for an illusion to physically exist, is to be transported from the consciousness onto reality. Writing and art are serve as prime examples for this; they represent the illusion that they previously were (or still are). Any social interaction, in my opinion, may be also an example for this.

· Physical/biological/mechanical chain reactions: Consciousness may create illusions and creations that can represent these illusions, but it cannot create biological beings. You are a biological being (I, at least, assume you are). Every biological being is created by a previous biological being (aside from the assembly of atoms by a specific environment with specific conditions into an organic entity, as in evolution). You, as a biological being, was created as a result of reproduction, or any other scientific process that led you into being. This process did NOT involved illusionary beings; they involved actual people, whether they were your parents or scientists. If we are to assume that you were born as a result of non-organic machines, then the machines themselves were created by people. Without the existence of actual people before you, you wouldn’t exist. You cannot be a result of illusion alone, because independent illusions do not manifest themselves into physicality, because illusions are not independent in the first place. Therefore, you must have been created from an entity, or few entities, which are not, essentially, illusional. Therefore, you can prove the existence of at least your parents, and your entire heritage.

Let us empower the previous claim: humans, in one way or another, share a universal heritage, from those who were our most primal ancestors. Every person can be at least be as little as related to you, but still related from at least a few ancestors. Genghis Khan, the ancient Mongolian ruler, is responsible for at least a few percents of today’s population. Since many other people lived in his generation, at least some of them must also be ancestors to some of today’s population, and even they may be related to very historic and primal ancestors. Because anyone can be related to you even to the slightest of part, all actual people are existent.

I shall call this claim: The Genealogical Claim, which argues: everyone (people) exist because they are genealogically related to you to some extant. Just like the food you ate - people are responsible for your own birth, and just like the music you’ve been listening - these people have an external existence which does not rely or entirely rely on you.