04-11-2024, 03:50 PM
If you’re operating empirically, the claim that sensory experiences are “100% an illusion” is nonsensical, seeing as it would require you to have empirical knowledge of the existence of a non-illusionary reality, which would be impossible.
Secondly, You’re mistakenly conflating reductionism with illusion. Saying, “wow, I thought that thing over there was an elephant, but it’s actually just a collection of quarks!” is a misunderstanding of language.
Thirdly, I don’t see what “nothing” has to do with the first half of your post.
Secondly, You’re mistakenly conflating reductionism with illusion. Saying, “wow, I thought that thing over there was an elephant, but it’s actually just a collection of quarks!” is a misunderstanding of language.
Thirdly, I don’t see what “nothing” has to do with the first half of your post.
