Real is what we can detect and interpret with our 5 senses (split from Picture of an atom. What is it?)

[Growl]

What is real? Real is what we can detect and interpret with our 5 senses, tools and methods enhance the usefulness of our senses... is it real? Well are you able to interpret it?

[John Cuthber]

19 hours ago, Growl said:

What is real? Real is what we can detect and interpret with our 5 senses, tools and methods enhance the usefulness of our senses... is it real? Well are you able to interpret it?

If you only have 5 sense, when do you know it's time to go to the bahroom?

[studiot]

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

If you only have 5 sense, when do you know it's time to go to the bahroom?

Perhaps a nice one, but aren't 'the 5 senses'  to do with the interaction between us and the rest of the universe ?

 

And aren't bathroom visits due to internal proceses ?

[John Cuthber]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Perhaps a nice one, but aren't 'the 5 senses'  to do with the interaction between us and the rest of the universe ?

 

And aren't bathroom visits due to internal proceses ?

" aren't 'the 5 senses'  to do with the interaction between us and the rest of the universe ?"
The idea that there's only 5 is one of Aristotle's mistakes.

"And aren't bathroom visits due to internal proceses ?"
So?
We have more than 5 senses.

[dimreepr]

2 hours ago, studiot said:

Perhaps a nice one, but aren't 'the 5 senses'  to do with the interaction between us and the rest of the universe ?

So, how do you explain balance?

[studiot]

I put the 'the 5 senses' in inverted commas to show that I did not accept that there are only 5 senses but was referring to someone else's classification.

Perhaps it wouold be clearer if I made the commas bigger?

 

24 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

So, how do you explain balance?

I could say alcohol or I could say that as I understand the mechanism of balance it involves interaction with the environment by visual clues (sense 1) and measuring pressure/ pressure difference (sense 2) as well as feeling gravity.

[CharonY]

Regardless of the number of senses, sensation is generally interpreted in the brain. Thus stimulation of areas can create sensation without the involvement of senses. Conversely, there are literal blind spots in our senses and/or transmission of the information to the brain can be impaired, preventing signals from sensory organs to reach our brain. So sensing (or not sensing) something is not an ideal way to establish reality.

[geordief]

13 hours ago, studiot said:

nd aren't bathroom visits due to internal proceses

How can one distinguish between an internal process and an external process?

If I had an artificial bladder installed would that still be internal?

 

Btw  does the number of senses we can have  depend on the number of distinct sensory apparatuses  we have or on the characteristics of the possible sensory links that can exist between the brain and its environment?

(Eg infra red vision )

[swansont]

1 hour ago, geordief said:

How can one distinguish between an internal process and an external process?

Whether the source of the stimulus is inside or outside your body?

[Ken Fabian]

Seems like we can use our senses indirectly, eg I can 'feel' the presence of an object using tongs, without actually touching it, just the tongs. I can be confident that it is a real object. Determining internal chemical structure by crystallography uses our senses very indirectly.

Defining "real" as what we sense directly is way too narrow.

Internal vs external doesn't look like such a clear distinction for human senses either. Some of our senses do work entirely within the body - even if much more internal "signalling" occurs without awareness than with it. Conscious awareness of an empty stomach or a full bladder is useful. Internal metabolic feedbacks aren't so useful to be aware of.

Sure, the just five senses is wrong, even aside from things like counting skin detecting heat and feeling air movements from hairs disturbed by a breeze and being pinched all counting as a single sense (touch); equilibrioception (balance) for example isn't a sub-sense(?) of another sense,  yet uses a variety of inputs that each might be viewed as a different sense, including skeleto-muscular positions and movements, visual cues as well as sensing movements of fluid within the inner ear's semi-circular canals.

I don't know that there is an indisputable definition for "real".

[zapatos]

On 9/24/2023 at 7:55 AM, Growl said:

What is real? Real is what we can detect and interpret with our 5 senses, tools and methods enhance the usefulness of our senses... is it real? Well are you able to interpret it?

I read your post and it made me happy. Well, I was happy until I realized since I couldn't detect 'happy' with my five senses that is is not real, and thus I am not 'really' happy. Now I'm sad. But wait. Since I can't detect 'sad'.... <endless loop>