180 Proof wrote:
<p></p>
<p>No. But there are <em>reasons which account for</em> there being "something rather than nothing" ...</p>

PsychVegas wrote:

This is similar to the discussion if a tree falls in a remote part of a forest does it make a sound. It can also be related to the "peek a boo" game where a child finally develops object permanence and realizes just because they can't see an object doesn't mean it no longer exists.

Knowing all of reality, i.e. being omniscient is unobtainable based on human limitations. However, something as simple as object permanence addresses your question regarding objects existing without consciously looking at them. We can successfully extrapolate that objects "exist" outside our conscious awareness. An example would be a fish at the bottom of the ocean has no concept of the moon, yet the moon exists. As humans, we are fortunate that we can realize and accept there are things that exist of which we are unaware.

What makes it (a rock) exist is the big mystery that has no answer. It is the game of asking what caused the earth, the big bang, well what caused the big bang, God, well what caused God and on and on and on and on. There is no answer.

oag wrote:
Explains reality in what way? Reality is simply that which you find to be real as opposed to that which you decide is imaginative, fictional, etc.
When you say that someone else has come up with the same or better conclusions do you mean to suggest that someone else could have a better handle on reality than you have? All you are going to get from them is their own thoughts and opinions on reality and it is going to fall back upon you to decide which ones are the same, better or worse than your own. In the end the only reality you can ever concern yourself with is yours. We can hypothesize an objective reality, free of bias, predisposition, etc. We can all take a stab at what that might be like but it is always going to be based on how each of us see reality in the first place so any one of us could be right or wrong and you might be right more often than someone who seems to you to have "better" thoughts and opinions.

When someone says that X is the way that it really is they are just guessing. You could come along and say that Y is the way that it really is and be just as correct because there are no means to actually determine how it really is.

Whenever anyone says anything about anything they are sharing their concept of reality. If I say that jumping off of a tall building will kill you that is simply a statement of how I see things. It is something I learned in my journey through life. I have every reason to believe that you have learned the same thing. If I say that GWB was a lousy president that is also just something I learned along the way. You might see it differently. Both are beliefs/opinions/thoughts that I have. If I explain them and they make sense to you perhaps I can change your view of reality, make it seem to you to be better. It may or may not be but as long as you are happy with the results that is all that matters.

oag wrote:
I don't really follow you. It seems to me that you believe that if you live longer you will gain access to something other than a broadened conscious look at reality. You seem to want a shortcut to some ultimate perspective on reality rather than taking the long road that all of us must face.

In the end you are only ever going to have your individual perspective on reality. You can take flights of fancy into other imagined realities but you will always end up back in yours. Getting other people to tell you about their individual perspectives on reality may help you broaden or refine yours but it won't help you gain knowledge of or access to an objective reality because they can't give you that any more than you can get it yourself. Your quest for knowledge and wisdom are good things but there is no shortcut. Your reality will only change with time and experience.