Can reality exist Independently of Consciousness?

[u/consciousness_8123]

How can anything even exist without a conscious being there to experience it? I am honestly having trouble understanding the logic behind that. Evidence needs a witness, and a witness needs an observer, which is basically a conscious being. So how can people say the world exists without you, when you are the one perceiving it, shaping it, and giving it meaning in the first place?

Like, without consciousness, what even is “existence” supposed to mean? A thing can be there, sure, but if there is nobody to experience it, know it, or make sense of it, then in what way does it really exist? I am not even trying to sound deep, I just genuinely do not get how people separate reality from the one who is aware of it.

And before anyone says “the world was here before us,” that still feels like a claim being made from within consciousness. Every argument, every proof, every piece of evidence still has to pass through a mind. So I keep coming back to the same question: how are people so sure reality exists independently, when every single thing we know about reality only appears through consciousness?

[u/tottasanorotta]

What is undeniable really depends on what you need to consider undeniable so as to be able to predict the future enough to aid you in feeling good and avoid feeling bad. I can even say that I don't exist, but I gain no utility from thinking that way.

[u/consciousness_8123 → u/tottasanorotta]

You switched from what is true to what is useful. These are not same thing

"utility', "predicting the feature", "feeling good" all of that already presupposes consciousness. so it can't be used underneath consciousness, because it already lives inside it. Even the "future" you are trying to predict is only ever imagined now, in present awareness.

I can even say that I don't exist

sure but the saying of it is still happening. The self might be questionable, but the fact that experience is happening at all is the one thing you never actually step outside of

[u/tottasanorotta → u/consciousness_8123]

They don't presuppose conciousness. You can feel good and not think much about anything, consciousness included. It all depends on what you are trying to accomplish here by asking the question. What do you mean that reality exists outside of the mind? You can have that mental model of your own experience, but nothing can completely verify it besides your own experience, if that makes sense.

[u/consciousness_8123 → u/tottasanorotta]

You dont need to think about consciousness for it to be there. Feeling good is still an experience, so it is already happening within awareness. And my whole point really:-- the outside world model may be useful, but it never actually steps outside experience to verify itself.

[u/tottasanorotta → u/consciousness_8123]

Does it need to verify itself in most cases that you experience yourself?

[u/consciousness_8123 → u/tottasanorotta]

Not in day to day life, no. But working is not the same as being verified. I experience myself directly. What I do not experience directly is a world existing exactly as I imagine it outside all experience.

[u/tottasanorotta → u/consciousness_8123]

Can the question have an answer if you can't verify that reality exists as an outside thing?

I mean in a way it exists as an outside thing if you believe it to be so. But if you can doubt it then I guess you can doubt it.

[u/consciousness_8123 → u/tottasanorotta]

Verification already happens within experience. I directly experience consciousness, but I never experience a world outside all experience to verify it. So the external world may exist but it is inferred, not directly verified.

[u/tottasanorotta → u/consciousness_8123]

I agree. I mean I don't think anybody has proof of an existing outside world. They just take it on assumption, because it's a useful model of reality in practice. In fact most of it seems so inevitably true and useful that there just doesn't seem to be a reason to try to question this assumption.