Cognitive Dissonance vs. Observer Effect (Physics)

[Sophus]

I didn't know whether to place this under Philosophy or Science but I think it will do fine under either. Maybe it will be stickied if successful enough. I am hoping for a wonderful and long conversation to sprout from this one!

First, read this if you have the chance: http://www.dpedtech.com/OP9.pdf
Or perhaps you're already well educated on the Observer Effect in Quantum Physics.

Is this a clash between Psychology and Quantum Physics? Our minds have been proven to tend to believe what they want. Or at least try even if it results in Cognitive Dissonance. Does Creativism mean we can make gods exist for ourselves? An afterlife (if we make our universe's rules "consistent")? Does this say more about the power of the mind to form a reality or nature's rule over giving us minds insufficient of discovering what it is? If reality means that we can make reality then doesn't that mean there is an absolute reality? I have always though of the mind as programming its own reality. Not actual reality itself!

When I contemplate this there are brief moments when I feel the awe of understanding it but once I try to put it in words I become confused all over again!

[Will]

The observer effect, by my best understanding, is independently verifiable. Cognitive dissonance cannot be verified because, as Neil deGrasse Tyson would say, it's a "brain failure"; it's bias meeting reality. Bias in science is incredibly dangerous, but thankfully a lot of very smart people work very hard in the peer-review system to make sure that biases don't come into play when it comes to our best understanding of how the universe works.

[AlP]

I didn't know whether to place this under Philosophy or Science but I think it will do fine under either. Maybe it will be stickied if successful enough. I am hoping for a wonderful and long conversation to sprout from this one!

It is interesting but read on.

First, read this if you have the chance: http://www.dpedtech.com/OP9.pdf
Or perhaps you're already well educated on the Observer Effect in Quantum Physics.

I read the first two pages. I think I understand what the author is trying to do. Bold type and all caps are a form of rhetoric (though I don't know the name, anynone?). Why does the author use these devices?

Is this a clash between Psychology and Quantum Physics? Our minds have been proven to tend to believe what they want. Or at least try even if it results in Cognitive Dissonance. Does Creativism mean we can make gods exist for ourselves? An afterlife (if we make our universe's rules "consistent")? Does this say more about the power of the mind to form a reality or nature's rule over giving us minds insufficient of discovering what it is? If reality means that we can make reality then doesn't that mean there is an absolute reality? I have always though of the mind as programming its own reality. Not actual reality itself!

I think there is no clash. Throughout human history, human minds have come closer and closer (I hope) to understanding reality. Being clueless is the norm. I'm comfortable with understanding a very small part of what humanity has learned. In my opinion, reason taken to the exclusion of all else goes nowhere interesting. Likewise, unbounded creation of new ideas without any basis in reality also goes nowhere interesting. My strategy is to find a balance between not just reason and creativity but also between all the good ideas that turn into bad ideas when you take them to extremes.

[templeboy]

Be careful! Explanations of quantum physics seem to have very little to do with quantum physics.  They are just dumbed down models for people, like me, who can't do the maths...and if they don't seem to make sense, its because they don't, the only thing about quantum physics that makes sense is the maths....

[Renegnicat]

It's not so much that we as human beings, can shape reality with our minds as it is that the universe creates it's own reality from moment to moment, of which we are a part.

You see, the reason why we can never get a firm grasp on the universe is because, by attempting to grasp it, we are changing it. By the very knowledge we extract from the universe, the more that knowledge is inneffective, in a sense. Of course, this isn't limited to just us; it's simply an artifact of a universe that is in constant quantum flux. As it interacts with itself, it forms it's own past, present, and future. And as a part of the universe, so do we.

Note, that because we are so large, the differences are minimal. Undetectable to us, but they are there. The phenomenon you are describing seems to be one of the fundamental "meta-laws", so to speak. Hmm.