Values<\/h2>\n

This view emphasizes that reality is encountered, rather than invented, and can resist or frustrate beliefs and desires, unlike malleable imaginary creations. Another influential proposal treats mind-independence as a criterion of reality, arguing that real entities do not depend on how people think about them. The Eleatic principle is controversial because it is typically taken to deny that abstract objects studied in fields like mathematics, such as numbers, are real. However, stories about Santa Claus, such as written texts in children’s books, are part of reality since they can influence how people think. Discussed in ancient Greek philosophy as the Eleatic principle, it states that to be real is to be able to produce changes and to be affected by them. Criteria of reality are proposed features or standards that distinguish real entities from unreal ones.
\nOn this view, higher levels show greater complexity and new phenomena but depend on the lower ones and could not exist without them. Some philosophical approaches rely on the idea of fundamentality and dependence to analyze the world in terms of levels or layers, such as material, biological, psychological, and social reality. In the Hindu tradition, it is often identified with Brahman as the all-pervasive reality and the supreme principle grounding all being. Some outlooks suggest that only the fundamental level is ultimately real, arguing that non-fundamental entities are in some sense eliminable since reality can be described without them.<\/p>\n

Values<\/h2>\n

It comprises beliefs, ideas, and attitudes that form a background against which people interpret experiences, make decisions, and navigate life. By contrast, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788\u20131860) criticized German idealism and held that a blind, irrational will is the underlying principle of reality. Immanuel Kant (1724\u20131804) rejected the possibility of objective knowledge of the things in themselves, arguing instead that all experience is shaped by the innate structures of human cognition. Plato (c. 427 \u2013 c. 347 BCE) argued for the existence of a realm of eternal forms or ideas in addition to the material world of mutable entities.
\nAnti-realism about abstract objects in mathematics takes various forms, including, but not limited to, fictionalism. Anti-realists hold that there are no abstract objects and offer alternative explanations. Realists and anti-realists about abstract objects debate whether, or in what sense, such entities form part of reality. Nominalism, another anti-realist view, rejects both mental and non-mental interpretations of universals. For example, a person may be a realist about universals and an anti-realist about values. In this sense, realism and anti-realism encompass many domain-specific positions across diverse fields.<\/p>\n

Realism and anti-realism<\/h2>\n

It holds that this practice can be useful in some contexts without ascribing substantive or framework-independent reality to such entities. Relativism, another form of anti-realism, holds that what counts as real varies based on one’s perspective or conceptual framework. Phenomenalism, a related view, reduces physical objects to collections of actual or possible sensory experiences. In the broadest sense, realism is the view that the external world and its constituents exist as they do regardless of how people perceive or think about them.
\nSkepticism about metaphysics holds that it is not possible to know the fundamental nature of reality, such as claims about categories of being or the existence of universals. It holds that the scientific view of the world is either exactly or at least approximately true by presenting reality as it is. For example, emotivism holds that value statements express emotional attitudes of subjective approval or disapproval rather than objective facts. Anti-realist views reject the mind-independent existence of values and can take various forms. Realists hold that values are objective features of reality, meaning that there are mind-independent facts about whether something is good or bad, irrespective of subjective beliefs or personal preferences.
\nIn this sense, it is the state of being real or what all real entities have in common, separating them from unreal or illusory ones. In a slightly different sense, reality is not the totality itself but an aspect shared by all its constituents. Contemporary technology in the form of augmented and virtual reality can inform experience and raises questions about the ontological status of virtual objects. Other discussions examine space and time as frameworks that organize relations among entities, and laws of nature describing regularities or general patterns of how entities interact and changes unfold. Various criteria for distinguishing real from unreal entities have been proposed, including causal powers, mind-independence, and being non-illusory. It is often contrasted with appearance, opposing what is with what seems to be, although the accuracy and fundamentality of this contrast are disputed.<\/p>\n

Levels of reality<\/h2>\n

Naturalism argues that values are part of the natural world and can be studied by the natural sciences through empirical observation. Some positions concern the existence of values in general, while others are limited to specific domains, such as moral, aesthetic, or religious values. Formalism, another form of anti-realism, understands mathematics as a practice of symbol manipulation, suggesting that mathematical truth is grounded in whether the manipulation rules permit the construction of a proof. According to conventionalism, the truth of mathematical statements rests on linguistic conventions or definitions, rather than on their relation to language-independent reality.<\/p>\n