Wasn't sure where to post this, so I figured I would post it here. This is a quote that's opened my eyes to a lot.
"People Live their Lives bound by what they accept as correct and true. That is how they define "Reality" . But what does it mean to be "correct" or "true"? They are merely vague concepts... Their "Reality" may all be a mirage. Can we consider them to be simply living in their own world, shaped by their beliefs?" Itachi from Naruto
I have long lived by the idea that what I believe is true is only true until it is challenged by a new idea as I gather new information. Upon getting new information that makes me rethink my previous beliefs means that I must re-evaluate based on this new information. If I find the new information credible, then I MUST give up the old (no longer true) belief and embrace the new one. This is how I learn and grow. If the new information doesn't stand up to my current belief (after doing research and evaluation), then I cast it aside, hold onto my current belief and keep going forward until the next challenge.
I have been told that this is just being wishy washy. I disagree. To me, this is how I learn and grow. I evaluate as I get new information and determine whether to accept it as my new norm or not. I have also been told that such people can sound quite ignorant when talking of their current belief when others have already embraced the new information. That's fine. They just heard it before I did. If they feel I am wrong in my evaluation and current belief, I want to hear their explanation, their proof so I can use that information to re-evaluate. I don't see that as stupid. I see that as rational, critical thinking and I relish and embrace it. I am always looking to learn and that didn't stop when I finished college. I read a lot of non-fiction for that very reason.
Although it often takes a decade or two or three for all the relevant primary sources to emerge, historians end up with the closest thing to a "God's eye" view of human interactions. By this I mean that after a period of time has elapsed, the various and sundry human perspectives on an event or development can be cross-checked against one another and against measurable data. When this is done professionally under the watchful eye of peer review as a corrective, historians begin to approach the "truth" asymptotically (= continually closer but never fully reaching it) and usually eventually come to a consensus on most (not all) salient points, some of which were once controversial but are no longer in dispute.
My point here is that any individual person's Reality might be a mirage insofar as it is sharply divorced from a future (as yet unreached) reality consensus, but reality unquestionably exists and can be approximated, albeit well after the fact, through historical inquiry into and comparison of all relevant primary sources from all sides.
I've never heard of Itachi but I like the quote, and I see how it could have influenced you. It's something that I need to think about because it leaves reality and truth to be personal and subjective, as it moves you to question the clarity of what you think you know. The reality you accept, I agree it can and often is a personal construct but truth as being that same thing takes faith if you are saying, the truth is in the mind of the beholder. At least I think it does.
I guess being correct and true is a matter of one's moral beliefs and where they get them from.
For instance, a Christian believes they get their morals from god (or the Bible) objectively and that their god cannot be wrong.
On the other hand, there are those that don't believe that, but that we as societies have decided what works best for us and make laws and rules that we can abide by.
As far as reality, we can only live in the reality that we can observe and interact with, we have no choice until other realities are presented to us or we can somehow temporarily alter it.