In my youth, I observed that many people believed many things about the world, about other people, and about the reality they lived in. Moreover, they did not agree with each other. No one I encountered seemed to believe exactly the same thing about everything. It seemed very odd to me. Every single person was different, and unless they were all wrong about a wide variety of things upon which they held their opinions, then the only logical conclusion was that they were all correct about what they themselves believed. Ignoring the fact that this was impossible, which is something I frequently do, I had to ask myself what explanation might exist to account for this flexibility in the fabric of realty. At which point I realized that reality was quite relative, and that we all live in our own little bubble of it. Yes, reality is relative, and if you don’t like it, that’s okay, because reality doesn’t care.
Don’t freak out (yet), I’m not talking about space-time. If we all had our own little bubble of that, well, it would be cool, but there would likely be adverse effect. Gravitation distortion, that sort of thing. No, what I’m talking about is a bubble of perception that bends the lens of our observations and conclusions so that they fit within the associative complex forming the shell of our own minds. Without this capability, the universe would seem very confusing on more levels than it already is (particularly for those lacking the ability to cognitively grasp what most of us consider obvious). For example, to a Christian and a biblical literalist, the world of an atheist might seem foolish and ridiculous (and vice-versa). Yet they both exist in the same space-time. They are clearly visible to each other, and can interact, yet one believes the universe was created ten thousand years ago by an all-powerful entity who looks like a human, and the other believes the universe was created fourteen billion years ago by a statistical fluke, and that people are a result of further statistical anomalies and chemical interactions following a set of rules governed by physical laws resulting from the first fluke. In between these two glowing philosophical extremes, there is a whole slew of middle ground that take a bit here and there and everywhere, and mixes things together in a creative stew of conceptual abstractions that explains it all in an understandable way to that particular individual.
What if they are all correct? What if the Christian will go to heaven, and the atheist will simply cease to exist? What if the deist will meet a universal God, and the Hindu will be reincarnated, and the Buddist will wake up to realize they are part of God. (Note, I’m playing fast and lose with religion here, and I’m aware there are lots of different flavors of these religions).
Of course, they can’t all be right. Right? Surely if the Christian is correct, then everyone else will go to Hell. Surely if the Hindu is right, everyone else will be coming back as something quite nasty. Surely if the deist is right, no one will remember any of this. Maybe if someone else is correct, and this is all just part of a dream being dreamt by a God who will someday awaken, we’ll all just remember our part in this drama and smile. Or maybe you are correct, and the rest of us are simply figments of your imagination.
Would it be alright if we were ALL right? Or is that impossible? Because if it’s impossible, then maybe it’s impossible because you simply can’t see how it can be so. And if it’s impossible for you, that’s okay, because it’s not going to be impossible to everyone. Believe what you want to, the rest will take care of itself.