This is something I’ve been wondering lately:
Can a question—or observation itself—bring reality into being, rather than just reveal it?
A recent paper I came across explores this idea from a scientific angle. It suggests that “reality” might not be fully real until there’s a certain structural correlation between the observer and what is being observed.
That sounds abstract, I know. But in this view, observation isn’t just passive—it helps stabilize what we call reality.
I wrote a short essay (in English) summarizing the idea:
👉 https://medium.com/@takamii26_37/do-questions-create-reality-on-observation-reality-and-the-shape-of-consciousness-7a9a425d2f41
Would love to hear what others think. Does this resonate with any philosophical frameworks you know of?
Thank you for taking the time to elaborate — I really appreciate how thoughtfully you’re engaging with this.
You’re pointing to what I think is the central tension here: the difference between how reality is experienced and how facts themselves are constituted.
I completely agree that questions reorganize experience. They shift attention, interpretation, and meaning. In that sense, a question reshapes the “lived world.” What changes is the structure through which reality is perceived.
But the more difficult question — and the one I’m still thinking through — is whether this reorganization only alters experience, or whether it also participates in the very process by which reality becomes determinate.
What I’m really asking comes down to this. Does a question merely illuminate what is already fixed? Or does it, in some way, participate in selecting or stabilizing one possibility rather than another when things are not yet fully determined?
If it’s the former, then we’re talking about revealing. If it’s the latter, then a question is participating in the process by which reality settles into form.
The distinction may seem subtle, but I think it’s decisive.