>our understanding of reality is subject to our own interpretation of the cues [our mind's interpretation of what we see, taste, smell, feel, and hear--varying of course from one experience to the next] provided to us by our senses--themselves subject to the "proper" function of the body and the mind--a concept which is itself constructed by means of an interpretation of the mind-body complex.
>this being the case--our understanding of reality is, then, subject to the function of the body and the mind, and >therefore differs dramatically from person to person, experience to experience, etc. [see, the blind man, the drug addict, the human dream, and the sober persons--which of these realities is more correct...?]
>if this "reality" varies as such, how are we to evaluate it?
it is non-objective and not to be defined collectively or generally.
>reality is the product of our own interpretations and mind/body functioning, which is constantly in flux.
>"knowledge" as "the fact or state of knowing; the perception of fact or truth; clear and certain mental apprehension" is, then, a delusion. [see jean baudrillard]
>it is a delusion because there can be know knowing or general qualification of reality if the very nature of reality is that it does not adhere to any one set of truths and cannot be apprehended in any real way.
>our search for "knowledge," too, is a delusion--exemplified by our endless search for something which in all probability does not actually exist.