How does this happen, the reader may ask, that we always talk about myth, but we find the discussed limitations in the reality of human life. Is it a myth if it describes reality? My answer is, of course, a myth. True, we are accustomed to treating myth as something that does not have the status of real. The myth we are considering here shapes reality, and is thereby confirmed by it every moment of our lives. To analyze this paradox, I will need another category familiar to the reader. We're talking about a hypothesis. Hypothesis in the broadest sense. The thinking of modern man, which is based on the myth of the stability of reality, is determined by hypotheses that change each other in the dynamics of this process. Moreover, hypotheses determine not only thinking, but also perception. What does this mean? We see (hear, feel, etc.) only what fits into the current hypothesis. In relation to reasoning about reality, it looks like this. Reality is what corresponds to the most probable hypothesis at the moment. Suppose I see a glass of wine on the table, which is completely “real” - I can touch it with my hand, pick it up, drink wine from it, finally. This means only one thing - the hypothesis about the existence of a glass of wine is the most probable. Let us imagine just for a second that the more probable hypothesis turned out to be that the glass does not exist or, for example, that the glass is filled not with wine, but with kvass. Reality is changing beyond recognition. In this very “reality”, our glass of wine, which was real just a second ago, disappears or its contents change. Fantastic? Not at all. From the point of view of modern physics, this is a description of reality. Not only a glass of wine, but the entire Universe, according to the principles of quantum mechanics, was created by an observer. I would add only one circumstance here - the world was created by an observer who cannot help but build hypotheses. Moreover, the degree of probability of confirmation/refutation of a hypothesis in a person’s mind is very certain even before the corresponding verification/falsification procedure. In other words, one of the hypotheses is more probable than its alternative. And it is precisely this that is inevitably confirmed. Returning to our example, this means that my perception of a glass of wine is determined precisely by the most probable hypothesis at the moment. Of course, the very process of constructing and putting forward a hypothesis is determined by a person’s “past” experience - I will be more likely to assume the existence of a glass of wine at the point where it “was” a minute ago. This dependence of a person’s perception, which is connected with consciousness, on previous experience in psychology is known as apperception [1]. It would be unfair to attribute to the act of observation only the status of a process that ascertains “reality.” The act of observation does not state facts, but creates them itself. In other words, I created the glass of wine, the table, and their subsequent sudden disappearance myself.[1] Apperception (lat. ad - to and lat. perceptio - perception) is one of the fundamental properties of the human psyche, expressed in the conditioning of the perception of objects and phenomena of the external world and the awareness of this perception by the features of the general content of mental life as a whole, the stock of knowledge and the specific state of the individual. http://pogodin.kiev.ua/news/gipotezy-stroyat-realnost-a-ne-predskazyvayut-ee