does the tree even exist?

Wish I would have found this prior to the dinner party I attended Friday evening. Perhaps I could have made a more articulate contribution to the stimulating conversation regarding whether the tree even exists in the forest, much less makes a sound when it falls, if there is no one to perceive it. (I love getting together with people who think about things like this!) You can read the entire essay in context here: http://www.pamelaheath.com/Skeptics.htm

***
We are now in the middle of a paradigm shift. The classical paradigm, which has been held since Descartes, is based in the underlying assumption that the observer is separate from the observed. In essence, duality. It says that there is a fundamental subject-object (or mind-body) split. This presupposes that there are objective ways to define and measure the fixed external world--which the proponents of this paradigm would say is the only world that matters. The classical paradigm favors experimental research design, which presumes to measure the world in an objective way.

Anyone who has grown up in today's school systems might be justified in being a little confused at this point. We are taught that the double blind controlled experiment is the gold standard research methodology. What happened?

Physics.

The emergence of quantum theory started a fundamental shift in how we understand the world. Physicists suddenly realized that there is always some indeterminacy in our measurements. This is because the act of measurement itself can define and change that which is being measured.

This means that the experimenter is always part of the experiment, and all our "objective" facts are, in fact, potentially flawed.

... And while not all physicists agree, the new paradigm that is emerging is one in which the universe is a single whole, within which every part is intimately connected to every other part.

Thus, the so-called objectivity of the classical paradigm is the true illusion, as an "observer effect" is inevitable in any observation. The experimenter is a part of his or her experiment.
***

and because I love adding emphasis, I want to add some to that last line:

The experimenter is ALWAYS a part of the experiment, and the observer is NEVER separate from what he or she observes. I think that's a good thing to keep in mind while we are being constantly deluged with scientific studies and statistics. Think long and hard about overriding your personal discernment and intuition because of a study, because there are no truly objective experimental designs. Claim the joy, privilege, and responsibility of exercising your own free will.