Osaid

I had a dream where I developed an entire crush on a dream character and then felt lovesick after waking up, and this happened a few times. I also had a dream where I was being tortured and I could feel the pain. The pain felt more "dull" than pain in real life. But I could still feel it, I was lucid too. But I couldn't control the dream despite being lucid. So that was odd in hindsight. So yeah, dreams are wild.

It's very easy to criticize survival from thousands of years in the future, when things are much more developed. Surviving in a beige - red society is an entirely different ball game than surviving in a red - green society. Even the most conscious people have a physical body maintain, and a physical body is a distinct form, and so that distinct form must take priority over other distinct forms in order to continue existing as a distinct form. Now, imagine if the society you live in and all of its people are stage beige - red, and you must figure out how to survive within that environment. The tactics you use today are not gonna work back then. This is the existential survival bind we are put in. Over the years, it's become easier to survive selflessly thanks to evolutionary advancements. But, of course, survival still happens to a certain degree. Our version of this today might be factory workers laboring away in order to make our phones. Or, the destructions of trees for our homes. Or, the slaughtering of animals for nutrients. These are the modern versions of "low development" survival activities which are hard to escape from. Of course these survival strategies will look much different in a thousand-year-old society where phones did not even exist. Anyways, this is all mostly a distraction anyways. Sort the wheat from the chaff.

I think snakes can be cute. But no, I wouldn't, since I'm a heterosexual male.

Well, the VR is a one time payment, and it can create infinite virtual escorts True, I'd rather ditch the doll for the VR though tbh. VR has more variety. Plus I'm suspicious as to how comfortable and enjoyable actually doing it with a doll really is.

Good idea, I'll ask Santa for one next Christmas

On second thought, I'm not sure if thrusting = more pleasure. It just equals more realism, cause ofc you thrust during actual sex. But I don't think that necessarily amps up the pleasure. In general, it seems like a dressed up fleshlight to me. I'd rather just have a fleshlight, and then use some other form of porn alongside it, like VR or whatever. If anything, it just seems like a unique way to masturbate. Not necessarily better or worse than others, just unique. Might be more appealing to some people than others, since people have different preferences. It just seems inefficient and clunky to me, though. I wouldn't wanna limit my sexual stimuli to a doll. But, I've never tried it.

Hmm, I guess. Sex doll + VR might be the move

There's something really funny about someone coming to the conclusion that they need a sex doll as a result of realizing they are God

what no fap does to a mf In all seriousness, is a sex doll really that much better than normal porn? I can't imagine myself finding much pleasure in doing it with a lifeless doll. Aside from that, it must get boring after a while? Then you gotta buy more dolls? Doesn't seem efficient to me. A VR headset or something seems way more appealing.

I could always intuitively sense as a child that the religious dogma being taught to me was BS. Probably because I was an introvert who was always contemplating philosophy. Religion just didn't make sense to me, and I could sense the fear and confusion from the religious people around me. I was always questioning their authority. You could say I was born with a very grounded epistemological framework, because I wasn't afraid to ask questions and contemplate things for myself. Making sure my ideas about the world were correct was a top priority for me. I think that the problem of being sucked into religious and conspiratorial dogma fundamentally comes to a lack of proper epistemology and a careless delegation of authority. The latter reason can probably be related to the former, but I think it's helpful to separate it in order to highlight it. Like for example, if you were to ask some hard-nosed conspiracy theorist "What is the difference between real and unreal?", they probably wouldn't even be able to give you a good answer. How are you going to believe some random ideology without first even knowing the answer to that? That's a very fundamental thing you've skipped over. If you don't know that, then of course your perception and ideologies are going to be corrupted and warped later down the line. Epistemology is analogous to a firewall on a computer, and the computer is analogous to your mind. If you don't have solid epistemology, all sorts of mind viruses are going to sneak in undetected. You're gonna have no standards for the ideas that go in your mind, and so all sorts of things will start to infest it. And then, what happens when you don't have good epistemology is that you start to rely on authority. More technically, you start delegating your own authority onto other people. Because ultimately, all authority is decided by you. Authority becomes your crutch without proper epistemology. If you can't think for yourself, let other people think for you. Your religious leader said it. Your teacher said it. Your parents said it. And so, it must be true. Who am I to question them? Well, you probably aren't even able to question them. Most people don't even contemplate questioning them, because their epistemological framework is so uncoordinated. In your instance, for example, the fear of this quote is an example of an appeal to authority. You are unable to discern whether the quote is true or false, so you are forced to give it authority and take what your mind perceives to be the safest route, which is avoiding anything beyond human knowledge. So, by default, the quote gains authority out of your fear, because you are unable to discern how truthful it is with your current epistemological framework.

Lol I suspected it might be The bot is too smart for RationalWiki

To be free of fear is to be full of love. Love yourself instead of the idea of someone else loving you. Love is a better master than duty. I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. An eye for an eye and the world goes blind.

Yep

It's the other way around. It has limited knowledge of things after 2021.

I'm pretty sure there's a caveat somewhere on the website saying that ChatGPT has limited knowledge of events after 2021. They seem to have decided to cut off its knowledge there.

Same for me, I was just focusing on the positive aspects of it. I think it's more likely for introverts.

We aren't constantly clinging to any anxieties or worries of the future. In that sense, we're more lax. When you're lax and carefree, it creates more space for enjoying things deeply. You can't enjoy and worry at the same time. There is an energy that builds up in the chest area. It almost feels like an itch that's being scratched. It's an energetic release. Sometimes you see something so absurd and surprising and comedic that you need to let out some sort of reaction and energy, and this ends up being a pretty enjoyable process. Talking to other people can ground you pull you away from your thoughts and worries if you are someone that overthinks. It feels like a weight being lifted off your chest sometimes, because you have someone you can communicate your feelings to and vent to. And then they can talk back and forth with you and give you feedback about yourself. It feels validating having someone listen and communicate to you, like an acknowledgment of your existence and your ideas. People can perceive social interactions differently though. I'm an introvert, and this is how I perceive the good aspects of socializing, other people might differ. I like Christmas because of all the festive designs and ideas that start to appear everywhere. It's very cartoony, and I like that. It gives different flavors and variety to the different months, instead of all of them being bland and similar. There are also many different events and gatherings that pop up as a result, which can be enjoyable. The lights outside are nice too, I like seeing bright colors everywhere, it's very stimulating and energetic. It's nice seeing the world celebrate something in unison, it creates a feeling of connection. If I had to use a few adjectives to describe Christmas, I would say warm and cozy, probably because of the contrast between the snow outside and being inside somewhere warm. This creates a unique cozy atmosphere.

This coding stuff is insane. You can even use it to write scripts for the Minecraft command block.

Ease them into it. You have to talk to them from where they're at in terms of development. It's like the difference between jumping straight into a cold shower vs slowly decreasing the temperature. For example, telling a stereotypical hard-nosed religious person "You are God" will likely cause backlash. But, if you instead ask, "What is God?", or "How do you know what God is?", these statements are much more palpable and easier to explore for them. A lot of times psychedelics do work, though. The experience completely shatters their paradigm. But some egos recover back. Some people are harder to change. I also think a lack of spiritual and epistemological foundation could be an issue as well. They're just easily swayed by the opinions and ideas of others. Their process for grounding themselves and finding truth aren't very rigid. This is probably related to why some people are harder to change.

Ego backlash

Stories are real, they exist as stories. You are making a distinction that says one part of reality is less real than the other. In reality, you don't believe in your own definition of God, which is that God is everything. If you did, you would realize that imagination and stories are all equally God, and thus equally real. One part of reality can't be less real than the other. You can't deny that you do experience imagination and stories, so it is some sort of phenomena that is occurring in your experience, even though you might shun it away. There is of course a difference between being conscious that something is a story, and being unconscious of the fact that something is a story. For example, a child who believes in Santa as a physical entity vs a parent who is aware that Santa is an imagined holiday mascot. They are both imagining Santa, but the latter has recontextualized it to see that it is imaginary, whereas the former hasn't become aware of that yet.

They do exist, as imagination. Sometimes it can even exist as something more visible and tangible. Consciousness can shapeshift. You're clinging to a state of consciousness which doesn't imagine stories, because you believe in the story that imagination is "unreal" or "invalid" or "less real" than the rest of reality. All of reality is real. You are still subtly partitioning God and placing certain aspects of it in hierarchies. If God generates everything, and God is everything, then stories and imagination are a part of everything as well. If you were aware of what you are saying, you would realize that imagining neural networks is how God generates things, because a neural network is God. God can imagine any sort of generation it wants. It can stop imagining things that generate it, as well. It doesn't really need a generation process in order to exist, unless you imagine it.

I understand. I didn't say imagination isn't a part of reality. It's tricky, because the mind will sneak in ideas about how certain parts of reality are "unreal" or "invalid", even if I don't explicitly state it, so I get your concern. I'll try to be more cognizant of it next time. If I'm being honest, I was already trying to be careful about my wording, because I know how it can affect people. But, if it rubbed you off the wrong way, I guess the approach still needs tweaking.

God can be a story. The idea that God is generating the output, is also a story. Nothing wrong with stories.

I didn't say you shouldn't debate people, just that you should be smart about it. My point is to be more mindful about how you allocate your energy in regards to debating. There are different intentions and expectations people have when arguing, and some can be dysfunctional and needy. Yes, there are useful skills that can be developed from debating. There are even people who create entire brands around debating, which reach many people. This is different from mindlessly debating random anons online. There are even situations where you might wanna change the mind of some close friend or family. That's all well and good. Just be strategic and realistic about it. There are people who debate with realistic expectations, and those who debate with dysfunctional and neurotic expectations.