Someone here

Sorry can't understand clearly. Lots of complex concepts. Explain to me as if I'm 8.

Without that monkey in your head you will die son... So don't pretend that you don't have a monkey in your head.. You have plenty of them. Otherwise we wouldn't be hearing from you.

Why do you think these thoughts arise? They match your direct experience. Because your direct experience can't give you access to what is not in your direct experience. Namely the past.. The future.. Your bank account.. The back of your head. You don't have conscious control over your direct experience. You have no clue why it's here. If it's a figment of your consciousness.. Go ahead and will the fridge out of existence. Ofcourse all that isn't conclusive but if you can't see why there is no link between what your direct experience tells you about what is supposed to be outside of it. Then you need to use your mind a bit harder.

The whole point is that if it exists outside your experience then you can't verify that from within your experience...you are trying to verify if the fridge exists outside of your experience from within your experience.. Do you see something wrong here? Come on guys what's wrong with yall lol .. All you are really is " I can't experience it when I'm not experiencing it." wow such brilliance lol . Does it stand there when you are not experiencing it is a totally different thing.

Screw the materialist paradigm.. It's a very simple and straightforward question.. Do you exist as a conscious being outside my own consciousness? I can't see why would that be impossible. To say that just because I can't verify it then it's not real is just silly imo. I can't experience anything outside of my own experience by defintion but that has nothing to do with do you have an experience of your own. There is no link whatsoever.

You don't know what you don't know.

Dude no point getting lost in those technical details. For me objectivism.. materialism.. Realism are the same thing.. that stuff out there are out there not just in your head. Same solipsism.. Idealism the same. There is actually different categories and subsets under each one of them so let's forget about the label and focus on the meaning. For me now I just don't know but I gravitate more towards that you are a real person in any case.

Yes that's your view. I'm not sure if I know that for certain as you Claim. So I remain skeptical.

Both the materialist' view and the solipsist's view are circular. The conclusion is already in the assumption. The assumption that you start with is the conclusion that you end up with. So it can't possibly be true. @Javfly33 read above. Won't explain it to you again. You don't know what is "the only way possible" for xyz. You just assume that.

This is speculation.. It's definitely possible for two independent POVs to exist. Take two cameras.. And record your room from two angles.. Check out the room from the two angles.. So here you go you have two POVs ofcourse each camera has no access to the other camera.. Yet they both exist independently simultaneously .. Now turn off one camera.. And check out the other one.. Does turning off one camera affect the other camera?????? Ofcourse no. Nothing mysterious about it. Common sense stuff. Now apply that to your pov and barack Obama's pov. Why can't it be that way? Because you are too attached to your own camera and you think it's the whole world?

Exactly. For both the solipsist and the materialist.. the assumption =the conclusion. For something to exist it has to be experienced.. And I can't experience something if I'm not experiencing it.. Therefore nothing exists unless I'm experiencing it duh ?.......... But the whole devil is in the first bolded statement because you just have to ASSUME that it's true.

I get you.. so you're saying in any case I will never experience anything outside of experience!! What a revolutionary insight. I basically don't disagree with that. The question is there something outside of experience? These two separate things. That fact that you can't experience something outside of consciousness doesn't equal that there is nothing outside of consciousness. Even tho there is nothing outside of consciousness FOR YOU.

Careful guys don't mess around with Nahm too much.. He will roast you and completely deconstruct every word you say and you might not know your way back home again. Just sayin ?

Very good question. I think here is the crux of the matter. What does it mean to say that something exists? From the video Leo literally said "to exist is to appear". In other words to have a phenomenal quality that you can.. see touch.. smell.. taste.. hear right now. If you can't access it right now it literally does not "exist". That means if you are not directly perceiving Paris or London or Madrid or New York right now.. They don't exist. But see the absurdity and the circulation here. You already assumed that to exist is to appear and then you negated the existence of whatever that isn't appearing right now. Simply because it's not appearing right now. Ofcourse that is true by the definition. But who told you your definition is true? That to appear is to exist? You don't know what you don't know DUH? If stuff exist outside of appearance you can't confirm their appearance-independent existence from within the domain of appearances. It's a lack in your end because you're stuck in your perceptions. A lack on your end isn't conclusive of what is supposed to exist outside of your limitations. Isn't that obvious?

What does your ability to understand my words have to do with whether we are dependent on each other or not for our existence? The key point is this.. The fact that appearances disappear immediately with the disappearance of one's consciousness has absolutely nothing to to do with whether these appearance have a deeper layer of existence. " Just because I don't see it when I don't see it.. That means it's only there when I see it" ?. there Is absolutely nothing in this logical building that is conclusive. Or valid.

Chop wood and carry water

@Nahm nah my intention is not to debunk someone for the sake of getting a "kick" out it . I only care about what's true. Nothing against Leo personally he is my role mode lol l. Also people have really different orientations. Just like how Sexual orientations are different. also what you care about in general. If you care about how you feel primarily . I care about existential understanding. Some people couldn't care less about it. To each his own I guess. And this diversity is here to teach us humility and open-mindedness. No serious conflicts. Just discussing.. Sharing.. Expanding perspectives.. Growth. For everyone ?

In the span of 5 months? Sounds too long. Loa is not time-efficient. I can change my eye's color 10 times in the span of 15 minutes. Lenses>loa

@Nahm thanks All beautiful.. "understood" and appreciated. The reason I made this thread (and a lot about the same topic in the past). Because I really Believe Leo got something wrong with this "appearances" metaphysics. It's confusing you can see a lot here preach this solipsism mentality. Leo thinks "where have you ever encountered anything underneath appearances"? ... And I'm like But Leo why do you need to encounter it to know it's real? The whole point is that if there is something underneath appearances you can't find it as an appearance!! ?‍♂️. Anyways screw this is just me lol. Have a nice day too bro.

Got you. You agree with me. But how can "God" be wrong? ? Jk alrighty. Lol

@Nahm Dude I love you cuz you are woke af.. I respect you too.. Cuz you're mod ?... But what are you adding to this thread with just flirting with seeking_brilliance and throwing cold comments ??

@electroBeam https://www.amazon.com/Inner-Gold-Understanding-Psychological-Projection-ebook/dp/B01H7INFEU

@electroBeam some aspects of myself ?

@electroBeam lol isn't that my reply on your post? so you just came here to revenge lmao

@electroBeam look this isn't rocket science.. There is a communication between two persons right now (me and you).. From your pov and /or from my pov.. for this communication to make sense.. me and you are assuming that on the other side there is a sentient being receiving the message... And my sentience is independent from your sentience. What Leo is saying is that my sentient is literally dependent on your sentient. In other words when you go to sleep tonight.. I and the rest of the universe will literally cease to exist. We were just projections of your own mind.... It must follow that there is no point talking with mere images in your mind. To a dream characters. Watch the video. This is only resolved if you accept the existence of a second layer of reality. If you don't it's straightforward solipsism.