ZzzleepingBear

I'm not super familiar with all what Sheldrake has claimed. But the gist I got from Sheldrake, is that he is more outspooken and scattered in his worldview. A bit all over the place if you will and are thereby at higher risk of being concidered woo-woo (not that there is something wrong with being all over though). While Hoffmans single idea are more in line with the scientific methood at it's core. He present his case, and invite anyone into exploring that way of thinking. I'm more familiar with Hoffman, and I don't even think he himself has said or suggested that this is how reality of consciousness work. But rather that he puts it out there as a plausible explanation for how the mind might opperate to certain extent. Hoffman comes across as more clinical in his approach imo. And that makes him more relatable to his fellow scientists I believe.

I'd say it is due to a restless mind at it's core. The expectations of tempo in relation of ability to actions, sets the whole body in a certain rythm that the mind might claim to be both useful and a purposeful task. Once this preoccupied intensity drops for any reason. There is a built up tension in the mind that correlates with that of the bodily energy residues that needs a new outlet in terms of mental/physical actions. So the intensity of bordom is due to tempo, while the actual cause of bordom might arise due to the lack of growing connections to be made.

By accepting that you can't accept it is a good start. Instead of you reaching out for acceptance, invite acceptance to come to you on it's own terms. You can come to know acceptance when you don't try to force it through the will of thought.

Try think of it this way. For there to have been a past. There also needed to be the now prior to that past event in where it all took place. If the past is the picture you remembered. The now was the and is the canvas onto where the past exist.

That is some sound advice^^ I might add this for OP. Is the snake a rope? Or is the rope a snake? It might depend on how fast you looked, or how good the lighting was etc. Solipsism is at best a mental gymnastic, and don't get me wrong I don't hate on Solipsism. But it is a sort of mental gymnastic that can be both fun and engaging, and a potential mind exercise. Why would that solipsism mind search for answears outside itself, and then proclaim that any answear it reads, is of it's own making? Solipsism claim to know itself as the ultimate singular. But such solipsism reasoning are dependant on dissregarding everything else as a fluke in regards and favour to the Solipsism midset. One way out of Solipsism if that is desired. Is to acknowledge the possibility that this Solipsism midset is a sort of reduction of the world it sees, and that thinking minds no matter how great, do inherit both biases and limitation inorder to play out certain relationships. The mind might be finite, but that doesn't mean that there must be a indirect problem to be solved in that regard.

Lol I see it Counter-clockwise, and I can't unsee it no matter if I focus on the foot. My conclution is that I got a stubborn mind:P

An inward investigation of will. While your body holds an certain potential for action. Your mind and spirit holds the means and direction for action to spring to life.

I see religion as a sort of public transport. A train if you will. A public transport can take you from A to B. It provides a collective common ground. But for anyone who have the ability or curiosity to question further than that, might wonder what happened to the rest of all the letters.