ZzzleepingBear

The problem with the flat earth theory is that the experiments always fall flat. And maybe that's why they believe in the flatness to begin with

Think about the absolute as the sea. And then think about the wave you want to catch because you like surfing let's say. The wave emerge from the sea. But sea doesn't emerge out of the wave. They are one, but simultaneously separate in a relative notion so to speak. When you catch a wave and ride it out. As it appeared on the surface of the sea, it also merge back in the sea without ever having left the sea. The wave never existed on it's own as something separate as a wave. It was the sea all along. And yet, you can paradoxically compare and choose what wave you like to surf as they come and go.

As much as I would like to say yes I does, beacuse lucid dreaming is fun and all. I don't think it increase one's chances for an awakening by much. And here is why I'm sceptical of that. As meta as lucid dreaming is, it merely shows you that the dream is not real as in being awake irl. So a lucid dream does only make you feel temporary free of your consequence framework that your mind operates from on daily basis. And that is probably where this sense of awe and freedom comes from in a lucid dream. But you stil continue to engage in the dream as you would even with out knowing that it was a dream, the only real difference is that you may take the dream less seriously so you can become much more playful while in it.

"Language games" that's a home run alright! Maybe you already agree with this, but I'd say that your red/green block example sounds more like a practical aspect of how language are ingrained in us as a tool to distinguish our being from objects etc. But when it comes to emotions and feelings. That is where the game begin so to speak. However, that emotional/feeling entanglement with language might just be an inevitable consequence of the learning itself, who is to say really. :-p

You're welcome! Yeah I had to look up the definition after reading your take on it, just to be sure myself. But as you said, context does play a big role here, and your definition could not make it any more clear here, once again well put! I'm not familiar with Wittgenstein, but I will definitely look into that "Beetles in a box". The thought of "do we mean the same thing here, or even close" That is with me quite often, so to that thought I am greatful. Since miscommunication isn't exactly unheard of, haha. Thanks once again for the recommendation, I will look into it. Seems like it could be some good stuff!

That is beautifully put i must say! Like swimming in murky waters.

You're welcome! About the conflating of the wooden table. Yes you got that right, it implies atleast the two things being mentioned. So having a discussion about what fundamentally makes a wooden table being a wooden table in the end of the day can from there on. Be turned into this endless arbitrary loop by stressing one of those point back and forth, by just one persons decisiveness from following along with one of those points as the crucial ground for what is most important in there. Yes, I share your precise view of Harris here. He is seemingly keen on discussing consciousness up to a certain point. And from there on, he switch to the brain and makes some claims about the brain having a key role or the main role of conciousness. He can maintain his doubt and mental position as long as pleases, merely by switching the discussion point between conciousness and the brain when he feel pressured. But he also makes weak point himself from doing so, and may even get to be percieved as this deep sceptical thinker by alot of viewers by not fully follow through in the main topic of consciousness as he embarked on. Hope that makes some more sense for you.

Alright, thank you for that. I always find it interesting, when how I frame someting in a certain way. That it can be identified into a category like this that you mentioned, because I usually never have a clue from what category-frame I speak from, unless maybe when it's something more basic like deterministic based, or other. Also, I might add to my take on information. That the end vision/goal as it is reached and understood. Determine whether information will be seen as just that. As information or nonsense:-)

Negative thoughts, is merely an opposite to positive thoughts. Both serves to find a middleground, or balance point. Drinking water is healthy for you, but if you drink too much of it at once, you end up poisoning yourself. And you are simultaneously dependant on drinking to survive. It all sounds like a contradiction until you take balance into perspective. In meditation, this "someone" is a thought in itself, that may seemingly appear as if this "someone" is producing thoughts. The point of watching, is to gain a increasing awareness of thoughts that you might identify with as yourself, as they arise in your mind with or without your own apparent doing.

This sentence alone stood out to me and makes so much sense now, as I think back on the debate between Harris and Spira. This is a perfect example of when someone like Harris wants or feel the need to deny the fundamental reality as conciousness in any discussion/debate. An egoic emergancy break. Conflating overlapping thoughts inorder to collapse an undenial seeing of what is.

Interesting question. Looking at the words itself strongly suggest that the word information. Is a description of knowledge put into a coherent formation. Like that of army soldiers in unity will togheter put themselves individually into one formation based on the comand given to them. Information> In-formation. In = knowledge. (In as input of ) Formation = A specific arangement into form So the word information would consist of an array of separate knowledge and inherent understanding put togheter into a unique form that can be individually recognized and agreed upon by reaching a common conclution/goal.

There is a 20 min long discussion between Sam Harris and Rupert Spira on youtube that I can recommend. I don't know much or anything about Sam harris really, other than that he is very popular and seem to oppose consciousness as the fundamental reality. But I have watched quite alot of Rupperts teachings through out the years. I found their discussion to be a quite interesting one, since it isn't really a hardheaded debate between the two either, despite their different positions. Oh, and btw that wasn't the full discussion I believe, I think it continue on some other platform. So I didn't watch the full thing, but I might do that Here it is for anyone interested

A classic!

Hahah good one! I call sus on OP.. He must be the imposter, he is the chosen one!

OP, take a look at this. It will be well worth your time I think.

That is actually a really good.. point:-)

You are the chosen one because every other position was already taken, and you where the best fit for the job of being you! Or are you surprised that you know yourself better than anyone else??

What did the Solipsist say to his fellow prison inmates on his first day in jail? Can all you imaginary NPC's shut it already! I try to get my afternoon nap in here, I've had a rough day okay!! ..? And then... He was awaken.

By stopping yourself right where you are, right now. Most people are familiar with the saying of: "If you want to become someone new or reach this/that goal, you have to keep moving forward." What is not often mentioned, is the speed of that forward movement. And you also have your personal direction to attend to, which is set out from your envisioned goal. With those details in mind.. As you reach your milestones and gaining experience, you also have a certain momentum behind you. And that also give you a certain taste for speed.. When you pass your inner speedlimit of joy, you start to miss out on the beauty around you as things tend to get blurry the faster you go. And here is where the sense of direction are at risk to be lost. Because the joyful journey do involve smelling the flowers, tasting the tea or coffee. But when you sit in that cosmic lamborghini roaring past the roses by the roadside in warp speed, and sweeping down that takeaway coffee in two gulps.. You eventually have to come back to the realization that the stilness of life is of no less value or importance than the excitment of speed.. Find your inner speed limit, put your foot off the gaspedal and stop at a beautiful rest stop inside of you.. Stop, and marvel at how far you come in your inner discoveries already. And even a short introspection will help you with the deepening and integration process of those inner discoveries that you already found out for yourself long ago. Stay present in the moment by slowing down, and you may even get a new found idea of in which direction you are going in from there. Where ever you find yourself, there you are. -Someone very wise I forgot the name of

God - Run my shit

It would depend on if there would be someone there to feel the responsibility in the firstplace.

Thats fair, exaggeration can happen. But if you have a strong habbit of exaggerating thoughts, that can throw you into black and white thinking. That is something you might want to look out for, unless you feel fine with what you think. The thing is, we can't change our basic need. We can only attend to them. You know, eating, resting, and so on. So if you take issue with the base line of life. You will for sure have to look over your reasoning unless you don't mind the confusion it will bring you. You know, lucidity is seeing something for what it is. it sheds the doubt of belief. For example. You got to know in what order basic needs, and your belief about your basic needs, stands in relation to eachother. And it can't be known from a callculated guess, it should be obvious to you that eating, and resting is prior to your resisting belief about those needs. This is the way to lucidity. Learn about your own resistance towards things that aren't meant for you to change or manipulate. This is the tapping into lucidity. Learn to apply it to where it feels most urgent for you, and then work your way from where you are at the moment.

Well, every good lie has some sort of truth to them. Otherwise there would not be anything to believe in if it was all nonsense to begin with.. So let's look at your nr (2) here. Bullshit myself about everything.. If this is true, then that would mean that all that you have been writing down here is a lie essentially. You might not believe in that, but maybe it's true that it is all bullshit after all? Maybe what you believe to be THE problem, is a lie then? Sleep is often sweet because you don't actively think. So you can't judge yourself or the toughts, or your environment as efficent in dreams as you can when you are awake.. Maybe it is your beliefs about your so called biological drives that is creating unnecessary problem in the way you think. After all, if you need to go and take a shit. Why would you go the extra mile to give a shit about what you think about the whole process. Once a turd is flushed, you don't want to mourn it and think about the turd that is gone.. Right? If you got a bad stomach, then of course you might want to consider what you might have been eating prior to your toilet visit. And that is practical thinking, not excessive thinking about every little happening that is going on. Maybe you just need to flush some thoughts?

My advice to you is to drop the colour tags that you have mentally put on people, and that change alone will make it easier to opening yourself up for the possibility to get a glimpse into anyones deeper sense of self beyond your premade assumtions about who you have to come to believe certain people are. Kindness goes along way, but by all means figure out your own bounderys that makes sense to assert when needed. It is great to be aware of no duality, but if you run into someone who haven't got into non duality but are treating you well and with respect either way, don't you think that rings just as true for treating you as themselves despite not knowing about non duality? The very kind act itself should speak volumes if you can recognize it for what it is, rather than doubt anyones intellectual knowledge about their own kindness in action. People can indeed act very selfishly.. And they can also act very generous. But they can't be both at the same time in the very moment. So an act of selfishness can't determine wheter a person IS selfish or not, but rather show a tendency of their general behaviour under ordinary circumstances. Pay attention to nuances in life. If your black and white conclutions about life feels like a safespot right now. Then fine, just keep in mind that grayscales will eventually creep into any Solipstic shell you try to build for yourself, and things can, and will be confusing if you adopt a too rigid mindset around this idea you have right now. My apology for not adressing your points directly here, my intent is not to sound like a know-it-all. But what I tried to point out here for you. Is that your whole solipsistic view of life shows me someone who try their best to put their head in the sand.. It is okey to be confused.. It can also suck to confused. But acting like you have it all figured out by pushing yourself into a solipsistic mindset will not make things less confusing down the road. That is basically what I want you to be aware of. Just be you, as much as dare today. Be kind to yourself and others around you. That's a good starting ground to stand on.

Do with this what you will, but consider this.. When you say "I know I am creating you" and "You are just a figment of my imagination" You might want to start asking yourself, what exactly is it that I'm creating here? The conclution you seem to have arrived at, is that by denying anyones separate existing life as being appart of your own being or imagination. You gain some minor control of the emotional outcome with anyone you interact with if you play into this Solipsism game of it's "all me" that is real in the end of the day.. right? Nobody can intentionally affect your feelings if you decide when or what interaction is real or not as you please. And since your feelings isn't really out there in the world. The world must be an illusion or figment of your imagination right? What this solipsism conclution is, is a half-baked truth at best. Sure, you are the one who have full responsibility of your thoughts/actions/emotions. That makes up the whole world as you see it. It could not be any other way.. BUT. Your view of the world is also your personal perspective/interpretation of the world. This solipsism view shuts down your own potential openness and respect of individuals other than yourself. And so you will close yourself down and make yourself inaccessible in relating with to others who might hold a very different view of things than than you do. And while being wrong hurts sometimes, it will make you stronger each time you are fully honest with yourself. Solipsism is bound to make you dense in your own convitions, and also less and less relatable as a compassionate human. Since the consideration of feelings of others, are easily dissmissed as irrelevant noice in your own mind, you will eventually have a harder time to relate to others at an emotional level. Since any emotional relationship require a certain vulnerability. Vulnerability is essentially your openness towards uncertainty when relating with others.