davecraw

I hope this message finds you all in good spirits. Today, I want to invite you on a thought experiment — a journey to reflect on the depth of our being, beyond the limitations of our immediate experience. I want to challenge the idea that seems to be commonly presented on this forum that the expereince and the experiencer are the same. To illustrate this, try these experiments: As you read this post, try to complete it by solely using your current experience. Can you? Evidently not, because the rest of this post isn't part of your current experience. But do you end up reading the rest of this? If so that's an indication of a MAJOR difference between you and your experience. Now sitting at your dining table with a plate full of your favorite food. Now, try to consume it using only your experience. Can you taste the tangy sweetness of that ripe orange or the comforting warmth of your grandma's famous stew? Without your senses, cognitive functions, and physical abilities — all of which are beyond mere experience — you can't. Take a moment to think of the myriad things you do every day. Can you carry out these activities with just your experience? Perhaps you enjoy painting — can your experience alone hold the brush and mix the colors on the palette? Or maybe you're a musician — can the experience by itself strum the guitar or hit the right piano key? Evidently not. Now, close your eyes and try to stop reading this post. Can you do that without you eyes that aren't part of your experience? What these exercises highlight is the palpable absurdity of identifying ourselves exclusively with our experiences. You, the one reading this, are the one that transcends this experience. If you're not convinced try close your eyes and try to respond with just that blackness. Now ask yourself where are the keys to type? Where are the hands to press the keys? Where is the post button with eyes closed?

Hard to tell if your trolling but nevertheless that's not evidence that you're an experience.

@Swarnim To your first point: Do you think your memory of reading this reads this? When this is no longer being read do you remain? If so itn't than an idnication of a difference between you and this experience? To your second point: So it's definitely possible to imagine only this exists. However is that true? The rest of this post isn't part of your experience right now but it still exists. Can't you confirm this by reading the rest of it? To your third point: Why should I expand the definion of experience to things that aren't being experienced? What exactly are the criteria something must meet in your mind for you to consider it to be an experience? Perhaps we define the words differently. One way to define the verb experience is "having (or living with) knowledge directly". In that context the knowledge is the qualia themselves like the color red or the shape of these letters. To your fourth point: If by sense of self you mean an experience of the experiencer then no such experience exists. The only indication there is an experiencer is the experience. Apparently the experiencer knows about its existence by experiencing its experience.

Your current experience exists. You know by experiencing it. Now this post is part of your experience. But notice this post was created way before now (check time stamp) when your current experience didn't exist. Isn't that evidence that the source of your experience exists beyond your experience?

I won't stop till I answer the questions I want to answer. I refuse to believe anything. As for the truth well right now I want to know whether I ever experience with the other bodies in this world.

@Razard86 I'm not arguign with you I'm just asking you a question that you are unforutnately avoiding answering. What's someone to do in a world apparently filled with people who spent their lives building gas chambers, enslaving people, getting gassed, an amount of suffering that is almost imcomprehensible. Perhaps it's all my fault. But then it's all just your fault. And you won't even have a rational discussion with me. I just wish someone would actually engage with these questions.

But you admit that's just an assumption right? After all you claimed you don't actually know if that's true: Your quote: "I have no evidence, and there can never be evidence for this."

So why is someone telling you that they have a different perspective than you?

That's not the question! First obviosuly each human is the source of its own creation. So this person is the God of its creation and nothing else. That's understood. Second I'm not even claiming I am a human or a body. However, it's worth noting that so-called body parts are being experienced. In fact it's prety clear nobody writes this (because nobody exists for the whole duration of writing this). But apparently this is written with certain bodues. Do you think you experience with all of the body parts in this world at some point in your life? Such as the ones that are apparently used to type this post? Do you understand the question or did I not make it clear enough?

I'm curious if you're under the impression that you experience with all of the bodies on this plannet or not?

Where is your evidence? Just because you can dream something when you sleep isn't proof this is a dream.

Do you have any evidence to support those claims otherwise they're just useless. After all you've got billions of people on this planent claiming the opposite. Plus from this perspective it's known that if you are experiencing my experience you don't even know if any of this is imaginary yet you claim it is.

Well the claim that the post was created now (currently the post was written 5 hours ago) is not an accurate representation of the experience. So it's not true unless you imagined it right now. You're right that it's possible to imagine a post with a timestamp that claims it was written 5 hours ago with eyes closed. But, there is no evidence that you imagined that post right now with eyes open. Or do you have some?

Lol why do you think so?

In the solitude of my room, I find myself looking at two pencils resting on my desk, a lone quarter, and a mattress on the floor next to me. Scribbled on a note is a secret, a four-digit code known by me. From my perspective, if you were truly experiencing my experience like me, you'd know this code. In fact you'd have access to it when you respond. After all, my reality would be your reality, and my knowledge would be your knowledge. So, can you tell me my secret code? If you don't and yet you insist that there are no other beings or experiences then you have some explaning to do! How do you reconcile that contradiction? Are you simply being deceptive, or do you have a more nuanced explanation? Are you going to deny my existence? Or blow my mind? Let's delve deeper into this exploration, not as a debate, but as a chance to truly push the boundaries of our understanding of consciousness and our interconnectedness within this universe. Your perspective is extremely valuble!

Well can you define imagine and imaginary first? The idea that you are imagining me is dubious given the standard definition of imagine and imaginary. By the way imagine is defined as "form a mental image or concept of". So based on those definitions you're claiming I'm just an image or concept in your mind but that's not true. The source of this post is not merely an image or concept.

What exactly don't you like about the post?

Because there's a huge difference between experiencing with everybody on this plannet and just with the one you respond with.

No and why is it that no one has responded with the correct code?

Begin by acknowledging my claim: I am having an experience. You may choose to accept or reject this assertion, or perhaps you're uncertain. You may even hold prior knowledge that corresponds to what I'm about to disclose. You possess the knowledge that you are experiencing. This experience I'm creating for you acts as your evidence, an internal, subjective truth. Assuming I am a separate entity from you, you can deduce that I am also experiencing something. This inference is based on my demonstrated awareness of your experience, an awareness communicated through the act of writing to you about it. However, if I am not separate but identical to you, then you still arrive at the same conclusion: I am experiencing. You know this because you are experiencing. In essence, regardless of whether I am seen as another or as a reflection of you, your understanding of your own experiences provides evidence of my experiences. Your consciousness, whether perceived in isolation or in unity with mine, attests to the reality of my own experience. Using my own logic I know you are experiencing. Now can we can address the deeper matters of existence?

Can you expand on that? What exactly do you mean by imagining everything? In what way do you regard imagining everything as being different than not imagining everything?

I dont think it's stupid but it is an indication that he doesn't know the code. Can you please point out what you find completely wrong about my worldview? I'm kind of taken aback honestly and value your response.

What do you mean?

I think the essence of my question is about whether you are interacting with someone that has a different expeience than you. AND more importantly if you experience that being's experience in your past or future. I think it's more accurate to state that he did not reveal the code. But why? Because he isn't me and never writes down the code I did? Because he's deceptive? Because he is me and will write the code in his future as me? Because he is me and wrote the code in his past as me but now can't rememeber? Or perhaps something else? Those are very different situations right?

That wasn't it!