InfinitePotential

Hell yeah. “As an AI language model, I don’t have personal beliefs or values, but here’s something pretty trippy to think about…”

If you are an infinite dreamer, existing eternally, with absolute never-ending capacity to dream… a dream of a typical 80 year human life makes up absolutely nothing of the totality of your infinite dream. In other words, from the perspective of your infinite dreamer self, the next “moment” (80 years from now), you may be dreaming something radically different, so that your dreams actually are not so consistent as they appear to be from your current perspective. Also, given certain states of consciousness, illogical things can happen. Also, when you’re dreaming at night, weird things may happen, but you don’t realize you’re dreaming. Similarly, we’re in this unbelievable magical existence… we take everything around us for granted and treat it as mundane and normal, when actually it’s pretty fucking crazy that we’re bipedal apes looking out of little orbs in our skulls riding on a rock hurling through empty space, etc.

I won’t say this is the #1, but it’s up there, and just to add another to this thread: self-deception. It’s always stuck with me from one of / several actualized videos the bit about (and I’m paraphrasing) “how can you possibly trust your mind, when your mind is the one assessing whether you can trust it?” kinda like how can we prove the validity of logic… with logic? The more closely I look, the more apparent it is that the mind tends to be interested in self-survival, not Truth. good news is, the mind is also interested in happiness, which methinks can lead to Truth.

This topic is an important point. When people discredit psychedelic experiences saying the realization one has is due to ingestion of an exogenous substance, I say well, we drink water and eat food, and act like when we are adequately fed and hydrated (and all the other things our body requires), only then is our perception of reality accurate and valid. In fact, if we were to stop consuming water or food - arguably becoming as sober as possible - we would eventually trip like a mother fucker. So, to accurately perceive reality, we have to intake the right amounts of certain things, and nothing of others? Almost seems like our perception of reality is always influenced by our state of mind ? And, like the original post, with us all walking around with god knows what chemicals lodged in our brains and bodies, can we really call ourselves sober.

Happiness. Peace of mind. Contentment. Joy. Feeling good, lastingly.

No, I don’t think so, if I understand you correctly. First off, there isn’t an “us” - an actual separate entity. But, speaking at the level of there being “us”es - at least in appearance - our individual consciousness is the product of, or at least dependent on / correlated with our brain. So that would have to be perfectly simulated, probably down to the quantum level (which is impossible in principle, due to indeterminacy and other quantum weirdness), unless there is some redundancy and quantum effects could be ignored. But that’s not enough, as our entire nervous system is at play in our conscious experience. But then, that is dependent on our entire physiology - the whole body. Which is dependent on all of the microorganisms inhabiting our body. But these are all affected by what is outside the body. And this is just at the “present” moment (which general relativity says does not even absolutely exist or make sense in principle). But, the past and future would all affect things as well, to the point of where it becomes impossible to draw a line saying here is the entirety of what we need to simulate in order to recreate this locus of consciousness. (Perhaps the entire observable universe is such a line - but to simulate that one would have to know, just to start, the position and momentum of all particles contained there in - which quantum mechanics tells us is impossible - but particles are ultimately just an approximation / model depicting what is actually the case…). in short, no, this is a task that technology derived from physical sciences taken to the extreme simply could not achieve. It is entirely possible and imo likely that our “locus” of consciousness is not the result of physical, or computational, or any type of “process”. It requires actual magic. And yet, seemingly, here we are having conscious experience…

Weird Fishes is one of my favorites all time, lots of other good picks in this thread too. A bunch of random ones I’m into lately: okay I’m done for now ?

But then can you really just add these “sentience units” to compare whether one group of organisms has more “sentience units” than another? The shrimp just aren’t capable of suffering like the whale is. It’s more like, what’s less ethical: pinch every human on their weenus or kill the whale? I feel like from a certain perspective, there are no amount of ants that I would not be willing to kill to save the life of a human, much less a corgi puppy. Even if their sentience is .000001 and a corgi’s is 1000, I’d kill all the ants regardless. Of course, that would bring a whole ‘nother host of problems, but the direct suffering as a result of killing the ants vs the corgis would make me choose the ants. Of course I’m biased here cause I like dogs and don’t like ant bites. Also, my reasoning kinda worries me for what an ET civilization / super-intelligence may think about us…

How about “what do I really want?”

Notice everything in your field of experience. Accept everything in your field of experience. Ignore everything in your field of experience. also there’s Neti-neti

I’m asleep af but I do think I have a kind heart and a pretty good grasp on some things. Plus I always tip well to balance all my shitty karma

I used to think this was true. Technically, it is. For example, people’s insulin responses to the same foods can be vastly different. (And indeed, a single person’s can be different at different times, in different situations). But that being said, there are rules of thumb that apply to the vast, vast majority of people. All animal species have little variation as to what constitutes an optimal lifestyle for each individual, health wise. Humans are not likely to be an exception. Sure there is genetic diversity, and we have spread to all corners of the globe and have different environmental influences (unlike other animals), but biologically speaking, we are (almost) all extremely similar. For example, lions are unanimously fit for consumption of raw meat, occasional hunting, and lots of laying around all day farting and grooming (idk, I’m not a lion expert). There is little to no variability. No need to make some tweaks to the standard lion lifestyle for one lion and other tweaks for another, barring injury. I see little reason why humans would be any different. Sure, we are any many ways vastly more complex, but we’re all the same species. That being said, modernity has so radically altered our “natural” environment… unnatural problems could require unnatural solutions. And too, there is a “generational health” aspect to these matters. The book Deep Nutrition makes the case that basicslly, from my understanding, if your parents and grandparents and so on lived unhealthy lifestyles, you’re fucked. If they didn’t, then you can get away with eating trash, because your genes have some good “momentum” (very loosely speaking). Makes sense to me - if I’m locked in with healthy habits, the occasional poor night’s sleep or chocolate binge isn’t too big of a deal. But weeks of that and I’m a totally different person. Anyways, my main point of this is that no, there are bits of health advice that are (virtually) applicable to everyone. They likely include avoiding poisonous substances, exposure to sunlight and nature, enough high quality sleep to feel well-rested, management of stress, some amount of physical activity, and plenty of 5-MEO-DMT. (They do not likely include abstaining from food for exceedingly long periods of time).

Smoked DMT in a dream, reality became very fractal like and I sorta spiraled into an infinite singularity. Highly recommended