Direct experience versus second hand experience

[LSD-Rumi]

@Leo Gura

I contemplated what you said quite a bit today and reached this result.

--There are two types of knowing. Knowing  through cognition amd knowing through direct perception. Although knowledge through thinking can lead to valid results, it still lacks a lot of what the direct experience provides. Direct perception is a first tier way of knowing, then comes knowledge gained through proper mental work.--There are two types of knowing. Knowing  through cognition amd knowing through direct perception. Although knowledge through thinking can lead to valid results, it still lacks a lot of what the direct experience provides. Direct perception is a first tier way of knowing, then comes knowledge gained through proper mental work.

There is a difference between saying that Earth is round to seeing a picture of Earth to then witness it directly from space. Direct perception allows for much richer experience --

But still saying you need to be shuttled to space to verify if Earth is round is still "confusing" to say the least.

Edited August 30 by LSD-Rumi

[Leo Gura]

19 minutes ago, LSD-Rumi said:

But still saying you need to be shuttled to space to verify if Earth is round is still "confusing" to say the least.

Technically, you don't even know that Earth exists. What you know is that there is ground you can walk around on, but how far it goes and what shape it takes is literally a fantasy in your head. For all you know, the ground could just extend infinitely in all directions and culture is just lying to you to keep you from running away too far.

The key is to distingush mental fantasies vs raw experience of the world.

If you want to know for sure the Earth is round you'd need to take a boat and sail around to see if you arrive back where you started. It actually won't be too hard to run that test today with a modern boat.

Edited August 30 by Leo Gura

[OBEler]

53 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Technically, you don't even know that Earth exists. What you know is that there is ground you can walk around on, but how far it goes and what shape it takes is literally a fantasy in your head. For all you know, the ground could just extend infinitely in all directions and culture is just lying to you to keep you from running away too far.

The key is to distingush mental fantasies vs raw experience of the world.

If you want to know for sure the Earth is round you'd need to take a boat and sail around to see if you arrive back where you started. It actually won't be too hard to run that test today with a modern boat.

 But Leo you said you create reality on the fly so you always just see a piece of the earth with your human senses, that's all there is and if you look away it doesn't exist anymore in the whole universe.

So taking a boat and sail around to see if you arrived back where you started should be not possible. Because you just create what's in front of you right now and thats all there is.

[Sempiternity]

2 hours ago, OBEler said:

 But Leo you said you create reality on the fly so you always just see a piece of the earth with your human senses, that's all there is and if you look away it doesn't exist anymore in the whole universe.

So taking a boat and sail around to see if you arrived back where you started should be not possible. Because you just create what's in front of you right now and thats all there is.

That was exactly my first thought. All there is, is what is within consciousness, what is being experienced through direct experience, right Now. If one were to get on a boat and travel around the world, all that would be true would be what Now is being experienced through direct experience, Now. There is no what happened before or where you'll go next, as that is all a mental projection/fantasy, that can only exist Now as a thought. 

Edited August 31 by Sempiternity

[LSD-Rumi]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Technically, you don't even know that Earth exists. What you know is that there is ground you can walk around on, but how far it goes and what shape it takes is literally a fantasy in your head. For all you know, the ground could just extend infinitely in all directions and culture is just lying to you to keep you from running away too far.

The key is to distingush mental fantasies vs raw experience of the world.

If you want to know for sure the Earth is round you'd need to take a boat and sail around to see if you arrive back where you started. It actually won't be too hard to run that test today with a modern boat.

I get what you mean now. But could my consciousness decide to go out of control and create a flat Earth? That would be breaking the rules that were never were broken before.

[Leo Gura]

6 hours ago, OBEler said:

 But Leo you said you create reality on the fly so you always just see a piece of the earth with your human senses, that's all there is and if you look away it doesn't exist anymore in the whole universe.

So taking a boat and sail around to see if you arrived back where you started should be not possible. Because you just create what's in front of you right now and thats all there is.

You are conflating relative and absolute matters.

When we ask the question: What shape is the Earth? we are asking a relative question, not an absolute one. The question really means: 1) if I travel in a straight line along the ground will I return to the same point or not?, and 2) if I fly into outer space and look back down at the ground, will I see a round object or not?

This issue has nothing to do with solipsism or whatever spiritual mumbo-jumbo.

3 hours ago, LSD-Rumi said:

But could my consciousness decide to go out of control and create a flat Earth?

Not within your normal default human condition, which is the context of this particular inquiry.

The Earth's shape is some way, relative to the default human state of consciousness.

What's being asked is an empirical question with empirical consequences, which can be tested. If you claim the Earth is flat then you should not be able to sail around it.

Edited August 31 by Leo Gura

[r0ckyreed]

50 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

If you claim the Earth is flat then you should not be able to sail around it.

Flat earthers would disagree and just say that you can sail around it in the same way that a disk spins on a track.

The shape of the earth is an objective truth and not a subjective or relative truth. An objective truth just means that facts exist independent of your beliefs, culture, experience, consciousness, etc. whereas a subjective truth says that truth is a matter of personal preference. But we can clearly see that people can be wrong in their beliefs.

The earth being round is objective because it is either round or it isn’t and it isn’t just a personal preference. We could even apply this to a good musician. Being a good musician isn’t just subjective. There are objective criteria that make someone a master or beginner. Of course, the lines can be blurred, but there are objective things that are pleasing to the human ear. If I say violins are pleasing to my ear but really aren’t, then I am wrong. If I say that Trump is a good philosopher and is smarter than Einstein, that would be demonstrably false. This isn’t just personal subjective preference. The nuance between subjective and objective truth is challenging and twisty.

Edited August 31 by r0ckyreed

[Jodistrict]

That's why in Buddhism you go into the jhana states before you investigate.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, r0ckyreed said:

Flat earthers would disagree and just say that you can sail around it in the same way that a disk spins on a track.

They can do whatever mental gymnastics they want, but you can't sail around a disk along its diameter.

Edited August 31 by Leo Gura

[Rafael Thundercat]

Some people are ignorong completly the episode "What is Actuality" and not being able to do the simple exercice of looking to hands and seeing actual and putting hands out and realizing that thinking about the hand is not actual. Rigth now a relative of mine is sleeping in another room. My direct experience is that for now that realtive dont exist. I assume he is still there, but what if I go there and he is just absent, vanish completly? I dont know. I just can trust this direct experience of being writing this words in this phone, see hands holding it a opaque background of the living room,birds singing, noises of cars far way, but I dont see cars, just sounds. Even describing like this is full of Bias. 

[ryandesreu]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

you can't sail around a disk along its diameter.

This is a belief I'm guessing. 

[Yimpa]

The world is my oyster.

But I’m allergic to oysters 

SOMEONE GET ME OUTTA HERE!!!!

[ryandesreu]

A beautiful flat earth eclipse 😍 

[ryandesreu]

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You are conflating relative and absolute matters.

Where is the line between relative and absolute?

[ryandesreu]

How is understanding the difference between knowing and believing on a deep level helpful in your everyday life?

Does it make you less susceptible to deception but also unsure about things? Where does it place you?

[Leo Gura]

@ryandesreu It's crucial for breaking free of human ideas, constructs, and culture.

If you mistake science for reality, your mind is paralyzed for life.

[Yimpa]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

If you mistake science for reality, your mind is paralyzed for life.

I can already predict that Claude is gonna gaslight you if I insert that statement into him 

https://www.instagram.com/p/C_Rhh8oSzAM/?igsh=NDZrZm02dWtpZWNn

I was wrong! Claude actually took it seriously…

Edited August 31 by Yimpa

[Yimpa]

For those who can’t afford Claude:

That's an interesting and provocative statement. I'd be curious to hear more about your perspective on this. What do you mean by mistaking science for reality, and how do you see that as paralyzing one's mind? 

Science aims to systematically study and understand reality through observation, experimentation, and theory. But you seem to be suggesting there's an important distinction between scientific models/theories and reality itself. I'd be interested to explore that idea further.

Do you see limitations in how science approaches understanding the world? Or are you perhaps commenting on the dangers of an overly rigid scientific worldview? I'm eager to hear your thoughts and engage in a thoughtful discussion on this topic.

[ryandesreu]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@ryandesreu It's crucial for breaking free of human ideas, constructs, and culture.

If you mistake science for reality, your mind is paralyzed for life.

Like using a thermometer to measure happiness, there are parts of reality that science just doesn't measure.

Aside from philosophy and spirituaity, how has breaking free changed your life?

 

[Yimpa]

6 minutes ago, ryandesreu said:

Aside from philosophy and spirituaity, how has breaking free changed your life?

I’ve discovered that what I used to consider memories/change are actually Reality itself. 

So this is what those nondualists kept hammering on about with “there is no you”. The problem is that they stopped there.

There is no YOU that is not YOU! Nothing/Something is YOU!