Quit Being Serious, Proclaiming I am GOD!!

[Ulax]

I agree its kinda cringe all this 'i am god' stuff. All posers.

Except me, I am actually the real god. No others except me. Glad you cleared out all the posers OP. Now give me my flowers

[Ishanga]

5 hours ago, Ulax said:

I agree its kinda cringe all this 'i am god' stuff. All posers.

Except me, I am actually the real god. No others except me. Glad you cleared out all the posers OP. Now give me my flowers

I knew the Real One would appear! May we all bow down to the Lord Saviour, YoUr TiMe hAs CoMe!!! :):):)

[SOUL]

@Inliytened1  Ah yes, we have another third person trying to explain someone else personal definition, I suspect it's another separate personal definition and not a perfect description of the first person's personal definition. Everyone needs their own personal dictionary linked in their signature.

Everything done by every being, by us, animals, bugs, microbes, it all, everything happens 'in the moment' , I dare you to do anything 'out of the moment'... "Do animals have psychological reactions of distress to things that aren't happening because of memory?" That is the question.

[El Zapato]

That is really what is going on...egoistic structure.  If I'm right, no make that, if I'm correct...I'm good.  It is incumbent upon me to convince everyone else that they are wrong...that is a whole lotta work, and I ain't up to it.  I'm happy being perfect and so be it.

[Schizophonia]

9 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

@SOUL animals don't suffer in the sense that we do.  Their suffering is purely in the moment.

How do you know ? 

[SOUL]

6 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

How do you know ? 

Are you suggesting they aren't omniscient gods which create everything? I just wonder if they are that why they keep running away from easily answerable questions.

[Breakingthewall]

7 hours ago, SOUL said:

Do animals have psychological reactions of distress to things that aren't happening because of memory?" That is the question.

 Animals can feel anguish about the past, if you torture a dog in a horrible way for a month, it will be forever traumatized, scared, neurotic. but he will never feel anguish thinking that he has a small dick.

The point is that the dog wont think: shit, why they torture me? That not fair, hey should love me. No, he will suffer and that's it, like PTSD, just the vibration of suffering. I think it's the same mechanic than humans without the thought,. A chimpanzee will suffer if all the others chimpanzee ignore him, it's not so different, but if they stop ignoring, he will forget in great extent the past because he can't think in conceptual way. Same than you if you stop thinking in conceptual way, you will stop suffering about the past except if you are now scared, then you are suffering now because a fear caused by your past experiences, then you have to face that fear and overcome it. 

Edited September 20 by Breakingthewall

[Fadl]

I kindda agree with you .. but why quoting sg? His ego is so big as well. 

[SOUL]

20 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

 Animals can feel anguish about the past, if you torture a dog in a horrible way for a month, it will be forever traumatized, scared, neurotic. but he will never feel anguish thinking that he has a small dick.

The point is that the dog wont think: shit, why they torture me? That not fair, hey should love me. No, he will suffer and that's it, like PTSD, just the vibration of suffering. I think it's the same mechanic than humans without the thought,. A chimpanzee will suffer if all the others chimpanzee ignore him, it's not so different, but if they stop ignoring, he will forget in great extent the past because he can't think in conceptual way. Same than you if you stop thinking in conceptual way, you will stop suffering about the past except if you are now scared, then you are suffering now because a fear caused by your past experiences, then you have to face that fear and overcome it. 

So you know exactly what animals think now? Science can't even explain or fully understand how human consciousness is produced and they possess it but you know what every animal can or can't think. Interesting.

Wait...aren't you one of the I am god creating everything and nothing else really exists folk? Maybe you should have just created animals that can think...or better yet, humans that can't think, so you know...no 'suffering'.

Well, in what is the appearance of this real world, different animals have exhibited the kinds of behaviors that would correlate to psychological reactions to things not actually happening. Although, since we can't actually know for sure what's going on in their consciousness, it's speculation.

Yet, in your response, you have actually proven that you understand what I have been saying all along. In our conscious experience, there is a distinction that can be made between what could be called self suffering and other types of suffering.

We can even see how our subconscious mind is more like physical suffering because it reacts without active participation by us, just like a throbbing toe. The autonomous sensations it produces from past events even if we consciously don't want them to appear in our mind, just like the throbbing toe.

Yet the active participation the conscious mind does with those subconsciously produced sensations is what increases or decreases the 'self' suffering. We can even see a distinction of suffering between the 'ego' suffering as a subconscious agent and 'awareness' as a conscious agent.

The ego can be described as creating a suffering identity narrative from the sensations produced by the subconscious mind. It is when in awareness we react to and interact with it by empowering it to be our 'truth', we believe it to be real. When we don't, that type of 'suffering' dissolves and dissipates.

So in our psyche there is a range of autonomous non-participatory suffering from subconscious to ego conscious and a distinctly different active participatory suffering in awareness. I see value in having a simple phrase to point to these three distinctions as pain, suffering and self suffering.

The reason I assign suffering to the subconscious/ego suffering is because it's closer to physical pain both having autonomous happening, so it aligns with the commonly accepted definition of suffering. The modifier of 'self' refers to the active, participatory suffering we choose to engage with.

This also helps clarify the difference between the thought in the autonomous sense compared to our awareness with regard to any suffering that may happen and how we can cease the active participation with suffering the subconscious mind produces.

I appreciate you responding though so we can explore this deeper. I enjoy it.

Edited September 21 by SOUL

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, SOUL said:

Wait...aren't you one of the I am god creating everything and nothing else really exists folk? Maybe you should have just created animals that can think...or better yet, humans that can't think, so you know...no 'suffering'.

Do you have any sexual problem?

2 hours ago, SOUL said:

So you know exactly what animals think now?

No, I just write things about my perception. For example, I think if I torture a dog it's going to be traumatized, but honestly, I never tortured any dog until now.

2 hours ago, SOUL said:

The ego can be described as creating a suffering identity narrative from the sensations produced by the subconscious mind. It is when in awareness we react to and interact with it by empowering it to be our 'truth', we believe it to be real. When we don't, that type of 'suffering' dissolves and dissipates.

In my opinion (this is just my opinion, not the absolute truth, not any conclusion after many scientific studies, just an opinion) the ego suffers because he is damaged, same that the body suffer when he is damaged. The ego is a mental construction, but it's real (as a mental construction) then could be damaged. The basis of ego is survival and reproduction, same than the basis of any living being, then the damage, although it's not physical, it exists. 

Edited September 21 by Breakingthewall

[Ishanga]

On 9/20/2024 at 4:53 PM, Fadl said:

I kindda agree with you .. but why quoting sg? His ego is so big as well. 

Yes but He Consciously creates his Ego and Identity for a specific purpose, he can change it all Will, most cannot do this, plus he makes the most sense!

[SOUL]

19 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Do you have any sexual problem?

Wait...what?

19 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

I never tortured any dog until now.

Until now? But now? um...ok

19 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

the ego suffers because he is damaged, same that the body suffer when he is damaged. The ego is a mental construction, but it's real (as a mental construction) then could be damaged. The basis of ego is survival and reproduction, same than the basis of any living being, then the damage, although it's not physical, it exists. 

Sure, the ego is mental construction, yet it seems like an autonomous process of that construction. We don't have to actively construct it to happen in the mind, it just happens.

It doesn't appear that the ego necessarily has to be 'damaged' to cause distress or suffering, it seems perfectly natural for it to use negative sensations to motivate behavior. That doesn't mean it cannot be damaged, it absolutely can, but it would seem that this would be considered the type of severe trauma that goes beyond just more common negative stimuli.

Although, this is just side stepping my point and for some reason either intentionally or not nobody on this forum can actually address someone's point. They just use a keyword and take a detour off it which makes most of the discussion here unproductive.

Yea, this is pretty common on the internet, but it seems even more prevalent on this particular forum. It makes the already abstract into something completely incomprehensible.

[Keryo Koffa]

2 hours ago, SOUL said:

nobody on this forum can actually address someone's point. They just use a keyword and take a detour off

@SOUL Points are fascinating, whether one can even be considered to have properties granted its zero-dimensional stretch, that can only gather positional significance in a dimensional space, hence rendering it propertyless. More interesting in fact is its real-world equivalent which can be seen in the apparent infinite singularity that's represented by a black hole. Do you think black holes inflect into white holes or emerge entirely unique interal quantum phenomena, then again, "inside" is perspective and they may be seen as places outside the universe, though there's also plenty of speculation about worm holes...

[Kuba Powiertowski]

Only here this spiritual bubble of confusion and unresolved problems exists. Here, and wherever mind is willing to create such stuff.

In reality, who cares? It is what it is. 

[SOUL]

On 9/22/2024 at 10:04 AM, Keryo Koffa said:

@SOUL Points are fascinating, whether one can even be considered to have properties granted its zero-dimensional stretch, that can only gather positional significance in a dimensional space, hence rendering it propertyless. More interesting in fact is its real-world equivalent which can be seen in the apparent infinite singularity that's represented by a black hole. Do you think black holes inflect into white holes or emerge entirely unique interal quantum phenomena, then again, "inside" is perspective and they may be seen as places outside the universe, though there's also plenty of speculation about worm holes...

If your intention was to create a reply that was impossible to respond to then you are a master at your craft. Kudos.

[Keryo Koffa]

20 minutes ago, SOUL said:

If your intention was to create a reply that was impossible to respond to then you are a master at your craft. Kudos.

I was just proving your previous point hehe get it? point! The unrespondablity is a bonus feature 😁

[Inliytened1]

On 9/20/2024 at 8:10 AM, SOUL said:

@Inliytened1  Ah yes, we have another third person trying to explain someone else personal definition, I suspect it's another separate personal definition and not a perfect description of the first person's personal definition. Everyone needs their own personal dictionary linked in their signature.

Everything done by every being, by us, animals, bugs, microbes, it all, everything happens 'in the moment' , I dare you to do anything 'out of the moment'... "Do animals have psychological reactions of distress to things that aren't happening because of memory?" That is the question.

No..it's just observation. Animals live purely in the moment.  That's plain to see.  Suffering is purely psychological.  I think we agree there.  Yet pain that lingers can turn into a sort of lamenting for a human where for an animal it is let go for what it is.  Just pain.

Edited September 27 by Inliytened1

[SOUL]

10 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

No..it's just observation. Animals live purely in the moment.  That's plain to see.  Suffering is purely psychological.  I think we agree there.  Yet pain that lingers can turn into a sort of lamenting for a human where for an animal it is let go for what it is.  Just pain.

Again...I dare you to live 'out of the moment', go ahead, try to do it.

I'm sure you are thinking that just because we can envision the future or the past or imagine circumstances that aren't presently happening it means we aren't 'in the moment' but welp, no, all of that takes place 'in the 'moment'.

We are always in the moment, we are never 'out of the moment'.

So you don't think that any animals, not even the mammalian ones, very similar to us, have any psychological reactions in the present moment because of memories from past experiences, though they may not be aware of it as such? All of which takes place in the moment because, alas, everything takes places 'in the moment'.

No, I don't agree that suffering is purely psychological because I understand that suffering is all forms of pain, not just psychological. The common definition of 'suffer' is in agreement with that understanding, suffering is pain, pain is suffering, they are synonymous.

[Inliytened1]

12 minutes ago, SOUL said:

Again...I dare you to live 'out of the moment', go ahead, try to do it.

I'm sure you are thinking that just because we can envision the future or the past or imagine circumstances that aren't presently happening it means we aren't 'in the moment' but welp, no, all of that takes place 'in the 'moment'.

We are always in the moment, we are never 'out of the moment'.

So you don't think that any animals, not even the mammalian ones, very similar to us, have any psychological reactions in the present moment because of memories from past experiences, though they may not be aware of it as such? All of which takes place in the moment because, alas, everything takes places 'in the moment'.

No, I don't agree that suffering is purely psychological because I understand that suffering is all forms of pain, not just psychological. The common definition of 'suffer' is in agreement with that understanding, suffering is pain, pain is suffering, they are synonymous.

Have you ever seen a dog throw itself off a bridge?  Have you ever seen a cat slit it's wrists or call into the suicide hotline?  ..well...the reason is they don't have the capacity to self reflect.   Yes - they can feel sadness and even depression.  But they aren't able to step outside themselves and become self aware that they are depressed.

But yes I think it's relative to what your definition of suffering is.  But I would say keep it simple.  Pain is pain and suffering is suffering.   Ask yourself why you are suffering?  Maybe you can't prevent your hand from hurting if you stick it on a hot stove, but you might be able to prevent the suffering from it.  If your definition of suffering is the screaming in anguish then yes you are correct that is a form of suffering if looked at in that context.  But real suffering to me is when the human mind self reflects and inflicts mental torture on itself - thinking and creating a personal hell for itself because it doesn't have a perfect world of pleasure.  

 

Edited September 27 by Inliytened1

[SOUL]

On 9/27/2024 at 6:48 AM, Inliytened1 said:

Have you ever seen a dog throw itself off a bridge?  Have you ever seen a cat slit it's wrists or call into the suicide hotline?  ..well...the reason is they don't have the capacity to self reflect.   Yes - they can feel sadness and even depression.  But they aren't able to step outside themselves and become self aware that they are depressed.

But yes I think it's relative to what your definition of suffering is.  But I would say keep it simple.  Pain is pain and suffering is suffering.   Ask yourself why you are suffering?  Maybe you can't prevent your hand from hurting if you stick it on a hot stove, but you might be able to prevent the suffering from it.  If your definition of suffering is the screaming in anguish then yes you are correct that is a form of suffering if looked at in that context.  But real suffering to me is when the human mind self reflects and inflicts mental torture on itself - thinking and creating a personal hell for itself because it doesn't have a perfect world of pleasure.  

 

The simple way is using the common definition of a word, not creating a different one that needs to be explained in esoteric terms.

You are trying to portray that if an animal doesn't behave in your anthropomorphic prop it's not the same which you are using to avoid answering the question but it doesn't mean they don't have psychological reactions and distress from memories even if they are unaware that's what is happening.

It is an example of the subconscious mind autonomously causing psychological distress, much in the same way it autonomously causes the sense of physical distress in the mind. That's where the sensation of 'pain' happens, in the mind, it doesn't happen in the toe you've stubbed.

The mind projects the appearance of pain into the toe, but it's all happening in the mind, it's autonomously created by the subconscious mind. Exactly the same way it autonomously creates psychological suffering in the mind, suffering is pain, pain is suffering.

Then, as you clearly understand by your reply, there is an element of conscious participation which is different from all those other autonomous subconscious mind sensations. It comes from our 'self' reflection, this mental anguish comes when we intentionally engage with the autonomous suffering.

That is why I make the distinction of the 'self' kind of suffering as you described when we self reflect on the psychological suffering instead of transcend it in our awareness and being.

It seems so obvious...and simple.

 

Edited September 28 by SOUL