LastThursday

Member
  • Content count

    463
  • Joined

  • Last visited

4 Followers

About LastThursday

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Location
    UK
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,634 profile views
  1. It's funny how when you tug at a thread the whole fabric moves. I'd say do some deep contemplation about the causes of your addictions (as well as cutting off distractions regularly). Once you're satisfied that you've got to the root of each cause, actually do something proactive about it. Do small things at first and then when you're confident do bolder things. And watch your life change dramatically.
  2. That your addictions are a product of your circumstances (I'm guessing here): Easy access to material that over stimulates your reward centres A possible lack of contact and opportunities to meet the opposite sex An under-stimulating hum-drum work/home environment you need release from Perhaps a lack of control you feel in your day to day life. In other words, the bigger picture of why you do what you do. Cutting off major distractions is definitely beneficial. But you'll have to do it constantly to fight against your circumstances.
  3. Just an observation: Where does thought end and action begin? Could it be in the boundary between the two that our sense of control and free will lies? But could it also be that thought and action have the same source and are therefore related siblings, but one doesn't cause the other? In which case our free will and control must also spring from the original source (like a third sibling)?
  4. What Leo says ^^^^ Imagine you have two friends, one is concious, the other a zombie. You decide to try and work which is which. You watch them for many weeks, but still you can't tell, they behave in very similar ways. Frustrated you start asking them questions. "Are you a zombie?", "No! How dare you!". All the questions you ask come to no avail. You can't tell the difference. You finally come to the realisation that you're going about it the wrong way. No matter how you interact with your two friends, it is always appearing in your conciousness awareness. The appearance and behaviour of your friends is always being interpreted and conceived by you. There's no way around this. Even if you could see through their eyes, it would still be your conscious awareness. There's no way to know if they're concious or not. You can only tell that you are concious. But it gets worse, because you yourself are being interpreted and conceived as well (by your ego)! Consciouness doesn't need YOU. YOU are the Zombie.
  5. Because this solipsism is a total dead end. Why do you assume that she's not having an experience? The only thing worh doing under that worldview is blow ones head off with a shotgun. You missed the point of my question. I'm not talking about solipsism or assumption. I'm talking about direct evidence in your experience. You have no idea whether other people are having experiences, you're just guessing. It may not feel or seem like you're guessing, but you are. You're using similarity to yourself to infer that other people are the same as you. Inference is just thoughts.
  6. That I'm looking forward to, who needs Absolute Truth?
  7. @AngeliteOf course not. Your experience is yours. Mine is mine. I can only experience your "Him" through the words you're writing and my own awareness.
  8. I like to surrender to awareness and just let it unfold through me and try not to resist it. But it's difficult.
  9. You only have awareness, the whole universe is "inside" of it. There's no room left for "outside". God is not "outside" of you, s/he/it is "inside" your awareness. But the awareness doesn't belong to you, not really. You belong to awareness - it is its own end. I believe the same as you, the only thing I can fully trust is awareness.
  10. I do appreciate your answer But I have no way of knowing if it's true or not until I experience it directly for myself.
  11. How would you know if I've read your article or not? You don't. That is my point, it's just a thought you're having about me. If you've experienced the absolute in different ways, I would say that it all happened in your direct experience, and so it existed for you.
  12. How do you know she's having an "experience"? Does she tell you? Or is this just a thought you're having?
  13. @SpiritualAwakening I see where you're coming from. It depends on your viewpoint. Are thoughts primary or is direct experience primary? You know which side I'm on. The three biggest problems I have with relying on thought are: Why can I not just think of something now and it just materialises in front of me right now? Why wait? Why doesn't it work 100% of the time? Where do thoughts actually come from? Are you really in control of them? Where do thoughts go? Why is it thoughts can be completely random and ridiculous and bizarre? How can they be trusted in any way?
  14. @SpiritualAwakening how do you know that "something" exists? The only way to know is to "experience" or become aware of it directly. Thoughts are not good enough. I can easily think about a teapot in orbit around the moon - does it exist - no. You can't trust your thoughts. What happens when you are not directly experiencing "grandma"? She becomes a thought. You actually have no idea if she's making herself dinner, watching TV, or has actually died. You can think about those things - yes - but you don't actually know, you can't trust those thoughts. She has actually stopped existing. Maybe you object and say: "but she can phone you to see how you are". Yes. Then she would come back into existence - because you are having a direct experience of her (not just thoughts). So where does grandma go when she's not existing? Nowhere. She literally dissolves into nothingness. It's not so ridiculous. Where do subatomic particles go when they're not being observed? They have a Shrodinger wave function, which is just a probability distribution (i.e. they become mind stuff, thought). It's only when they manifest in your direct awareness that they become real and exist.
  15. @Consilience I think you understand it well.