LastThursday

The image you gave is misleading. For a start every time round the cycle things change, it's not static. Something becomes a peanut and then the peanut becomes something else. Next there are many peanut cycles, each one different. And lastly, this cycle is intermeshed with every other cycle (ecosystem), and with the cycles of Earth itself: water, atmospheric, ocean currents, Earth wobble and on and on. And even solar cycles have an effect. Science says all those things and more.

That's true. I'd say an abstract or mental map is a very different thing from any other type of map - even language. Your example of navigating a building is interesting. Even when you're actually in the building and trying to navigate it, you're still using an abstract mental map to do it. I think most would call this "direct experience" instead, but there is a sense in which we're still using mental maps even when directly experiencing (anything) - and we can't actually get away from this. Although @Vibroverse thinks/knows it's possible to do so. You've touched on something important, in that a map isn't meant to explain everything. Is a map always a simplification of what it represents? Is a map always a particular point of view? This is just fate or determinism by another name, personally I don't believe in determinism. But it's very possible there is a guiding force pushing us in certain directions - which is nearly like determinism. The guiding force is still "us" but one that we're not much conscious of.

Being able to do this is a superpower that is critical if you're into self-help or spirituality. Confusion normally creates negative feelings; to be able to just sit in confusion and not strongly emotionally react is a great skill to have.

Yes same stuff. As the wikipedia article says: thought form or imaginary friend. But my take is that it is possible for the tulpa/thought form to posses your body - and this is both easier to do and to maintain. But maybe at that point it becomes less of a tulpa and more of something else? I mean, doesn't a good actor become "possesed" by the character they've studied and mentally built up? Is acting dangerous? Agreed, as can anything spiritual or that plays with the mind. But I would say it is not dangerous in general for most people. Naturally, you could argue there are levels of tulpa creation. If you want to create a malevolent demon tulpa, then yeah ok, potential danger. It's probably good to realise at some point on the path, that there is no ground, because everything is relative to everything else. But it should be eased into. If you are prone to believing any stray thought as reality, then maybe steer clear of this sort of thing.

I'm not a tulpamancer as such. But I have dabbled. There is a fair amount of mental effort involved. I've found that it's much easier to just embody your tulpa and be them. All this talk of it being a dangerous activity is rubbish. Just go ahead and do it. Having imaginary people in your life is not dangerous.

No no no. That's what "happened" means. It happened. It's just that the past is qualitatively differerent from the now.

Is there any room for "direct experience" in that case? Or is all of experience "indirect" i.e. a map of some sort? Is there a concrete end point to the map of a map of map? Yes? How is language understood at all? Does it use another language - a mental mapping language? Or is there some non-language that language is understood by? Sorry lots of questions marks.

NLP (Neuro Linguistic Programming) says that for a person to change and transform (i.e. therapy), you recall the imprint and then modify it with new experience (called anchoring in NLP). In effect changing the mental map of the person. I'm thinking that your "imprints" and @Vibroverse's "perfect platonic ideas" are one and the same thing. Somehow it is the currency that we use for thought and understanding - I'd call it a mental map or conceptual map. That is the utilitarian view of a map, which answers the question "why have a map?". A map then allows you to gain knowledge of truth by bringing it to your attention, you can then "walk the path" as you say. So this is what I've got so far: map -> mental map -> reality The map can be anything tangible that is symbolic in some way. This then is attached to a mental map (imprint/platonic idea), and in turn is attached to a real experience. I think the mental map arises in response to symbols and/or experience, and the attachment happens because the same mental map gets triggered by more than one thing: the squiggle on a piece of paper, triggers the same mental map that a mountain in reality does.

I keep vacillating (nice word) between these thoughts: Of course there are separate consciousnesses don't be silly Consciousness can do what it likes (and is a prankster) There is only one consciousness (possibly mine, possibly not) I'm not special, why should I be the only consciousness one? It's a non-question, unanswerable Am I a p-zombie? The question is answerable but not with language Consciousness is just a concept and nobody even understands what it refers to Welcome to my mind.

It's a false dichotomy. Your life purpose is exactly that: your purpose in life. If your purpose in life is to also have a girlfriend then that is part of your life's purpose. Nobody said it should be easy. Take her with you on your journey, grow together.

Or just stare at her foot for long enough (the lifted one). That's what I did.

@strangelooper no offence, but I'm going to stop myself from engaging any further with you, as tempting as it is. Good day to you. Don't derail the topic either. Thanks.

You clearly know nothing about momentum and inertial frames Throw two tennis balls up in the air at the same time and notice that they move together - relative to each other there is no motion. Likewise your body and the ground are moving together. Close your eyes on an aeroplane, can you actually tell if you're moving or not? I don't think NASA had CGI in 1969. Oh no. I've taken the bait hook line and sinker - shoot me, put me out of my misery. Maybe I didn't pray enough to the one true God: Science?

Let's break it down into simple pieces. At any particular moment in your life you have only two options: do something, do nothing. The first thing to consider is your emotional reaction to either choice. It may be that you "do nothing" and you feel good about that. And, the same for doing something. But maybe you feel bad about "do nothing", or bad about "do something". It looks like you need advice because you feel bad about both options. So it's important to recognise your emotions towards the choices you have. The second thing to consider is consequences. Sometimes "do nothing" has good consequences and sometimes bad. And the same with "do something". Maybe if you don't pay your bills, your electricity is cut off. Maybe if you choose to work for money, you become a wage slave. Maybe if you choose not to say something stupid, your life is easier. Maybe if you choose to study, you'll be rich in a few years. Consequences consequences. The third thing to consider is that consequences and emotions are attached to each other. You'll have negative feelings about unpleasant things that might happen if you make a choice. You may have positive feelings ones too. So. The reason you make a choice at any particular moment is your emotional reaction to the consequences of that choice. The strength of that emotional reaction is what makes you "decide" what to do - either positive or negative. Rational thought is only there to inform your emotions. It's worth noting there is no middle choice. You're either doing domething or doing nothing. There's no escape and you have to take responsibility for your own choices. BUT. Your emotions are not fixed. They come and go like the waves on a beach. And that is why, sometimes you'll "do something" and other times you'll "do nothing". My advice? Bypass your emotions by using rationality. Ask yourself the following: What is the bigger picture here? What happens if I give up my studies totally or if I fully engage with my studies without distraction? Should I exchange short term gratification for long term gratification? Am I happy with mediocre results from my studies? Why am I studying at all? Do I want the results? Or is it just what I'm expected to do? If I wasn't studying what would I do instead? Should I study to a schedule? Plan my days in advance? Should I study at all and just wing it and hope for the best? What you want to do is convice your emotions with as much rationality as possible. That's what motivation is all about.

The notion of a vague guide that reduces confusion is intriguing. In any case, hit me up when you're finished, and I'll be your first reviewer.

Maybe that's why I was talking about definitions (but I didn't know it). People like to call themselves "confused" because that allows them not to admit their "ignorance". Is that your message? I would like to see this very much from you. I'm not sure however if language causes the confusion or if the confusion results from undisciplined framing (thinking). Maybe it's both ways. It seems that language has ambiguity deliberately built into it, i.e. what words reference may be ambiguous: my God is not your God etc.

I've been fighting with messed up sleeping patterns lately and I'm feeling tired because of it. When it comes to stuff like this I often intuitively know what's up. I often see other people struggle with understanding where their problems arise from. Bad sleeping patterns is a big factor in mental health issues (and general health) and one can influence the other, often in a detrimental way. I don't believe that's the case for me here though. First things first, having had a week's break, that itself disrupted my normal sleep routine. I wasn't wearing my blue-light-blocking glasses whilst away and I was drinking alcohol most evenings. I didn't have a fixed sleeping schedule and timings drifted around a lot. Like pushing a swing in the playground, going to sleep and waking up at the same times everyday actually conditions the body to expect the pattern. I would say I naturally need about 8.5 hours of full sleep to feel ok. I often sleep with less, probably eight hours, and catch up on the weekend probably 9 or 9.5 hours on occasion. I seem to need more sleep Friday/Saturday, but think this is because I work out with Badminton on the Friday. I don't use an alarm on weekends. The next is that the clocks have changed to GMT, and the weekend straight after my break. I thought I would be clever and just maintain BST anyway and go to sleep and get up an hour earlier. This seems to have backfired, but it's hard to work out why other than having had a disrupted sleep routine the week before. I tried my best to maintain eating times as well and keep everything shifted an hour earlier. This shifting is relatively easy for me to maintain working from home. I've basically found it really hard to actually get to sleep, when before the break things were easy. The result is that the length of my sleep has yo-yoed for the last few weeks. I'd lack sleep one night, only to sleep longer the next night, but then find I was too "awake" to sleep quickly the next night and so on. There could also be a problem with bodily temperature control as the outside temperature has dropped fairly quick over the last few weeks. I generally don't heat my flat (too god damn expensive in the UK), so getting into bed can be cool, but I think as I'm drifting off I'm heating up too much and it's keeping me awake again. Shifting from summer mode to winter mode in terms of thickness of bedding is tricky to get right. I'm variously experimenting with different duvets, clothing etc. But doing this whilst trying to nod off, is not conducive to good sleep. I also seem to get a spike of increased temperature around 5-6am, and if I wake up during this it can also affect my sleep. I often have to get up just and walk around just to cool down - annoying! I've also been taking St John's Wort mostly as an experiment. I took it back in the day to improve my mood when I was going through stuff and it helped immensely. I've done about a month's worth and from experience its effects kick after about three weeks. I wanted to experiment and see if I felt any different on it - so far not much difference. But I do wonder if it's affecting my sleep (it didn't before), as I'm taking the pills just before bed. I'll switch things up and do it when I wake up instead. Sometimes pills have other active components that can affect sleep (especially with caffeine for me). The upshot is that I'm just giving in to GMT, and back to my old sleep schedule of 12 to 8. I did that last night and seemed to drift off relatively quickly. I'm hoping that things will stick and I can go back to feeling normal and not so tired. The implication is with a little bit of thought and detective work you can also work out the source of your problems - and fix them.

Yup, after a while. Can you make the woman stop spinning? Or even realise it's not a woman? (Sorry metaphysical jesting, ignore me).

I'm confused about confusion. I'd always thought that confusion was about a thing not making sense or not hanging together. And that this lack of sense normally comes about through some sort of ambiguity - "Is it this or is it that? I'm confused.". Sometimes it's just through not seeing or understanding the connection between things. If TWO+FOUR=SEVEN, then that's confusing - but to resolve the confusion you just count the number of letters on the left. It seems like the word confusion is also used to mean a lack of understanding or ignorance as you say. I personally would never use the word confusion for this, but the meaning of words drift over time, and I'm just stuck in the past. Anyway, I'm not really sure what I'm trying to do here, other than argue about definitions. I'm confused and I'm proud

You're right to say that the direction of spin is always relative to something. A simple spin will always spin around an axis (i.e. the bit the moves the least), that's how you can tell it's spinning at all. The axis is just an imaginary line in space. This line can have a direction (up or down say) by convention. For the Earth the convention is to use magnetic North for the direction of the axis. So with respect to this direction, you can say that the Earth spins either left or right (with North up) looking side-on at the Equator, or anti-clockwise looking down through the axis (i.e. towards South). Once you establish a direction for the axis, you can always say which way an object spins. In the spinning woman, we do have an axis (feet to head), but we're lacking context about depth, so we can't tell when the limbs are coming towards us or away from us - so we can't tell the direction of spin.

Everything in moderation is a good maxim to live by. Hedonism can turn into devilry, but it doesn't have to. Ultimately, pleasure is neither wrong nor right. That's mostly accurate. But running away from responsibility is not hedonism, instead that's selfishness and maybe even immaturity. I suspect the man didn't get pleasure from hitting the dog.

You sum up nicely what it might be like to work without concepts (maps). I'm sure there's some trickiness in your pencil example though. I mean, isn't an "object" a concept? Is it really possible to get away from concepts altogether (rhetorical question)? I mean even if you work outside of language, isn't that still a "thing" you're holding? It makes me suspect that maps are much deeper ingrained and harder to escape than we think. That's really the point I'm trying to explore with my original question. How does "pointing" itself work? How does a concept (map) get linked to a thing it points to in the first place? What is that linking process exactly? Do you think platonic perfection is a kind of nexus between the map and territory? For example if I said to you "imagine an infinitely long road", the map is the utterance, the actual road is the territory, and between them is the perfect notion of infinity (and road)? That perfect notion is the linkage between the two? As an aside do you think that the perfect platonic notion of "infinity" is an actual infinity?

It is. Mostly, we want what our peers have. But the nuance is that this realisation shouldn't be used as an excuse not to take action. In a sense you want to be as genuine with yourself as possible. The ideal is to be actualised enough to be able to take action without friction whenever the need arises. That includes taking action on your desires and dreams.

God wants existence. Or was that existence wants God... erm.... can't remember.

@Kuba Powiertowski stories can be paths to truth, yes, but the stories have to be actualised to know Truth. Stories cannot be Truth themselves. Hence they are false. But for the sake of this thread let's discuss somewhere else if you like. Start another thread?