WokeBloke

So I have to admit this comment has seriously thrown me off. Now this might be a matter of definitions. Perhaps how you define a dream and how I define a dream is very different. In my mind the most fundamental aspect of a dream is that the other characters in the dream are fake. What I mean is they don't have their own lives whereas presumably in this world each person is actually experiencing. So, when someone tells me that "Life is a dream" I start thinking they are telling me that everybody I see in my waking life is fake. In other words I think no-one actually reads this post. There is a huge distinction between these 3 scenarios 1. All the bodies in my world are mine and thus as real as my body 2. All the bodies in my world are not mine but they are conscious like me 3. All the bodies in my world are not mine and they are unconscious which means this really is a dream Perhaps I am misinterpreting what people mean when they say this. But obviosuly it's hard to take the world seriously if I think the other bodies are fake. And it causes me a lot of stress because I can't tell if the comment itself is delusional or if you guys are trying to wake me up from this fake life. Otherwise if you actually are aware then I can't wake up from this "dream" because you aren't a dream you are actually real.

Remember only the source of thoughts can think. Now look at this: What is 4 + 4? The source of thoughts then answers 8. So the source of thoughts sees and responds to my question because it it aware of my question. Thoughts can't see but the source of thoughts can.

In what way?

Still I'm not imaginary. Just as real as you unless you all are tricking me.

If you are me then you aren't a figment of me. You would be all of me.

I can't imagine the imaginer.

Do you think there is a world outside of your perception? And if not then how would you account for my point of view of seeing your post?

@Leo Gura If this were true then you should be able to say what is on my desk. Otherwise it's just a belief. You are only conscious of the things that you perceive. You know of nothing outside of your perception.

@Leo Gura How can you be sure there is no world outside the body (but within consciousness) that you are perceiving with the body? I mean from my point of view both you and I are in different parts of the world and communicating which suggests there is a world outside our perception but within our consciousness.

@Leo Gura Can you define imagination? I feel like I may have a different definition than you.

@Leo Gura So you think your hand is imaginary but do you think that you are imaginary? If not then there must be a dimension of reality that is not imagined but is doing the imagining.

I guess I don't understand why you are calling it imaginary if this is what you actually created. Like the things that happen in the world are not imaginary happenings they are the things that actually happen to you.

You aren't imagining me for what its worth. I am aware of your post.

According to our discord conversation you don't think I exist which is false from my perspective. You also don't think you exist so how could you know about my existence if you don't exist?

But I don't see how you can awaken from waking life if other people are real. In other words they don't just exist in your mind they have their own minds whereas dreams exist only in your mind.

The only way to know about feelings is by experiencing them.

@Mason Riggle There is still the writer of that post which is aware of raw feelings/emotions

@Someone here Is there any evidence for these claims? -The universe contains a finite amount of stuff -spread out over a finite amount of space.

You suggest we live in a multiverse with eternal inflation. I don't understand how that corresponds to repeating this moment again in your mind. When I think of eternal inflation I think of infinitely increasing complexity as opposed to repetition. Please help me understand what you mean!

I thought about this alot. First you have far too many beliefs and assumptions about the nature of reality that we have absolutely no access to. Think about it like this. Every step/action you take only takes you further away from where you are now. There is no way for you to return to this moment eternally unless you 1. Exist forever 2. Have the ability to recreate this moment 3. Have the desire at the end of your life to recreate this life since you only do what you desire.

First let's observe the fact that the user of language (UOL) exists. If the UOL did not exist then this sentence would not exist. The UOL uses language when thinking, writing, and speaking. The UOL is the only one that can deny it's own existence since the denial of its existence requires words. In order for the UOL to claim that the UOL does not exist it first needs to exist. Now notice that the UOL calls itself the UOL. In addition the UOL is the only one that uses the pronoun "I". The UOL also defines the pronoun "I". My definition of I is that it is a reference by its user to its user. Keep in mind the user of "I" is not a word. So thus the claim "I do not exist" is false because it equates to "the user of language does not exist" which I already proved was false.

If neither you nor no one exists then there really is no reason to try to convince a nonexistent I to stop believing in itself.

@Carl-Richard Well it's definitely non-conceptual due to the fact that language is being used. The problem if I want to talk about myself I need to use words. So I am attempting to describe a nonword with words which can only go so far.

The bodies that are in your experience are not experiencing. In other words your experience is not experiencing. This doesn't necessarily mean that your experience of other people isn't based on something beyond your experience. Perhaps you are sensing real bodies and perhaps they are your bodies. Still your perception is not perceiving. This is just my opinion.

I often see people say language is dualistic. Could someone please elaborate on what they mean by that? Maybe with an example or something.