Carl-Richard

That's all of metaphysics

Usually, but not always. The most parsimonious explanation is to not give an explanation, because that requires the fewest assumptions. Truly good explanations tend to give you an optimal grip on the situation: the optimal ratio between simplicity vs. complexity, specificity vs. generality etc. For example, Spiral Dynamics wouldn't be such a good model if you threw out all the color-coded vMEMEs and replaced them with something like a spectrum of low to high consciousness, even though that would be a more parsimonious option. It's the same when it comes to metaphysics: how can you give both a detailed and comprehensive account of what reality is? It's a question of balance and elegance.

It does explain reality though. If it didn't, we wouldn't give it any thought. Occam's razor (a.k.a. conceptual parsimony) is not the only epistemic criteria by which we give weight to different metaphysics (certainly the naturalist ones). You also have things like coherence, internal logical consistency, empirical adequacy and explanatory power. Physicalism does pretty well for most of these things. Yes, it's true that physicalism is less parsimonious than idealism, but traditional forms of idealism (everything except analytic idealism) notoriously lack empirically adequate explanations for how we get individualized personal perspectives. Physicalism might not have an explanation for how consciousness arises, but if consciousness is a given, then it has an explanation for how individual perspectives arise (through the arrangements of subatomic particles into separate bodies and brains), while traditional idealism does not. So in this scenario, which one should you choose: parsimony or explanatory power? So to summarize: if you're a fan of traditional idealism but you also value logic, science etc., then you have to choose between parsimony (in this case idealism) or explanatory power (in this case physicalism). However, if you're a believer in analytical idealism, then you don't have to make that choice

@Tyler Robinson All people live in a community or "tribe". That is not a contradiction. Edit: I just watched this and it reminded me of your comment ?: Red Joe stands up for daughter ?

Well, when Leo talks about God-realization, he talks about sticking 5-MeO-DMT up your ass. That is why the term doesn't mean anything.

These terms mean nothing. Do they also talk about entheogens?

?

The topic is also an example of self-bias. "Look how self-biased people's worldviews are. Let me try to sell you my worldview."

Tl;dr: words ≠ concepts.

?

Let it come and let it go.

Some people talk about "God consciousness", but it's thought of as a transitory stage.

Psychedelics might trigger a psychotic break in pre-disposed individuals, so I would discourage you from doing that.

Wrong. We need to stop perpetuating this myth that schizophrenia is somehow equal to mysticism or psychedelics.

Steve Vai.

I would've said this about myself some years ago as well.

If you're taking opioids regularly, there is something wrong.

Wut ?

I just had a huge blast of nostalgic memories from wintertime around 5-6 years ago. It's weird how there is a distinct emotional signature for a specific part of your life that has such a strong impact when you experience it, and that you can really only experience it retrospectively after a certain amount of time (you can't really feel nostalgia for today or yesterday). Nostalgia is not just one memory. It's a mood, and it connects several memories together. There is a flood of memories that captures the essence of an era, of yourself. You get to re-experience how it was like to be you once upon a time. The mind is an incredible thing.

Infinite formlessness (spaceless, timeless void). All limited forms (experiential qualities) spring out of that void. Your personal dream is one of the many ways that these qualities manifest themselves within this larger dream. While it may appear from the perspective of your personal dream that certain qualities are off-limits (e.g. you can't experience hidden aspects of others, yourself or the world), this is not a problem for the larger dream, because again, it exists beyond any notion of space and time. It's everything everywhere simultaneously. Space and time is a very general way of talking about how the personal hides from the transpersonal.

Waking reality and sleep are both your dreams, happening within a larger dream, like circles within a larger circle.

That's such a great way of distinguishing between the transpersonal Mind and the personal mind. You're having thoughts, feelings and perceptions that I don't have. That is your dream. I'm dreaming a different dream in that respect. But we're also part of a larger dream; the space between the thoughts, behind the feelings and perceptions.

There is an element of that for sure.