anaj

Using the movie as an analogy: If you're lucid within the Matrix, meaning you _know_ it is all a simulation, but still are embedded within it, and you know the real cause of any health condition is the code that runs the simulation, even though that same code also renders a bunch of preceding apparent causes, you'd _still_ go to the doctor, as you recognize that this is the mechanism whereby the matrix code allows for healing within the simulation to take place. There is no contradiction, only a recognition of the rules of the game.

Shameless plug for my own book, Refuting the external world. https://www.amazon.com/Refuting-External-World-Goran-Backlund-ebook/dp/B00NOXW8QE

Be careful being so quick to decide that life is meaningless. Life is not meaningless. What is Leo saying? There is no objective reality. What follows from this? Surely there is no objective meaning then, but there is no objective anything, which means that there can't be the absence of meaning either. In other words, it's not that there is a bunch of objective stuff out there, among which objective meaning is absent. No, there is no objective anything, which means that there is no subjective things either. Once you abolish on side of the coin the other goes with it. What's left is experiencing, and that can be absolutely infused with meaningfulness. This idea that there's no objective meaning is only half the story. There is no objective anything, which means that nothing can be missing or absent from said objective reality either, so the psychological effect of the "lack" of objective meaning is ungrounded on philosophical analysis.

It's not the subjective experience of one's unfolding life that is being denied, but its supposed objective counterpart. And without objective existence you exist in the same way something in a dream exists - merely strands of dream stuff woven into being.

Instead of looking for happiness by consuming stuff, try to create something. It sounds as if you're in this mindset where you're just looking for the next thing to consume, but that will never do. Create, create, create. That's the thing. Poems, music, painting, whatever. Try to capture the infinite way in which you see the world in some bounded form.

@Torkys Thank you! it warms my heart, what you wrote!

So I've wrote this book that explains how the external world; the existence of an objective reality outside of our perceptions; is a logical impossibility. In other words, it's not like what Leo does; I'm not merely arguing and presenting evidence for why we are unjustified in assuming such a reality - no, this is something different. I'm actually showing you, logically, why there can't even exist a possibility of such a reality. Now, I'm posting here because for the next 5 days, the book is FREE in the kindle store, and I thought, given how much weight Leo has given this idea of no objective reality, that you might be interested. https://www.amazon.com/Refuting-External-World-Goran-Backlund-ebook/dp/B00NOXW8QE I hope it's helpful to somebody.

In Leo's video on what is consciousness (or perhaps it was from his may-retreat-report) he says that atoms are made out of consciousness. But atoms don't exist to be made or not made out of consciousness if there is no objective reality in which they can exist. Their existence is merely inferred from observable phenomena (which appears in consciousness). The fact that Leo says objective reality doesn't exist in some videos and then say atoms are made out of consciousness is contradictory.

if there is no objective reality, then whatever you find most meaningful, subjectively, is not arbitrary - it is your deepest purpose. In other words, if there is no objective reality against which to test your subjective meaning for veridicality, then subjective meaning is _true_ meaning. And even if you maintain this idea of an objective reality, subjectivity is not a subset of objectivity, but they are two sides of the same coin, namely the totality of reality. objective reality is not the whole of reality, but a subset stripped of the subjective aspect. What I mean is that even under the materialist paradigm, subjective meaning is nested under total reality, and therefore an intrinsic part of it, even though, definitionally, objective reality lacks meaning (since we define objective reality as the subset of reality stripped of all subjective aspects). It's like "beauty". It exists in all the ways we care about, unless you definitionally say it doesn't exist since it doesn't fit in the objectivity category (which is a mere conceptual fabrication) which is the criterion we chosen for saying things exist. You must be very trapped in conceptual fuckery if you convince yourself that beauty doesn't exist. the same goes for meaning.

Yes, I'm enlightened. Here's my report http://www.uncoveringlife.com/awakening-story/

Another way to look at it is this: You can't really know whether these things that happened are good or bad. Maybe having gone through these things will help you see more clearly in the future? Maybe you wouldn't even be on the path of self-actualization unless you did the things you did in the past? It's difficult to tell. Don't be so fast to decide whether things you did were good or bad until you see the entire picture before you.

I like to look at it like follows: Hope is when you wishing for a specific outcome. Like, "I hope I win the lottery tomorrow." Faith is when you trust that you fundamentally will be okay regardless of what happens. Like, you have faith in the unfolding of life.

shameless plug for my own book here, but it's relevant for this discussion. https://www.amazon.com/Refuting-External-World-Goran-Backlund-ebook/dp/B00NOXW8QE