Leo's take on solipsism is confusing

[Breakingthewall]

8 minutes ago, Nemra said:

why would I be able to levitate my phone?

Why not? What prevents it? According solipsism it's just an image that you are creating right now as god

[Princess Arabia]

3 hours ago, meta_male said:

@patricknotstar Did you listen to Curt's interview with Leo? Part 1. Somewhere around the 5 hour mark I think he explains it a little different than in his solipsism video.

 

....and he will say a different thing now.

[Princess Arabia]

7 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

Spirituality in general is confusing. Have you noticed every person that writes has like their own unique interpretation of it? It’s like we all speak our own language. I notice this both here and in spirituality forums on Reddit. I’m okay with not knowing, with being confused though , so it’s not a problem. But damn there’s so many ways to speak of the same concepts, for example the idea of consciousness, let’s not even start with that

Hit the nail on the head.....it's all stories. Appearing and disappearing out of nothing. Nothing is the real deal.

[Nemra]

1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

Why not? What prevents it? According solipsism it's just an image that you are creating right now as god

It is an ability that I do not possess.

You are like asking, "Why are you not doing something that you cannot do?"

Maybe, if you hit my head hard enough, I could possess it. Who knows?

Edited May 2 by Nemra

[AJBrew]

Probably want to clarify that it is Metaphysical Solipsism that is being talked about here and not the usual term that most people understand as inverted to this.

Edited May 2 by AJBrew

[Breakingthewall]

1 hour ago, Nemra said:

It is an ability that I do not possess.

You are like asking, "Why are you not doing something that you cannot do?"

 

1 hour ago, Nemra said:

 

Yes ok but the only possible answer is because it's out of your field of possibilities. "Out" implies just that something is out, not solipsism.

[Nemra]

28 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Yes ok but the only possible answer is because it's out of your field of possibilities. "Out" implies just that something is out, not solipsism.

It means that it does not exist in my experience, as in I cannot experience the controlling part of an object the way levitation is thought of.

Let's say someone levitates an object in front of me. Still, I would not experience the controlling part for the same reason I do not experience others' experiences, because those experiences do not happen for me. Only the experience that I am conscious of is happening.

Edited May 2 by Nemra

[koops]

9 hours ago, patricknotstar said:

Just being a rationalist and based on epistemology 101 this is true. So I am curious how you derive solipsism from this?

You have no way of discerning which is true as you can only verify your own self awareness, through direct experience, not anyone else's. 

Yet Leo claims solipsism is true and I don't see how that can be verified through direct experience and isn't just an assumption. To me it seems like an eternal mystery. 

You don't derive it.

You awake to it.

 

9 hours ago, patricknotstar said:

Yes you could very well be the only conscious entity in existence, but you also couldn't. You have no way of discerning which is true as you can only verify your own self awareness, through direct experience, not anyone else's. 

Yes, Absolute Truth. Oneness.

There is no other self-awareness, only Self-awareness.

 

[Breakingthewall]

12 minutes ago, Nemra said:

It means that it does not exist in my experience, as in I cannot experience the controlling part of an object the way levitation is thought of.

Let's say someone levitates an object in front of me. Still, I would not experience the controlling part for the same reason I do not experience others' experiences, because those experiences do not happen for me. Only the experience that I am conscious of is happening.

What I wanted to point is since your experience is finite there are infinite possibilities out of it. In an infinite frame that's implies that are others dimensions that are coexisting out of your field of experience. The fact that you don't experience them doesn't mean that they doesn't exist. if mathematically they are a possibility, they are real. In a infinite frame mathematically possible is equal than real. 

[Nemra]

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

What I wanted to point is since your experience is finite there are infinite possibilities out of it. In an infinite frame that's implies that are others dimensions that are coexisting out of your field of experience.

I could have other experiences but that does not mean that those experiences exist when I am not experiencing them.

Those non-existent experiences exist as mental representations in my experience at this moment.

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

If mathematically they are a possibility, they are real. In an infinite frame mathematically possible is equal than real. 

They might or might not be possible. You do not know. It is just a possibility, even if it makes so much sense.

If you experience them, then they would exist at that moment.

----------

Let's say that a person took a picture of the Eiffel Tower and sent it to you.

The possibility of the tower existing depends on the medium itself.

Even if the picture is or seems to be exact and realistic, it does not mean that the tower actually exists at the moment when you look at the picture.

However, it means that if you go to the nearby spot in Paris where the photo was taken, the tower could exist at that moment unless it has been removed before your visit.

----------

Q. Is your experience a possibility?

A. No, of course. It is happening. Experiences that are not happening at this moment are a possibility.

Edited May 2 by Nemra

[Davino]

@Yimpa yoohooooooo!