The mirroir effect : Why you only speak to yourself.

[Schizophonia]

Dimensions, the constituent limits of experience, present themselves as a hierarchy (Ken Wilber would call it a holarchy, to be more precise) in a fractal model.

3D is a dimensional structure made up of three smaller dimensions (depth, width, length).

"Vision" is a structure containing both "3D" and, for example, the "color" dimension, which in turn contains the "Red" or "Green" dimensions;

It is not possible for the human mind to be directly intuitively aware of this, but we know theoretically and experimentally that most colors are in fact combinatorial subdimensions of "primary" colors (red, yellow, and blue).

The human being is a knot, a configuration compulsively maintained for some reason, of consciousness and experience (I'm creating a divide between consciousness and experience here, I'll come back to this) of a certain limited field of holons/dimensions; beyond a certain threshold, in the infinitely large or small, these dimensions are no longer perceptible.
To return to the example of 3D, the human mind cannot become aware of 4D or 5D, nor can it become aware of the lower dimensions of the "depth" dimension; Just as we are not aware of dimensions that are simply too deranged from our ego, far away in the divine imagination (the dimension "Byugdzugdza%%%%"777555...").

Consciousness, awareness, is the experience of the "discrimination" of an experienceable dimension, that is, its differentiation from other dimensions ("red" is not "depth").

I have the "direct" experience of the taste of an apple -> experience.
I experience the "concept," the "language," the delimitation of the "taste of the apple" by dimensions external to the taste of the apple, by what is not the apple (the phrase, the concept "taste of the apple" is of a completely different nature from the experience of the taste of the apple) -> consciousness.

Therefore, there is a systematic opposition between the experience of a dimension, and its conscious awareness.
The more I experience something (the taste of an apple), the more my attention actually moves away from the barriers that allow me to delimit the experience, that is, the other dimensions; and vice versa.
Of course, for something as simple as this, I can actually eat an apple and at the same time say to myself "that's the taste of an apple"; consciously realize it, but in doing so, my attention, and therefore my ego, technically shifts to two opposite places.
And it's the same thing downstream! When I experience eating an apple, I become conscious; the taste of sugar, acidity, etc., are technically also a conscious language about what's happening in the sub-dimensions that make up the "sugar" or acid dimension.

This process of conscious awareness, of discrimination, is called duality. In this sense, we could say that all experiences consciously acquainted with the human mind are sub-dimensions of the "dual" dimension; that is, they have the particularity of being distinguishable by their non-presence.
They are "directly" experienced (1), or experienced and consciously acquainted with their non-presence; that is, by the presence of what they are not (0).
Lacan said that language, that representation, functions like a "hole.", the "hole of representation"
What is an American flag? It is both an experience, a dimension experienced in itself (a fabric, colors) (1), but also a symbol, a limit that consciousizes something, a dimension, an experiment that is not here (0) (the American people, values, etc.).

I experience, with my attention, the American people, whatever that may mean, since of course, as soon as one symbolizes a dimension, as soon as one "signifies," one is no longer in its experience but in awareness, awareness through the experience of what is not the experience one is making aware of -> 1

I make aware of what the American people are -> 0; I am no longer experiencing the American people, but in what symbolizes them, what I use to "delimit,"
that is, what they are not (experience of the flag).

 

 

How is it linked to mirror Effect:

The split between experience (inner quadrants, as Ken Wilber would say) and awareness (outer quadrants), this principle of duality, has a radical implication
on how humans identify:

The way a person becomes aware of themselves and others is ultimately the "inverse" of their experience.

Let's take the example of a person who sees stupid people everywhere (maybe you? lol); with enough contemplation, honesty, and humor, you'll realize
that this person who tacitly suggests they're smarter than average is actually stupider.
Why this "paradox"?

Because if I were intelligent, I would naturally come to experience being intelligent;
I would read a lot of books, watch documentaries, have intelligent and qualified colleagues and friends, etc.
But if I experience being intelligent, and experience opposes conceptualization, how could I come to regularly realize that I'm intelligent?
Even a neuroscience researcher, when they're engaged in their neuroscience stuff, will see themselves, realize that they're "not smart enough" in the face of the difficulties of their problems, precisely because they're experiencing a particularly intelligent experience. It's only when he descends from an intelligence experience, when he sees an old friend with a more moderate intelligence, that he will actually be able to realize that he is "intelligent."
Our level of intelligence can only be measured in comparison with that of others, so if I want to realize (want to be) intelligent, I must actually maximize the level of stupidity I perceive (experiment) in the world; but I am my world, I am the world to which I lower myself through narcissism.
If, rather than studying to become a nuclear engineer, I prefer to watch stupid videos on TikTok of political opponents to comment on how stupid they are,
I may conceive of myself as more intelligent at that moment because that's my goal; but "objectively," I'm no longer a nuclear engineer, but a guy who makes nasty comments on TikTok; I'm no longer an experience of intelligence. Awareness of a dimension is NOT experimenting the dimension. When I become aware of something, I want it, but I am not it; this is the big difference between wanting and being in Neville Goddard, Walter C. Lanyon, other Christian Science thinkers, and non-dual thinkers of the Far East.

From a materialist point of view, to return a little to the illusion; we could also explain it this way:

It is not possible to experience something, to make it conscious, that is, to put words to it to say it quickly, and to express it outside the capabilities of your central nervous system.
How do you know what the color "red" is? Because you have a field of neurons that allows you to experience it; YOUR neurons.
How do you know and recognize aggression? Because it's inside you!
How do you recognize the stupidity of others? Because it's yours!
Why are you ultimately surrounded by all these idiots rather than intelligent people "like you"? Because you are ultimately at least a little bit of an idiot like them, and pigeons don't fly with eagles.

If I want to be smarter, I don't seek to be smarter, because that would mean saying, affirming, or experiencing not being; I AM smarter, I know it; it's at the center of the universe, it's my experience, and therefore there is no awareness.

Therefore, everything you say about others, without exception, is a projection of what you really "objectively" are, what the experience of being you is.

"Others are bad" -> You are bad. "Others are putting obstacles in my way" -> You let your malice, anger, or other emotions negatively influence your relationships out of pride or misplaced narcissism.
"Society is corrupt" -> You are corrupt.
"Society is fatphobic" -> You are mean to yourself even when it comes to your weight.
"Men are perverts" -> You are desperate to be loved and think about getting together with him as soon as you meet a nice man.
"Women are hypergamous and moody" -> You are desperate and insecure and want to be treated like a god as a result.
"Right-wing men are misogynistic" -> Almost all of the sex scandals that have occurred in French politics have been perpetrated by left-wing or far-left figures. "Left-wingers are lax" -> Right-wing figures in France are known for embezzlement, and many have electronic collars for it.

I could give thousands of examples; it's absolutely systematic.

You are what you project; you are the experience, the wave, the impulse, but believe yourself to be only what comes back to you (the maya, the language); to be in the meaning, not just you as a vehicle/avatar, but the nature of others and of the universe in general as well.
This is the illusion of duality applied to interpersonal relationships; it's the mirror effect.

Edited Friday at 03:27 PM by Schizophonia

[Sugarcoat]

I haven’t read yet but damn did you write all that from your mind ?

[theleelajoker]

Try to put it into a maximum of 2-3 simple sentences?

[Sugarcoat]

5 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

Try to put it into a maximum of 2-3 simple sentences?

Hahaahahah I swear. Do people read such long posts ever. (No offense, I’m impressed by such writing)

Edited Friday at 05:27 PM by Sugarcoat

[theleelajoker]

I tried to read it all but lost the meaning of what was said It's also not my first language

For me, the art of communication is to reduce complexity and to find the least amount of information while keeping the meaning / message intact. (Often, I fail doing that)

Storytelling of course can deviate bc you may want to create tension, curiosity, excitement, emotions whatever. But even then --> less information, more clarity is better.

Edited Friday at 05:32 PM by theleelajoker

[Sugarcoat]

41 minutes ago, theleelajoker said:

I tried to read it all but lost the meaning of what was said It's also not my first language

For me, the art of communication is to reduce complexity and to find the least amount of information while keeping the meaning / message intact. (Often, I fail doing that)

Storytelling of course can deviate bc you may want to create tension, curiosity, excitement, emotions whatever. But even then --> less information, more clarity is better.

He tends to write in uncommon, complicated way with uncommon terms. Your English seems pretty good, English is also not my first but I’m still fluent in it. 
 

I agree. When I write I always try to write in a simple way that people can understand. And to make it shorter and more digestible is preferable too

[Schizophonia]

3 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

I haven’t read yet but damn did you write all that from your mind ?

No it's chatGPT.

I was masturbating when i hit that it was been a long time i didn't do a long and complexe topic to seeming very very smart.

So i asked him "hey dude, i'm too brainroted by youtube shorts and heavy metal to write 3 corrects sentances, can you write me a random post about concioussness so i can show off on Actualized about my big and large intelligence".

And that's how this post was born.  🤔

[Schizophonia]

3 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

I haven’t read yet but damn did you write all that from your mind ?

Jokes asides it's actually easier that you think. 

At first, you don't really know what you're going to write, and then, with a little effort, the flow comes.
It requires a little work, but not that much.
It probably took me about one to two hours of consecutive work; and it could be more precise or simply clean.

[Sugarcoat]

2 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

No it's chatGPT.

I was masturbating when i hit that it was been a long time i didn't do a long and complexe topic to seeming very very smart.

So i asked him "hey dude, i'm too brainroted by youtube shorts and heavy metal to write 3 corrects sentances, can you write me a random post about concioussness so i can show off on Actualized about my big and large intelligence".

And that's how this post was born.  🤔

I need to start masturbating so I can be this smart. That’s what I got from your reply

[Schizophonia]

3 hours ago, theleelajoker said:

Try to put it into a maximum of 2-3 simple sentences?

"Others are projections of ourselves."

"Basically at a time t we either "know" what something is, or we experience that something."

"theleelajoker is lazy and shoud put til tok"

[Schizophonia]

8 minutes ago, Sugarcoat said:

I need to start masturbating so I can be this smart. That’s what I got from your reply

Ok but It only works if you think to me.🤔

3 hours ago, theleelajoker said:

I tried to read it all but lost the meaning of what was said It's also not my first language

For me, the art of communication is to reduce complexity and to find the least amount of information while keeping the meaning / message intact. (Often, I fail doing that)

Storytelling of course can deviate bc you may want to create tension, curiosity, excitement, emotions whatever. But even then --> less information, more clarity is better.

Me too, but this wasn't what I wanted here.

Edited Friday at 08:52 PM by Schizophonia

[Hojo]

Its not a communication its a post and it is very smart. I will try to think of ways I am projecting. The long post was nessesary to get a point across.

With this logic You can say maga is actually the ones that want a 1 world government and they are projecting that on us. And trump is going to try to do it.

You can take any political figure and automatically see what they want to do based on their projections of other people.

The smart ones say nothing so you can't see their projections that are impossible to hide.

Edited Friday at 09:01 PM by Hojo

[Princess Arabia]

How many times do we have to hear that when it's ChatGPT, to specify.

Two to three sentences in and i knew you didn't write that shit. I kept scrolling to see by Chatgpt at the end, but I see it's in the comments instead. People don't realize you're robots with programming and patterns. When you've been on here for awhile there's a writing pattern you've created and this just wasn't yours. Only if you're observant anyway, you'll notice.

 

[Hojo]

@Princess Arabia You think this is chatgpt? I dont think chat gpt could write this. This looks like a human wrote it.

Edited Saturday at 02:53 AM by Hojo

[Princess Arabia]

4 minutes ago, Hojo said:

@Princess Arabia You think this is chatgpt? I dont think chat gpt could write this. This looks like a human wrote it.

Schizo did say it was. I guess you didn't read the comments. Look again. He said so.

[Hojo]

@Princess Arabia oh ok I didnt see it.

[Princess Arabia]

Just now, Hojo said:

@Princess Arabia oh ok I didnt see it.

That's because your eyes are on your profile pic. Hehe. The other on is up your a**. Lol

[Schizophonia]

11 hours ago, Hojo said:

Its not a communication its a post and it is very smart. I will try to think of ways I am projecting. The long post was nessesary to get a point across.

With this logic You can say maga is actually the ones that want a 1 world government and they are projecting that on us. And trump is going to try to do it.

You can take any political figure and automatically see what they want to do based on their projections of other people.

The smart ones say nothing so you can't see their projections that are impossible to hide.

Spot on

 

[Schizophonia]

@Princess Arabia @Hojo I trolled sugarcoat it’s handwritten.

Edited Saturday at 08:12 AM by Schizophonia

[The Crocodile]

(from a Carlos book):

I felt compelled at that point to present an argument. I sincerely contended that in European
thought we had accounted for what he called the nagual. I brought in the concept of the
Transcendental Ego, or the unobserved observer present in all our thoughts, perceptions and
feelings. I explained to don Juan that the individual could perceive or intuit himself, as a self,
through the Transcendental Ego, because this was the only thing capable of judgment, capable of
disclosing reality within the realm of its consciousness.
Don Juan was unruffled. He laughed.
"Disclosing reality," he said, mimicking me. "That's the tonal."
I argued that the tonal may be called the Empirical Ego found in one's passing stream of
consciousness or experience, while the Transcendental Ego was found behind that stream.
"Watching, I suppose," he said mockingly.
"That's right. Watching itself," I said.
"I hear you talking," he said. "But you're saying nothing. The nagual is not experience or
intuition or consciousness. Those terms and everything else you may care to say are only items on
the island of the tonal. The nagual, on the other hand, is only effect. The tonal begins at birth and
ends at death, but the nagual never ends. The nagual has no limit. I've said that the nagual is
where power hovers; that was only a way of alluding to it. By reasons of its effect, perhaps the
nagual can be best understood in terms of power. For instance, when you felt numb and couldn't
talk earlier today, I was actually soothing you; that is, my nagual was acting upon you."
"How was that possible, don Juan?"
"You won't believe this, but no one knows how. All I know is that I wanted your undivided
attention and then my nagual went to work on you. I know that much because I can witness its
effect, but I don't know how it works."

(Don Juan saying the nagual is unknowable in nature and not aligned with Eastern mysticism or European philosophy.)