Martin Ball says he's not solipsistic

[zurew]

3 hours ago, Nemra said:

Of course, you cannot trust anyone.

No its not about that, its about taking the method/process as infallible.

Why treat the info that you gather / realize through a specific method to be infallible?

Like why is it hard to just say - "The reason why I think x,y,z is true is because of awakening" -  why say " x,y,z is true without a doubt and I cant be wrong about it"?

 

For example, I dont treat inferential justification to be anything special - Its one system of justification, where justification is defined by inference - its useful, it can be used to solve a lot of disagreements, but it has its own limitations as well.

It can also be used to establish whats logically impossible - but even there what is established is logical impossibility and not necessarily anything true related to reality.

 

3 hours ago, Nemra said:

ave you done meditation

Yes I have, Ive had my own experiences and some of them were profound - but even there whats important is what kind inferences one makes about it and it seems there are many ways to make sense of those experiences.

[Harikrishnan]

1 hour ago, Wilhelm44 said:

"When I go everyone cease to exist" - you mean that from your point of view right ? Because if you died before me, i would still be here, or if I died before you, you would still be here. Or am I missing something ?

Only one field exist. And I took ownership over it 😎

[Breakingthewall]

41 minutes ago, Harikrishnan said:

Only one field exist. And I took ownership over it 😎

For change to exist there must be at least two fields interacting.

You the solipsistic have decided that it's impossible that the reality can take two perspectives. Why?

Edited May 27 by Breakingthewall

[Nemra]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

Like why is it hard to just say - "The reason why I think x,y,z is true is because of awakening"

I thought that was obvious.

To me, someone who says "... it's because of awakening" doesn't say much.

1 hour ago, zurew said:

why say " x,y,z is true without a doubt and I cant be wrong about it"?

Well, before that you said why not attribute x,y,z to awakening, which I think also means that the person has realized thing about x,y,z.

The second one is more revealing. But also depends how the terms are defined. It also could be more confusing.

However, aren't there things that you have found out to be true?

I don't hold things as true just because someone said it.

Edited May 27 by Nemra

[Yeah Yeah]

I still don't understand why people aren't responding to me to argue for their own experience like you typed a response and you say I am here and I am having my own experience because I am typing this and I know I have my own experience so if any one of you says that back to me like yeah I'm here and then I say yeah I'm here and we are both sure we are each here then that disproves solipsism but no one is doing that each of you continue dancing around it and pretending mental masturbation around this idea could somehow hold true but from this argument's logic I'm reading I know I exist and therefore you all would by solipsism not exist and that surely can't be the case and yet no one is voicing with as much vigor as myself they exist and getting to the point with me so either you all are indeed NPCs ignoring me because I'm the sole dreamer or you each hope to be the supreme dreamer but still argue against other commenters in this thread who also talk as if to hope to awaken they are the sole dreamer like this is absurd 

 

[zurew]

27 minutes ago, Nemra said:

I thought that was obvious.

To me, someone who says "... it's because of awakening" doesn't say much.

No , you are not tracking there - the point is that you specify the method by which you gathered/realized those things to be true (you are honest about what they are contingent on and limited to)

27 minutes ago, Nemra said:

However, aren't there things that you have found out to be true?

Yes, but all of those are contingent on other premises and none of them are infallible.

 

Edited May 27 by zurew

[Yeah Yeah]

This goes two ways I am the dreamer and you all are NPCs arguing in relativity so my cosmic research as a node of the only awareness reflecting back to myself or you all equally do have your own independent experience but dance around my logic here because you hope to still get a kick that one of you is the only solipsistic bubble in the void but that is a form of conscious supremacey above other commenters and beings which is highly egoistic but most of you won't accept that as a possibility because you get a real kick in the hopes you might be the supreme awareness and someone like me is an ignorable figment of your dream 

[Yeah Yeah]

I am constantly being ignored and my logic is not collecting actual debate I am making sense yet I am being ignored - this is narcissistic theatre - if you actually responded to me you're afraid you'll have to realise you aren't actually the only supreme node in all this experience and that'd crush your ego more than truth absolutely disappointing especially on a Leo forum this is childish if anything 

 

[Yeah Yeah]

I know I exist - I am having my own experience yet not one of you has as much vigor to respond equally which either mean none of you exist or you don't actually want to hear someone break your fantasy for feeling special - I exist and it is offensive for any one of you to act like I'm a figment of your ignorable background prop that is not truth that is cosmic narcissistic - I know I exist and yet no one has acknowledged that and equally agreed how much they exist instead I have been continually ignored for the sake of other people jerking themselves off in Mama's basement hoping to feel more divine than anyone expressing their actual lived felt experience  

[Loveeee]

Experience is a real thing but is not a classical finite thing, it's formless, shapeless. There can't be two of those. It's that simple 

[Nemra]

19 minutes ago, zurew said:

No, you are not tracking there - the point is that you specify the method by which you gathered/realized those things to be true (you are honest about what they are contingent on and limited to)

Well, yeah.

Even saying awakening could mean different things to different people. E.g., religious people would have a different idea about it, which could be to go to church and live the Christian life.

23 minutes ago, zurew said:

Yes, but all of those are contingent on other premises and none of them are infallible.

Well, I think you would also agree that those premises should also be questioned.

[Thought Art]

@Carl-Richard So, my understanding of maya would that the “other/ other people” is part of maya. Notice how the other people in your life you only know your own awareness. If reality is maya, why wouldn’t other people be included in that maya and not actually exist. You seem to be drawing distinctions where some things are real, like other people, other minds, space and time (all of which you only experience in your mind) which you ground in some form of rationality which is again your own mind. 
 

I wonder your thoughts on my interpretation.
 

It doesn’t really make sense that reality would be “consciousness” but to ground your metaphysics in space/ time. There is not really any proof existentially in other minds, space or time. These things exist in consciousness. But, are not existing in and of them selves. They would be aspects if maya.

[Carl-Richard]

45 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@Carl-Richard So, my understanding of maya would that the “other/ other people” is part of maya. Notice how the other people in your life you only know your own awareness. If reality is maya, why wouldn’t other people be included in that maya and not actually exist.

Did you see the picture I posted earlier? They are.

 

48 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

You seem to be drawing distinctions where some things are real, like other people, other minds, space and time (all of which you only experience in your mind) which you ground in some form of rationality which is again your own mind. 

I draw the distinctions (illusory distinctions) for the sake of pragmatism, for understanding the illusion. I have conceded that they are Maya and not metaphysical bedrock, in this very thread.

 

52 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

It doesn’t really make sense that reality would be “consciousness” but to ground your metaphysics in space/ time. There is not really any proof existentially in other minds, space or time. These things exist in consciousness. But, are not existing in and of them selves. They would be aspects if maya.

Solipsists are the ones who ground their metaphysics in space and time by making definitive statements like "other people do not experience". If you don't want to talk about space and time, don't talk about others, let alone if they experience anything or not.

[Oppositionless]

From your pov you're all that is, from my pov I'm all that is. 

[Thought Art]

@Carl-Richard okay thank you for sharing that i was reply to your previous comment. 

I think others can be perceived by a solipsist without applying space and time. They have a different ontological category for “others” than, they would if they were a materialist. In a dream for example a person speak of a monster they saw. But, the dreamer need not consider space and time because they know it’s a dream. There is no space and time in dreams though it appears that way.
 

A solipsist may just consider an “other” a form of finite division in their infinite mind. Like anything that that would be perceived. 

I would say solipsists, at least metaphysical, absolute solipsism is not grounding reality in space and time at all. I’m not entirety sure why you think that. 
 

Because. It’s all maya. 

I think, largely the realization of solipsism occurs during God Realization and in states of omnipotence. 
 

 

Edited May 27 by Thought Art

[Harikrishnan]

7 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

For change to exist there must be at least two fields interacting.

You the solipsistic have decided that it's impossible that the reality can take two perspectives. Why?

you dont understand what field is then. 

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Thought Art said:

@Carl-Richard okay thank you for sharing that i was reply to your previous comment. 

I think others can be perceived by a solipsist without applying space and time. They have a different ontological category for “others” than, they would if they were a materialist. In a dream for example a person speak of a monster they saw. But, the dreamer need not consider space and time because they know it’s a dream. There is no space and time in dreams though it appears that way.

Anything that has an extension visually (not just in waking reality but also in your imagination) can be described by the concept of space. If you can draw two points and a line between them, that's space. Space is just a placeholder concept for things that extend visually. It doesn't matter if it's in a dream or not. The reason you think that is because materialists have hijacked the notion of space to mean space in waking reality (or outer space), which we can thank Descartes for when he drew the distinction between res extensa and res cogitans. But if you're an idealist, reality is indistinguishable from a dream. I linked a video earlier of an idealist that argued (from a scientific and philosophical point of view) that other people in waking reality are dream characters.

Edited May 28 by Carl-Richard

[gengar]

I struggled a lot with solipsism for years since basically having a spiritual experience of it at 20 years old.

The days after it, I remember laying on the couch, trembling with fear inside, while my parents left to do groceries, and at that moment I was basically aware that the moment they left my field of experience and I heard the door shut, they didn't exist anymore. It was horrendous and I cried.

I didn't help that Leo was starting to explicitly affirm solipsism on the forum at that time.

It also didn't help that my mental and physical health worsened the years after and I was contemplating suicide.

I tried everything to shed the idea, mostly with trying to delude myself with religious beliefs.

But of course nothing helped because nothing can veil the truth once you've seen it.

In the end, after much contemplation of all different ways reality could be, if not solipsism;

I realized one thing.

Reality would be evil if solipsism is not true.

And imagining others is the highest love you could have for them.

You love them so much that you simply make them up out of thin air.

Solipsism is the highest Good.

And to be honest, most of this thread is just cope. I know every trick there is to hide solipsism from yourself. In the end solipsism can't be explained away by any theories because Consciousness doesn't abide by any theories.

Solipsism and Consciousness don't abide by any theories or stories. It's simply what is here now. All other minds are imagined by what is here right now.
 

Edited May 28 by gengar

[gengar]

10 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

For change to exist there must be at least two fields interacting.

You the solipsistic have decided that it's impossible that the reality can take two perspectives. Why?

Because the entire notion of "two" existing in the first place is impossible. There is only one thing; The totality of all things.

[gengar]

10 hours ago, Yeah Yeah said:

I still don't understand why people aren't responding to me to argue for their own experience like you typed a response and you say I am here and I am having my own experience because I am typing this and I know I have my own experience so if any one of you says that back to me like yeah I'm here and then I say yeah I'm here and we are both sure we are each here then that disproves solipsism but no one is doing that each of you continue dancing around it and pretending mental masturbation around this idea could somehow hold true but from this argument's logic I'm reading I know I exist and therefore you all would by solipsism not exist and that surely can't be the case and yet no one is voicing with as much vigor as myself they exist and getting to the point with me so either you all are indeed NPCs ignoring me because I'm the sole dreamer or you each hope to be the supreme dreamer but still argue against other commenters in this thread who also talk as if to hope to awaken they are the sole dreamer like this is absurd 

 

Why are you you and not me?