Martin Ball says he's not solipsistic

[Wilhelm44]

Just now, Harikrishnan said:

In that point of view is leo and you believe he has mind of his own and ask him question like this. It become obvious as you do the work. 

So from your pov the other imaginary characters dont have a mind of their own. And your telling me that from my pov the other imaginary characters dont have their own minds. Which imaginary character doesn't have its own mind, me or you ?

[Leo Gura]

15 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

They never started Leo. You are arguing a temporal reality that doesn't exist.

Its only observable because you create it. You'll just create the next thing.

You are speaking junk.

Creating the next thing is more temporal than what I said.

[Wilhelm44]

@Leo Gura, lets say there is another person who also had solipsistic awakening like you, who's pov is the valid one then ?

[Harikrishnan]

Just now, Wilhelm44 said:

So from your pov the other imaginary characters dont have a mind of their own. And your telling me that from my pov the other imaginary characters dont have their own minds. Which imaginary character doesn't have its own mind, me or you ?

😂 when am writing here, I know who I am and what you are really. Whole thing is happening in my mind. There is no you out there somewhere in some country. Thats it. Then why am I replying to your question? I am answering different question arising within me when I take responsibility and ownership of entire field.

[BlueOak]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You are speaking junk.

Creating the next thing is more temporal than what I said.

True. Creating the current thing is more fitting a term.

[Harikrishnan]

2 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

@Leo Gura, lets say there is another person who also had solipsistic awakening like you, who's pov is the valid one then ?

Its like highest state, you are not always functioning in high state. One come down there is another, one go up there is no another. 

[BlueOak]

To be clear, creation isn't the logical focus of the mind, though that can direct it, it's the direct state and experience happening right now.
So with no mind, there is no focus, or framework, and thus creation becomes everything.

Edited May 28 by BlueOak

[Leo Gura]

11 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

@Leo Gura, lets say there is another person who also had solipsistic awakening like you, who's pov is the valid one then ?

Solipsism means there's only your POV.

Stop saying there's anyone else but you -- if you're talking about solipsism. Stop imagining them, stop assuming them, stop theorizing about them.

Go into your toilet and notice, the only one who exists in your toilet is you. That's it. Nothing else. Everyone else is a fiction. When you are sitting there on your toilet, no other humans being has ever existed but you. You've never even seen another human being.

That's how serious solipsism is.

Edited May 28 by Leo Gura

[Wilhelm44]

1 minute ago, Harikrishnan said:

Its like highest state, you are not always functioning in high state. One come down there is another, one go up there is no another. 

Yes, but it's possible for two different imaginary characters, to both awaken to this highest state in there own unique way. Which means they will have different yet still infinite pov on reality.

[Loveeee]

 

[Wilhelm44]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

Solipsism means there's only your POV.

By "only your POV" do you mean some ultimate Oneness state ? Which means another character in the dream can also awaken to that POV ? Not sure how else to understand it. 

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

By "only your POV" do you mean some ultimate Oneness state ?

No.

Your state right now.

Edited May 28 by Leo Gura

[Harikrishnan]

1 minute ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Yes, but it's possible for two different imaginary characters, to both awaken to this highest state in there own unique way. Which means they will have different yet still infinite pov on reality.

Its not possible. When I awaken all other imaginary character cease to exist. Like there is no outside. Also sorry I dont know how to explain this since english is not my first language. 

[Wilhelm44]

@Leo Gura  @Harikrishnan

Thank you Leo, I am going to do that toilet exercise.

Just one last question: how come I seem to be communicating here with two different people who have both had a solipsistic awakening ?

 

[Loveeee]

God's denial capacity knows no bounds 

[Leo Gura]

4 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

@Leo Gura  @Harikrishnan

Thank you Leo, I am going to do that toilet exercise.

Just one last question: how come I seem to be communicating here with two different people who have both had a solipsistic awakening ?

Because that's how a reality is created.

If you didn't imagine others strongly enough, they wouldn't exist and you would be alone. To have others you must keep imagining them with the strength of a brick wall.

If you ever stop dreaming, the universe will disappear. So you must keep dreaming like your life depends on it. The dream is so strong it is beyond your conscious control. To you I feel as real as a brick wall.

Edited May 28 by Leo Gura

[Nemra]

7 minutes ago, zurew said:

Direct is appearance - what you did there is you made a judgement about that appearance and filled it up with content (filled it up with a story about its nature and about what properties it has or doesn't have [non-direct])

And I'm telling you that you are using those appearances to create a story of things to be experiencing reality. It's tricky.

[Salvijus]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Because that's how a reality is created.

If you didn't imagine others strongly enough, they wouldn't exist and you would be alone. To have others you must keep imagining them with the strength of a brick wall.

If you ever stop dreaming, the universe will disappear. So you must keep dreaming like your life depends on it.

Williams meant to say, if solipsism implies that there's only one dreamer. How come he's speaking with two awakened solipsists? Would the real slim shady please stand up? 

[zurew]

10 minutes ago, Nemra said:

And I'm telling you that you are using those appearances to create a story of things to be experiencing reality. It's tricky.

No im not saying that , I dont talk about anything about "other things experiencing reality" (I dont know whether there are other minds or not)  - what I am saying is, that the absolute only gets you to appearance appearing, but it doesnt help you to make sense of the nature of the appearance and it doesnt help you to make sense of what kind of properties the appearance has or doesnt have.

Again the moment you start to give a story about  appearance - you are using something other than what is absolute, and you are subject to be wrong about it.

Its you who for some reason wants to claim that solipsism is absolute - its not me who wants to claim that non-solipsism is absolute.

 

 

In short - the absolute doesnt help shit with reducing down the possibility space - You need conceptual tools for that, and those are subject to being fallible

Edited May 28 by zurew

[Salvijus]

21 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The dream is so strong it is beyond your conscious control. To you I feel as real as a brick wall.

If there are things beyond the concious control, that implies that you're not the maker of the dream. Uh oh. "Let's pretend that argument doesn't exist and continue with my story, maybe nobody will notice it" - a solipsists. 

Edited May 28 by Salvijus