Near sighted/Far Sighted and survival

[Hojo]

I have been thinking about how survival and vision relate to each other and have come to  an idea about far sighted being survival mode and near sighted is when you are in normal.

Take your finger put it 1 foot in front of you then take the finger away. Staring at the empty space is near sighted. You do not need to focus on anything outside of your aura field in near sighted mode you are not scared of anything. You are not identified with anything outside your near sight.

Far sighted mode is where we exist in we are constantly looking out for danger and pretend this is where we exist. Its of ego politics logic identiy fear and others. When the ego cant find things in its direct vacinity to be scared of in far sighted mode it will reach out and look to find things to be scared of. IE News politics.

I have been trying to focus more on my near sight when walking around and interacting with people and it brings you into a mode of peace. If you practice enough you will be able to instantly switch from far sight to near sight without having to use your finger.

Try to go for a walk around your town completely near sighted and see how you start to notice the sounds and colours and thrill of cars passing and people talking. You wont see any other except blurs passing you. Its not cross eyed so people cannot notice you are doing it. 

Edited July 8 by Hojo

[aurum]

@Hojo you could just as easily claim the reverse.

Near-sightedness = pulling your vision in, retracting from the world, hiding, fear

Far-sightedness = relaxing into your field of vision, moving into the world, safety

[Hojo]

@aurumYou could.

I am using this theory based on Donald Hoffmans theory where the more you see the less of truth you see.

The Interface Theory of Perception, proposed by Donald D. Hoffman, suggests that our perception of reality is not a mirror of objective truth, but rather an adaptive interface designed to guide behavior and enhance survival. It posits that evolution has shaped our perceptual systems to provide useful, species-specific symbols, much like a computer interface, rather than accurate representations of the external world

So in this theory the more clearly you see the less truth you see. Not truth is fear. Everytime you get scared you jump into looking what it is in your perceptual field. A sound turns into there is something out to get me I need to look to see what it is for survival purposes.

Edited July 8 by Hojo

[aurum]

Just now, Hojo said:

The Interface Theory of Perception, proposed by Donald D. Hoffman, suggests that our perception of reality is not a mirror of objective truth, but rather an adaptive interface designed to guide behavior and enhance survival. It posits that evolution has shaped our perceptual systems to provide useful, species-specific symbols, much like a computer interface, rather than accurate representations of the external world

This theory is badly wrong.

Your perception of reality is exactly reality. Not an interface of any kind. 

[Hojo]

@aurum That is badly wrong.

You can literally disprove this by doing what my post says. Your eyes have two different ways they can perceive reality near sighted and far sighted. Is reality blurry or clear?

[aurum]

1 minute ago, Hojo said:

Is reality blurry or clear?

It is literally whatever you perceive. 

[Hojo]

So then how can you say my theory is wrong. Or donald Hoffman cause I perceive it to be true. You have to agree with me under that framework. @aurum

Edited July 8 by Hojo

[aurum]

1 minute ago, Hojo said:

So then how can you say my theory is wrong. Or donald Hoffman cause I perceive it to be true. @aurum

You can still experience self-deception.

[Hojo]

@aurum 

7 minutes ago, aurum said:

It is literally whatever you perceive. 

So it can be not how I perceive it?

[Natasha Tori Maru]

11 minutes ago, Hojo said:

, suggests that our perception of reality is not a mirror of objective truth, but rather an adaptive interface designed to guide behavior and enhance survival. It posits that evolution has shaped our perceptual systems to provide useful, species-specific symbols, much like a computer interface, rather than accurate representations of the external world

 

This is describing infancy - 'not knowing' >>> Growing to adult - 'knowing'. As elements of existence come into awareness, we form beliefs and understanding so we can learn to survive. What works for us.

Belief, and thinking you understand, lead to no further questions being asked. This can blind you to the real truth, as these beliefs you form as a result of survival serve to function as a method for survival. Thinking you know, means you won't look into what you believe - you filter out the truth - hence the 'computer interface' of belief.

[Hojo]

@Natasha Tori Maru Yes now we already know how to survive and can go back to not knowing.

Edited July 8 by Hojo

[aurum]

1 minute ago, Hojo said:

@aurum 

So it can be not how I perceive it?

No, your perception is 100% reality. You can just still be self-deceived.

Both are true.

Your self-deception is ontologically still reality. But that does mean you're right.

You are self-deceived that your perception of reality is not 100% reality.

[Hojo]

@aurum How can I deceive myself into thinking that my perception of reality is wrong, when you are the one that told me its wrong? The logical conclusion would be that you are wrong and as the king of reality I should tell you you are wrong because you are reality trying to deceive myself.

I am saying my perception is right, you are telling me my perception is wrong, then you are saying its right and I am trying to trick myself into thinking its wrong, when you are the one (reality), telling me my perception is wrong. I dont understand. Are you saying you are wrong?

Edited July 8 by Hojo

[aurum]

17 minutes ago, Hojo said:

How can I deceive myself into thinking that my perception of reality is wrong, when you are the one that told me its wrong?

You were already deceived.

I just pointed it out to you.

17 minutes ago, Hojo said:

The logical conclusion would be that you are wrong and as the king of reality I should tell you you are wrong because you are reality trying to deceive myself.

Being king of reality doesn't mean all your silly beliefs are now correct. Don't get it confused.

[Hojo]

@aurumThose beliefs are part of my perception. You arent believing what you are saying. I understand what you are saying but it contradicts itself. You are saying that when I go near sighted reality is near sighted and when I am far sighted reality is rigid and that I am deceiving myself by saying that one is survival mode and one isnt. Or one exists when the other one is there.

But you are part of my perception if you say that my perception is 100 percent right, then you cant disagree with my beliefs. As my belief systems form my perception of reality.Obviously this statement is not true by the fact that you are disagreeing with me. You are reality saying my perception is 100 percent true and but also not true to me. In both cases you are wrong.

If I am paranoid and feel like people are coming after me reality will be perceived differently by me. It will have a different qualia. You are saying that the ideas of people coming after me is wrong but the qualia of people coming at me is right. But one dosent exist without the other. The idea are the qualia.

One state we are born in one state we are not. One state comes for survival purposes the other happens again when there is nothing to be scared of. We return to this state later in life when we are going to see God soon.

Edited July 8 by Hojo

[aurum]

4 minutes ago, Hojo said:

@aurumThose beliefs are part of my perception.

You're confusing things.

Yes, all beliefs are ontologically true in the sense that that occur in reality and therefore must be.

But that is different from beliefs being "correct". Self-deception still occurs within reality.

Just think about it.

[Hojo]

@aurumWhich way of perception is correct in this case?

Edited July 8 by Hojo

[samijiben]

I know what you mean when I take LSD it is like this — pushed outside of my head, in the Driver's Seat of my experience... Up Front & Center — this is an interactive & highly participatory experience of being in the world — engagement with reality — intimacy and closeness with the "contents" of your experience.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, Hojo said:

@Natasha Tori Maru Yes now we already know how to survive and can go back to not knowing.

However, you will find, that getting back to the 'not knowing' state is virtually impossible.

Your survival methods are like a reflex you cannot control. 

Like your heart beating.

[CARDOZZO]

The map is not the territory 😉

Imagine you are alien: a human being is not a human being. A city is not a city.

The cartography engineer and the map are one.