Solipsism - You will only have your perspective- forever

[Inliytened1]

1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I'm a Senior California Litigation & Appellate Paralegal (Remote Contract Litigation Support).  

https://www.linkedin.com/in/joseph-maynor-32b526359/

Very nice. I'm a member of your channel and I do admit I need to take some time to listen to your materials but I have listened to you.  Thank you for your service. 

[cetus]

1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I'm a Senior California Litigation & Appellate Paralegal (Remote Contract Litigation Support).  

https://www.linkedin.com/in/joseph-maynor-32b526359/

Have any experience with H.O. ins. co. that don't want to pay up after a flood? They send a remediation crew out to do the tear out. But they are giving me the run around on the build back. And I'm about ready to sue their ass.

[cetus]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

I knew this was coming lol.  This is my life.

That's why auto mechanics never mention what they do for a living.

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This is probably for the best.  

Why is that?

[cetus]

@Joseph Maynor If you ever need advice on the structure of your home see me first.

[Inliytened1]

7 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I'm not pushing myself on anyone.  I'm just sharing.

Ok. Well maybe a podcast is in store.  You need to maybe shake things up a bit  imo

 Imo

[Inliytened1]

4 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

We should definitely do an Actualized meetup IMO.  That would be fun.

I misread your post for the record  

[Inliytened1]

2 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:

You wanted to try a podcast with me as I recall.

Yea I think we should.  I'll reach out. 

Edited 15 hours ago by Inliytened1

[Willy Phallicus]

16 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Solipsism cannot be realised in any direct way.

Its a direct peak experience wherein all doubt is removed.

The trouble comes when you try explaining it or when you explain it and the dream characters get bent.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Just now, Willy Phallicus said:

Its a direct peak experience wherein all doubt is removed.

The psychological certainty of an experience is not the same thing as evidence that the experience accurately represents reality.

[Willy Phallicus]

I think most half way enlightened folk would agree that there will never be any scientific evidence presented to the external world in the English language to concisely explain the metaphysical and paradoxical that would convince people to stop doubting the infinite power of God and God's completely obvious solipsistic nature to those with the eyes to see.  You hear it all the time even from those who would claim to know Him (aka You) - God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent but despite his infinite power, the dude just can't pull off solipsism and this is the one area where the humans got the Almighty beat and know better.  I think its more of a case of them not being in on the cosmic joke but whatever you need to tell yourself is fine by me.

I guess that's why Jesus said the kingdom of heaven is inside you and every guru points you inward.

"No one can tell you you're in love, you just know it."

Its not a coincidence you can't prove it either.  

I call it Gnosis.  Know Thyself. You remember. Its direct knowledge of who, what, where, why and how the miracle that is I Am perpetuates itself.  Key word being Knowledge.  One of the first things you remember is that you're all alone despite appearances.

Many are chosen but few are called.

Edited 12 hours ago by Willy Phallicus

[Nercohype]

I don't really agree with solipsism.

 

To me, it isn't that only my consciousness exists. I think there is one fundamental consciousness that expresses itself through many different minds and psyches. Our personalities, memories, and psychological structures are different, but the underlying awareness is shared.

When I look into someone's eyes, I don't feel like I'm looking at an empty object or a figment of my imagination. I experience the presence of another conscious being. I can't prove that philosophically, but it's a real experience for me. So while I agree that we can never step outside our own perspective and see reality from some completely objective "behind the scenes" viewpoint, I don't think that means other consciousnesses don't exist. To me, it means our access to reality is always through experience not that everyone else is imaginary! 

[LordFall]

6 minutes ago, Nercohype said:

I don't really agree with solipsism.

 

To me, it isn't that only my consciousness exists. I think there is one fundamental consciousness that expresses itself through many different minds and psyches. Our personalities, memories, and psychological structures are different, but the underlying awareness is shared.

When I look into someone's eyes, I don't feel like I'm looking at an empty object or a figment of my imagination. I experience the presence of another conscious being. I can't prove that philosophically, but it's a real experience for me. So while I agree that we can never step outside our own perspective and see reality from some completely objective "behind the scenes" viewpoint, I don't think that means other consciousnesses don't exist. To me, it means our access to reality is always through experience not that everyone else is imaginary! 

Well obviously, I don't understand why a lot of people here pretend otherwise. It's such a strange point like who do they think they're talking to on an internet forum of all places? 

When I feel at highest consciousness it's like my consciousness flows into others and it's a seemless exchange but that doesn't invalidate other beings. It doesn't have any logical sense. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

We may have directly experienced the absence of distinctions between self and world, or the immediacy of experience itself.

But the conclusion 'only my mind exists' is still a conceptual interpretation layered onto that experience.

 

[Inliytened1]

7 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

We may have directly experienced the absence of distinctions between self and world, or the immediacy of experience itself.

But the conclusion 'only my mind exists' is still a conceptual interpretation layered onto that experience.

 

Its very trippy to think that you will never see "objective reality" no matter how you slice it.  Ever.  But we ALL just assume it exists.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Just now, Inliytened1 said:

Its very trippy to think that you will never see "objective reality" no matter how you slice it.  Ever.  But we ALL just assume it exists.  

How the fuck can I even escape concept?!?!?!

I feel like claiming I can would be dishonest

[LordFall]

21 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Its very trippy to think that you will never see "objective reality" no matter how you slice it.  Ever.  But we ALL just assume it exists.  

You are seeing objective reality, you are just perceiving it subjectively. It does exist, it's actually the only thing that exists. We are how objective reality experiences itself locally.

Saying we can't experience the objective because we translate it into our terms is like saying you can't hear music because you use your ears to listen to it and ears can only translate vibration, it's a bit silly. 

[Inliytened1]

12 minutes ago, LordFall said:

You are seeing objective reality, you are just perceiving it subjectively. It does exist, it's actually the only thing that exists. We are how objective reality experiences itself locally.

Saying we can't experience the objective because we translate it into our terms is like saying you can't hear music because you use your ears to listen to it and ears can only translate vibration, it's a bit silly. 

Yes that's true but pure objectivity only exists as pure experience itself - like if you were to relieve yourself now of the "you" there would be raw experience there.  No experiencer.  I'm not talking about that I'm talking about what we all assume exists beyond our field of perception.  For example it appears that you are in this bubble now looking out..but all you can see is what your perception limits you to. You assume there is stuff beyond your perception.  That exists independently of your perceptions.  But of course notice that all of this has been assumed because in order to do that you had to accept by default that perception itself was real. 

Edited 9 hours ago by Inliytened1

[LordFall]

If a server hosts this forum while you're asleep, it is actively processing data, executing code, and drawing power. You don't have to 'assume' it exists; you can measure its output, audit its logs, and test its uptime. Similarly with reality. 

Redefining basic causality as an 'unproven assumption' just because you aren't looking at it is a weird idea IMO.

Edited 9 hours ago by LordFall

[Inliytened1]

2 minutes ago, LordFall said:

If a server hosts this forum while you're asleep, it is actively processing data, executing code, and drawing power. You don't have to 'assume' it exists; you can measure its output, audit its logs, and test its uptime. Similarly with reality. 

Redefining basic causality as an 'unproven assumption' just because you aren't looking at it is a weird idea IMO.

The whole trick to this if God were designing this thing with no downtime.  Why would you actually need the server to actually run while you were asleep.  All you actually need is the output of data you mentioned. You don't need it to actually do it.  All you would need would be the output.  Solipsism suggests just that.