Solipsism Question - Are Dreams Identical To This Right Now?

[Max1993]

If I was a dream character (for you) that was identical to a nightly dream character, I would lie and claim that I am real and can see and as a dream character my existence does not go beyond the appearance of these words. From my perspective now, I am not lying to you I truly see a dusty keyboard as I am typing this so I promise I am not trying to deceive you lol, there are things I can see that you cannot. So what is the difference between "me" and a nightly dream character specifically for you? A nightly dream character would deceive you but I am telling you the truth about my visual field. From your solipsistic perspective, which I happen to agree with, would I be identical to a nightly dream character for you or am I bit different for you and why? 

I know this has been discussed a lot but I was interested in a fresh perspective. 

Edited Wednesday at 04:56 PM by Max1993
typo

[Mellowmarsh]

On 15/09/2026 at 6:43 PM, Max1993 said:

From my perspective now, I am not lying to you I truly see a dusty keyboard as I am typing this so I promise I am not trying to deceive you lol, there are things I can see that you cannot

From the perspective of the character known as Max1993,  nothing else is happening. 
 

[Carl-Richard]

Nightly dream characters might be real. Mic drop.

People with dissociative identity disorder report having different alters being present as dream characters in the same dream, and afterwards, each alter reports experiencing that dream from different perspectives (each alter reports this when the person is awake and they're currently in control of the person). So who knows: maybe all dream characters are dissociated alters?

The difference between nightly dream beings and normal beings is the latter seem more consistent than the former (you see them more regularly and their behavior seems to have some long-term consistency / coherence over time). But perhaps nightly dreams could be a bit like sitting on a train and getting off at a station for a few minutes then jumping on the train again. The relative shifting and short-lasting nature of the experience doesn't necessarily prove that the place you're visiting is not real (or that the characters within it are not real). It could be just that you're on a short visit.

And if the characters in the nightly dreams look quite exactly like characters in "real" waking life (they look like waking, breathing, walking, talking humans), what other justification do you have to call them not real? If you ignore materialist fantasies like "they're inside your brain", I don't see many options.

Edited yesterday at 10:39 AM by Carl-Richard

[JoshB]

@Max1993 reality is an infinite mind.

Because this Mind is infinite, its total / absolute. This means its everything.

Notice that there can only be 1 everything. Because if there was something outside of everything it wouldnt be everything. 

This also means that any difference between anything is a relative imagined distinction. Because from the absolute pov the substance of everything is mind. 

Now you can deconstruct every aspect of experience until all that remains is pure conciousness. Conciousness devoid of any quality or substance. Along with that realization you will also realize there is no difference between something and nothing. 

You will also realize there never was a human self / body/ mind. Because again these are all imaginary distinctions that collapse. 

Now pertaining back to your question. From the absolute awakened pov, there is no difference between a nightly dream character or day dreamed character and yourself. They are all just as imaginary.

Whatever Conciousness is consciously imagining is the only thing that exists. So if you imagine a day dream character isnt "real" that is true. If you imagine a night time character is real that becomes true. 

Because you are imagining everything and everyone NO ONE not even Leo can answer the question of what is real.

Because everyone and their answers are second order to your mind and imaginary process. Their answers are something you creating. 

Its your dream, unlock the door to infinity and dream the best dream possible. We are dealing with the actuality of being able to imagine anything. 

 

Edited yesterday at 07:52 AM by JoshB

[JoshB]

Leo is one step removed from you being God 

[Max1993]

@Mellowmarsh So is your character "Mellowmarsh" happening simultaneously with me or is it more linear, like I would have to live your life and then mine? Closer to one life at a time? 

[Max1993]

@Carl-Richard Thank you, that's a cool new perspective. My intuition says that its about seeing how thoughts and happenings are not decided by us so we are not a real self in the first place. If thoughts just happen, the movie is playing without an ego in the first place. So how can there be others if the self isn't even real. Maybe there is no "way" that it is occurring, it is THAT dreamlike. 

[Joseph Maynor]

When I had this insight on psychedelics I did not feel like I was the small self at all, but then again it was within the context of that trip.  When I came down, everything changed.  

[Max1993]

@JoshB Thank you, I feel like I am getting closer. If the self can be deconstructed out of existence what does that say about others sort of thing. If everything is one, I would have your experience and then have my experience in a linear fashion, so even though you are just an appearance now at least at some point "I" was real enough as "you". Again though, if thoughts just happen without anyone deciding or doing, there is no decider or doer in the first place, or no self in the first place, so that dissolves others? Did their field of view ever happen? I want to interact with them as if they have a field of view deep down. 

[Max1993]

@Joseph Maynor Yeah, actually understanding the self helps to understand others it seems. 

[Yimpa]

You can become directly conscious that Other = You and You = Infinity.

Don’t underestimate a 10 minute peak experience of this. It’ll be the most profound 10 minutes of you life. Even if you’ve had this experience before. You will experience Love/Death in radically new ways that will catch you off guard, in the best way possible.

[Yimpa]

13 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

When I had this insight on psychedelics I did not feel like I was the small self at all, but then again it was within the context of that trip.  When I came down, everything changed.  

I was looking directly at God. And God recognized me too.

[Joseph Maynor]

8 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

I was looking directly at God. And God recognized me too.

The question is who was God?  It is not even a question.  

[Carl-Richard]

45 minutes ago, Max1993 said:

@Carl-Richard Thank you, that's a cool new perspective. My intuition says that its about seeing how thoughts and happenings are not decided by us so we are not a real self in the first place. If thoughts just happen, the movie is playing without an ego in the first place. So how can there be others if the self isn't even real. Maybe there is no "way" that it is occurring, it is THAT dreamlike. 

I think basically all questions about solipsism on this forum evaporate when you realize it's a model, a conceptual framework, and not absolute. People have a misplaced importance to it, like it's some undeniable metaphysical given. It's not. The absolute is reality is One. Saying anything else becomes a way for the mind to confuse model with reality.

If you want to start talking about characters within the One, you're presupposing separation. If you want to talk about "happenings" (one happening vs another), you're presupposing time. And if there is a happening over here and over there, you're presupposing space. You can talk about these things, but you're already way inside model making, inside the relative.

And then you can start to ask "what is the best model?". What is the best model for explaining or understanding what is happening granted separation, time and space? That's what solipsism (which is a bad model in this case if you ask most people) is about. That's what frameworks like analytical idealism, constitutive panpsychism, or just physicalism/materialism, is about.

Edited 23 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[yetineti]

Yes, everything is identical.

[Mellowmarsh]

13 hours ago, Max1993 said:

@Mellowmarsh So is your character "Mellowmarsh" happening simultaneously with me or is it more linear, like I would have to live your life and then mine? Closer to one life at a time? 

Other characters are formlessly formed appearances, or whatever labeled images you want to call them, that are all just your own perspectives, they’re not any thing other than you, because there is only you happening, which is happening just for you only, and there’s nothing else happening apart from your own perspective, that you are presently aware of. There’s nothing else happening separate from your own perception arena. 

It seems like there’s two characters now forming in your perspective, namely, yours and other, ie: Max & Mellowmarsh. However, there is zero distance separating these two imaged characters, they’re both images being formed and simultaneously appearing in the same one knowing that is you,  from the perspective of you only. 

This knowing you, cannot know itself as other because it’s the only knowing there is, it’s the one knowing that cannot be known because it’s one without a second. One knowing is the ultimate oxymoron insofar as you cannot know the knowing because you are the knowing. And the knowing cannot be inside or outside of itself because there’s simply no division there, except as an artificially created illusory conceptual construct. In other words, a division of an image formed of the imageless is no division at all. 

[JoshB]

14 hours ago, Max1993 said:

@JoshB Thank you, I feel like I am getting closer. If the self can be deconstructed out of existence what does that say about others sort of thing. If everything is one, I would have your experience and then have my experience in a linear fashion, so even though you are just an appearance now at least at some point "I" was real enough as "you". Again though, if thoughts just happen without anyone deciding or doing, there is no decider or doer in the first place, or no self in the first place, so that dissolves others? Did their field of view ever happen? I want to interact with them as if they have a field of view deep down. 

The self isn't deconstructed out of existence, the self is recontextualized as existence itself.

There is only one field of view, YOURS. 

You are seeking a 1st order Absolute Answer while asking relative 2nd order questions

You are over complicating this process of understanding. Focus and contemplate on what is consciousness. You will not be able to understand solipsism without realizing what consciousness is. 

Only Consciousness and Consciousness Alone fully knows and understands what it is. 

Edited 9 hours ago by JoshB