My Latest Solipsistic Insight

[Nemra]

The correct way would be to say that the experiences that parts are having in your own experience (other people) is an imagination on top of your own experience, because your experience is direct.

To say that there are other experiences happening beside your experience is false.

To say that people cannot reflect some experience you might have is also false.

The imagination of other people's experience existing is itself direct as it is happening in your experience. However, what the imagination refers to can never be direct.

Non-direct experiences do not exist the same way as direct experience; they are not actual. The latter is more fundamental.

The problem is that treating non-direct experiences as actual comes from ignoring that you are imagining qualia as non-self-evident to construct the idea of non-direct experiences.

Let's say you are a writer. Do the experiences of the characters you create actually exist? No, you just imagine their experiences as if they are actual.

Edited 16 hours ago by Nemra

[JoshB]

1 hour ago, Nemra said:

The correct way would be to say that the experiences that parts are having in your own experience (other people) is an imagination on top of your own experience, because your experience is direct.

To say that there are other experiences happening beside your experience is false.

To say that people cannot reflect some experience you might have is also false.

The imagination of other people existing is itself direct as it is happening in your experience. However, what the imagination refers to can never be direct.

Non-direct experiences do not exist the same way as direct experience; they are not actual. The latter is more fundamental.

The problem is that treating non-direct experiences as actual comes from ignoring that you are imagining qualia as non-self-evident to construct the idea of non-direct experiences.

Let's say you are a writer. Do the experiences of the characters you create actually exist? No, you just imagine their experiences as if they are actual.

Precisely, Other minds, beings, objects, experiences, etc are all couched within your Absolute Direct Experience.  

But because your consciousness is absolute you have the infinite capacity to imagine anything. So your direct experience could hold another experience indirectly. But only as something you are imagining. 

It's directly indirect so to speak lol

Edited 16 hours ago by JoshB

[JoshB]

@Carl-Richard @Nemra I watched The Dark Knight on DMT and imagined that was a non fictional universe as well as realizing I'm Batman

[Nemra]

5 hours ago, JoshB said:

So your direct experience could hold another experience indirectly. But only as something you are imagining.

Imagination is a wild thing.

I would add that those indirect experiences are less fundamental in their nature than direct experience, because the idea of indirect experience is built on top of your direct experience, even if you imagine that there are experiences out there existing with yours.

But I assume you got what I said.

5 hours ago, JoshB said:

It's directly indirect so to speak lol

🙂

Edited 11 hours ago by Nemra

[JoshB]

8 minutes ago, Nemra said:

Imagination is a wild thing.

I would add that those indirect experiences are less fundamental in their nature than direct experience, because the idea of indirect experience is built on top of your direct experience, even if I imagine that there are experiences out there existing with mine.

But I assume you got what I said.

🙂

@Nemra Fundamentally indirect experience is made out of direct experience [;

direct experience can be molded into indirect

Self can be molded into other 

Edited 15 hours ago by JoshB

[Leo Gura]

Indirect experience is like a square circle.

[Nemra]

8 hours ago, JoshB said:

@Nemra Fundamentally indirect experience is made out of direct experience [;

Yeah.

It is literally the act of copying the characteristics of your own experience and attaching it to some sensory phenomenon while imagining the experience that sensory phenomenon is having based entirely on what you have directly perceived over the years.

Edited 7 hours ago by Nemra

[Nemra]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Indirect experience is like a square circle.

Great example! 😆

Edited 15 hours ago by Nemra

[Willy Phallicus]

9 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Or they realize it's completely demented to use the word considering the cultural poisoning of it for centuries.

They got the demented part right its just that they're projecting it onto the solipsist.

Edited 14 hours ago by Willy Phallicus

[Yimpa]

My latest solipsistic insight: I am You

[Carl-Richard]

6 hours ago, Willy Phallicus said:

They got the demented part right its just that they're projecting it onto the solipsist.

So do you have any arguments or are you just going to shitpost?

[Willy Phallicus]

25 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

So do you have any arguments or are you just going to shitpost?

I give what I get.

I don't have an argument.  I have an understanding.  You are God and God is All there is a pretty straightforward fucking argument if there ever was one and it turns out thats what the Truth is so it isn't Willy's argument that absolutely decimates any argument you might claim to have.

You either Know it or you don't.

God/human is not an either/or proposition.  Its both and neither.  Same goes for self and other and every other duality. Depends on where consciousness is projecting from. Ego or Christ. People who have gone beyond choronzon know wtf Im talking about. The word solipsism isn't going to fuck with their gestalt.

If you deny solipsism then you are in denial of God which makes a whole lot of sense since you came here to deny yourself the freedom of being God in the first place.  I am not your problem.

[Carl-Richard]

42 minutes ago, Willy Phallicus said:

If you deny solipsism then you are in denial of God which makes a whole lot of sense since you came here to deny yourself the freedom of being God in the first place.  I am not your problem.

I don't deny being God, I don't deny God is alone, I deny the word "solipsism" is an effective way to communicate your understanding about God. That's what the argument is about. And if you have no arguments about that, we're not discussing the same thing.

[Willy Phallicus]

13 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

I deny the word "solipsism" is an effective way to communicate your understanding about God.

Okay so deny it then.  And? You can deny it all you want.  No one is forcing you to accept the truth or someone else's label for truth.  

Just say you don't like it because that's more accurate.  Its not like the word is antithetical to the whole "lonely God thesis" aka Absolute Truth.

[Carl-Richard]

23 minutes ago, Willy Phallicus said:

Okay so deny it then.  And? You can deny it all you want.  No one is forcing you to accept the truth or someone else's label for truth.  

Just say you don't like it because that's more accurate.  Its not like the word is antithetical to the whole "lonely God thesis" aka Absolute Truth.

I've said exactly why I don't think it's effective (it's a culturally contaminated word). If you have a problem with that argument, you can say what that problem is.

Edited 5 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Willy Phallicus]

17 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

I've said exactly why I don't think it's effective (it's a culturally contaminated word). If you have a problem with that argument, you can say what that problem is.

You don't have an argument, you have a belief system about the word solipsism and its effectiveness which isn't coming off as objective.  You can't reasonably suggest that its problematic when applied to the reality of One mind inventing all other minds.

Im a 100% certain that God and the word solipsism are totally compatible.  In fact, since its just God, God invented the word to help him to describe a state he can achieve - absolute unity of the whole.  One mind experiencing everything and everyone and thats it aka solipsism.

The information is only as good as the people getting it.  If people cant do the math or dont want too then thats their problem, not the words problem.