Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:09:52 GMT -5
Only because light reflects off the silvered glass. If an image of a tree appears in my consciousness that is because I am seeing a real tree in the real outer word with my real eyes. If you disagree prove it is not the case.I don't have to prove anything because I have never seen such a world ever since I open my eyes. Why do you need proof which you have never seen in your life? Why do you assume some kind of magic world? I don't believe you have never seen such a world. You are making up a story which I have the experience of reading. Do you have the experience of writing it? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:10:58 GMT -5
It's not speculation. It's my experience. Tell me why it's wrong. It's not your experience, perceiving is your experience, We both are perceiving the moon, I am saying I am perceiving the moon which is in my perception, that's what we both are perceiving but suddenly you are saying to me that it's coming from outside, how do you know it's coming from outside? You have never seen such a moon in your entire life, then why do you assume such mysterious moon? Because it is my experience. Prove that it is not. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 17, 2016 10:11:05 GMT -5
You are looking through the eye is the speculation but you are looking directly is not the speculation. This is the speculation you and Satch both are having. To say that you have to open your eyes to see the cars coming is not what I would define as speculation. I could perhaps call something like that an experiential or consensus truth. Just as it is an experiential or consensus truth that if you put your hand in a flame, your hand will burn. These are not absolute truths, but they are still true. There are thousands of these types of truths. It IS true that you live in India. It may not be an absolute truth but it is still true in comparison to the statement that you live in Australia. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 17, 2016 10:11:23 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:11:54 GMT -5
I don't have to prove anything because I have never seen such a world ever since I open my eyes. Why do you need proof which you have never seen in your life? Why do you assume some kind of magic world? I don't believe you have never seen such a world. You are making up a story which I have the experience of reading. Do you have the experience of writing it? Yes, you are reading from your appearance, don't you? Let's assume there is a outer world, even if you assume such a case, you are still reading from the image(image inside your brain) of actual(outer), aren't you? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 17, 2016 10:13:08 GMT -5
I interact and respond in my lucid dreams while knowing for a fact that world doesn't exist. That's because it is a 'lucid dream', it's an unusual experience and not the same as the awake state experience. When you eat a juicy orange, there's the taste sensation, there MAY be a story about it, there might be some sense of pleasure and joy. If you're also telling a story about how the world doesn't exist, you've divorced yourself from the direct experience. And here's another point. If in your dream you know the world doesn't exist, what world do you know of, that doesn't exist? Andy, you think you're chasing down something important with Gopal, and now me, but seriously, you're just spinning.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:13:53 GMT -5
It's not your experience, perceiving is your experience, We both are perceiving the moon, I am saying I am perceiving the moon which is in my perception, that's what we both are perceiving but suddenly you are saying to me that it's coming from outside, how do you know it's coming from outside? You have never seen such a moon in your entire life, then why do you assume such mysterious moon? Because it is my experience. Prove that it is not. Why do I have to prove the world which you and I have never seen? Why do I have prove unicorn doesn't exist? So why do I have to prove that your imagined world doesn't exist? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 17, 2016 10:13:56 GMT -5
Come on gopal I'm waiting. What is your proof that the external world is not physical and only exists as an appearance in consciousness. I am not coming to prove to you now that external world doesn't exist, I am saying One single process is happening which we both are interpreting in two different ways, but I am saying that I am not speculating, but you are speculating and creating your own assumed world. We both agree that we both are seeing But I am saying that we are directly seeing and this doesn't include any speculation but when you say it's something coming from outside, you are falling into the speculation,aren't you? Why are you assuming some kind magic world which you have never interacted? Do babies speculate? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:14:26 GMT -5
I don't believe you have never seen such a world. You are making up a story which I have the experience of reading. Do you have the experience of writing it? Yes, you are reading from your appearance, don't you? Let's assume there is a outer world, even if you assume such a case, you are still reading from the image(image inside your bran) of actual(outer), aren't you? No it is not my experience that I am reading an image from my brain. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Sept 17, 2016 10:15:05 GMT -5
Firstly I'm asking gopal a question which you've hijacked and secondly I ain't talking about no pointers. Well, thirdly you're the one responding to me so the complaint about hijacking is just whining and fourthly if you don't think that "appearances in consciousness" doesn't involve a pointing then what you wrote here is pure projection and you've contradicted what you wrote here. Because if "appearances in consciousness" doesn't reference a pointer, then for you it's just intellectual mind-play that you think you can understand on a conceptual level. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:15:31 GMT -5
I am not coming to prove to you now that external world doesn't exist, I am saying One single process is happening which we both are interpreting in two different ways, but I am saying that I am not speculating, but you are speculating and creating your own assumed world. We both agree that we both are seeing But I am saying that we are directly seeing and this doesn't include any speculation but when you say it's something coming from outside, you are falling into the speculation,aren't you? Why are you assuming some kind magic world which you have never interacted? Do babies speculate? Babies doesn't speculate that's what it doesn't know anything the world which you and Satch have built secretly. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 17, 2016 10:15:39 GMT -5
When I say nothing has been said, I mean the conversation has been a bunch of obfuscation and distraction. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 17, 2016 10:16:23 GMT -5
He specifically said that Consciousness builds that individual dream. right, 'individual' is the key word. Asking someone about their nightly dreams just shows that the asker believes in a someone that has nightly dreams lol. He believes the dream is created by Consciousness, appearing to Consciousness and being experienced by Consciousness lol. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:17:22 GMT -5
Yes, you are reading from your appearance, don't you? Let's assume there is a outer world, even if you assume such a case, you are still reading from the image(image inside your bran) of actual(outer), aren't you? No it is not my experience that I am reading an image from my brain. That's what I am saying you are reading from your inner world,right? Let's assume there is a outer world, ok? Where are you seeing the moon? In your inner world or outer world? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2016 10:17:34 GMT -5
Firstly I'm asking gopal a question which you've hijacked and secondly I ain't talking about no pointers. Well, thirdly you're the one responding to me so the complaint about hijacking is just whining and fourthly if you don't think that "appearances in consciousness" doesn't involve a pointing then what you wrote here is pure projection and you've contradicted what you wrote here. Because if "appearances in consciousness" doesn't reference a pointer, then for you it's just intellectual mind-play that you think you can understand. Drama Queen |
|
For instance, this:
