|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 7, 2024 8:11:09 GMT -5
I'm only asking, how do you explain that we live in an obviously shared world ( physically anyway)? that is in the physical world that you perceive when awake, is created by your subconscious only for your benefit, from the information filtered through your beliefs, that it gathers from all the other participants in the physical reality framework that it temporarily associates with, the one that "resonates" the closest with, from the endless number of possible versions that exist, and with which potentially it can and dynamically does associate. In my opinion, what seems obvious to you is a distortion: like the Sun traveling on a sky above a flat Earth. Your question is irrelevant to my understanding of reality. If I experienced a situation as you suggested, while dreaming or awake, I would intuitively interpret it as deeply as I can, to understand what in my beliefs, emotions, and expectations caused me to experienced that. I'd draw then some knowledge and guidance from it, new, confirming, or differentiating. The outcome of that situation (while dreaming or awake) would gauge my ability to deal with negative suggestions. A more positive outcome would be a better grade for me than a less negative outcome. For example (apolitically) the failed attempt at Trump's life: that was caused only by his beliefs, emotions, and expectations; by nothing else. The relatively benign outcome for him, shows that his ability to deal with negative suggestions is quite high. This correlates with other pieces of information about him, bits and pieces form various commentaries. So we do at least exist in a physical reality framework. If you have to consider all that every time you come to a traffic light, you'll never get anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 7, 2024 12:28:27 GMT -5
Everything that is in the physical world that you perceive when awake, is created by your subconscious only for your benefit, from the information filtered through your beliefs, that it gathers from all the other participants in the physical reality framework that it temporarily associates with, the one that "resonates" the closest with, from the endless number of possible versions that exist, and with which potentially it can and dynamically does associate. In my opinion, what seems obvious to you is a distortion: like the Sun traveling on a sky above a flat Earth. Your question is irrelevant to my understanding of reality. If I experienced a situation as you suggested, while dreaming or awake, I would intuitively interpret it as deeply as I can, to understand what in my beliefs, emotions, and expectations caused me to experienced that. I'd draw then some knowledge and guidance from it, new, confirming, or differentiating. The outcome of that situation (while dreaming or awake) would gauge my ability to deal with negative suggestions. A more positive outcome would be a better grade for me than a less negative outcome. For example (apolitically) the failed attempt at Trump's life: that was caused only by his beliefs, emotions, and expectations; by nothing else. The relatively benign outcome for him, shows that his ability to deal with negative suggestions is quite high. This correlates with other pieces of information about him, bits and pieces form various commentaries. So we do at least exist in a physical reality framework. If you have to consider all that every time you come to a traffic light, you'll never get anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 7, 2024 13:09:26 GMT -5
I'm only asking, how do you explain that we live in an obviously shared world ( physically anyway)? that is in the physical world that you perceive when awake, is created by your subconscious only for your benefit, from the information filtered through your beliefs, that it gathers from all the other participants in the physical reality framework that it temporarily associates with, the one that "resonates" the closest with, from the endless number of possible versions that exist, and with which potentially it can and dynamically does associate. .. Again, not to sound like a broken down record player here, you continue to assert your subjective beliefs to be true that supersedes over and above another's. I fail to understand why you continue to do this when all there is, are subjective beliefs had that can differ from one to another. I presume there isn't anyones subjective beliefs that are more truer than another's. Unless you believe that to be true, based upon your subjective understandings.? Perhaps you can clarify. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 7, 2024 13:33:07 GMT -5
Everything that is in the physical world that you perceive when awake, is created by your subconscious only for your benefit, from the information filtered through your beliefs, that it gathers from all the other participants in the physical reality framework that it temporarily associates with, the one that "resonates" the closest with, from the endless number of possible versions that exist, and with which potentially it can and dynamically does associate. .. Again, not to sound like a broken down record player here, you continue to assert your subjective beliefs to be true that supersedes over and above another's. I fail to understand why you continue to do this when all there is, are subjective beliefs had that can differ from one to another. I presume there isn't anyones subjective beliefs that are more truer than another's. Unless you believe that to be true, based upon your subjective understandings.? Perhaps you can clarify. is a misunderstanding. I don't "assert my beliefs to be true". I share them, but I don't argue them. I don't pretend to know the truth; I actually believe that truth is infinite, hence can't ever be fully comprehended. Surely some have more distorted beliefs than others. We aren't all at the dame level of development. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 7, 2024 13:40:48 GMT -5
.. Again, not to sound like a broken down record player here, you continue to assert your subjective beliefs to be true that supersedes over and above another's. I fail to understand why you continue to do this when all there is, are subjective beliefs had that can differ from one to another. I presume there isn't anyones subjective beliefs that are more truer than another's. Unless you believe that to be true, based upon your subjective understandings.? Perhaps you can clarify. is a misunderstanding. I don't "assert my beliefs to be true". I share them, but I don't argue them. I don't pretend to know the truth; I actually believe that truth is infinite, hence can't ever be fully comprehended. Surely some have more distorted beliefs than others. We aren't all at the dame level of development. It really doesn't come across that way, one doesn't have to argue one's subjective beliefs in order to put them across as being more true than another's. People with a distorted belief as you put is only distorted based upon your subjective understandings and beliefs. Who is to say that someone's distorted beliefs are more accurate than your distorted beliefs. You see what is regarded as distorted is based upon your subjective beliefs aren't they. This is why your premises doesn't make any sense to me. There are either subjective beliefs that are not anymore truer than another's or there are. That's it. There is no comprise. |
|
|
|
Post by inavalan on Sept 7, 2024 14:31:01 GMT -5
That is a misunderstanding. I don't "assert my beliefs to be true". I share them, but I don't argue them. I don't pretend to know the truth; I actually believe that truth is infinite, hence can't ever be fully comprehended. Surely some have more distorted beliefs than others. We aren't all at the dame level of development. It really doesn't come across that way, one doesn't have to argue one's subjective beliefs in order to put them across as being more true than another's. People with a distorted belief as you put is only distorted based upon your subjective understandings and beliefs. Who is to say that someone's distorted beliefs are more accurate than your distorted beliefs. You see what is regarded as distorted is based upon your subjective beliefs aren't they. This is why your premises doesn't make any sense to me. There are either subjective beliefs that are not anymore truer than another's or there are. That's it. There is no comprise. I will sign off from this argument, as it is of no use to me, and it seems to be of no use to you either. Have a nice weekend! |
|
|
|
Post by Gopal on Sept 7, 2024 21:30:53 GMT -5
It really doesn't come across that way, one doesn't have to argue one's subjective beliefs in order to put them across as being more true than another's. People with a distorted belief as you put is only distorted based upon your subjective understandings and beliefs. Who is to say that someone's distorted beliefs are more accurate than your distorted beliefs. You see what is regarded as distorted is based upon your subjective beliefs aren't they. This is why your premises doesn't make any sense to me. There are either subjective beliefs that are not anymore truer than another's or there are. That's it. There is no comprise. I will sign off from this argument, as it is of no use to me, and it seems to be of no use to you either. Have a nice weekend! That’s why I left after a few arguments. I anticipated this outcome. Tenka has a way of pushing people into situations where it’s impossible to argue with him anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 8, 2024 2:50:06 GMT -5
It really doesn't come across that way, one doesn't have to argue one's subjective beliefs in order to put them across as being more true than another's. People with a distorted belief as you put is only distorted based upon your subjective understandings and beliefs. Who is to say that someone's distorted beliefs are more accurate than your distorted beliefs. You see what is regarded as distorted is based upon your subjective beliefs aren't they. This is why your premises doesn't make any sense to me. There are either subjective beliefs that are not anymore truer than another's or there are. That's it. There is no comprise. I will sign off from this argument, as it is of no use to me, and it seems to be of no use to you either. Have a nice weekend! Well for the record I am not arguing with you, that's just your opinion. I just question your beliefs when there seems to be inconsistencies in your behaviour. What you subjectively perceive as being distortion is based upon your subjectivity isn't it. This is a basic reflection of your belief. This is how it works, I think similar to Gopal, you say things but they don't add up at times and then avoid straightforward questions. Butt even in the avoidance it doesn't seem to stop peeps carrying on with the same behaviour and exercising the same premises. This is why I continue to question why you continue to express yourself as you do. If me picking out these things is no use to you then so be it, I just see things people write here on a public forum and engage or not. Peeps speaking about reality and how they think it is for me is open to questioning don't you think? Maybe peeps should put a foot note at the end of their posts saying 'what I have just said isn't open for questioning'. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 8, 2024 2:54:35 GMT -5
I will sign off from this argument, as it is of no use to me, and it seems to be of no use to you either. Have a nice weekend! That’s why I left after a few arguments. I anticipated this outcome. Tenka has a way of pushing people into situations where it’s impossible to argue with him anymore. Most have witnessed that you don't answer straightforward questions. Again, same as inavalan you see straightforward questions put forward as being argumentative when all that is happening is questions being asked. How on earth can straightforward questions end up with people refusing to answer and get defensive and make out that I am the aggressor. Kan't peeps just take ownership that what they say doesn't add up at times or that their behaviour doesn't match their beliefs? |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Sept 8, 2024 3:10:32 GMT -5
.. For sure, that's why I said to laffy, things come up when you are ready to deal with things, somethings come up from different incarnations. They never go away permanently, they just get buried to certain degrees. Sometimes peeps seem totally ignorant of things, sometimes one knows something isn't right but can't for the life of them know what it is and live with it for the rest of their days. Some get help from therapists, some like myself work it out for themselves. Nevertheless once one has put the personal traits aside one returns to them and this is where one has to live with whatever one has come to terms with or not, resolved or not. So the abused has to integrate the experience of abuse with their abuser at the kitchen table. It's a bit like those that have experienced what they are beyond the self and the mind and the world to then be aware of it again. Some disassociate to certain degrees, some integrate all things as what you are etc .. I'm an integrate all as you are kinda guy myself, and one may touch on the infinite outpouring of love, yet attention will return to what needs it, and things that get tied up in knots can unwind in their own time because you are just as you are without desire that you should be otherwise. Well there's the golden ticket. Attention does return to wherever that is and awareness and attention go hand in hand. So it doesn't matter how many dreamlike premises one potentially has and how many understandings had of no-one is here and the world is an illusion for examples sake when one finds their attentional awareness here and now. One keeps returning to this point regardless. So the one that can put aside self in meditation and transcend their worldly traumas and the feelings of abuse eventually return back to a point where the self is and world is. This is a point worth thinking about as to why that is. It's like a magnetic pull back to a point in reality. |
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Sept 8, 2024 3:27:39 GMT -5
I'm an integrate all as you are kinda guy myself, and one may touch on the infinite outpouring of love, yet attention will return to what needs it, and things that get tied up in knots can unwind in their own time because you are just as you are without desire that you should be otherwise. Well there's the golden ticket. Attention does return to wherever that is and awareness and attention go hand in hand. So it doesn't matter how many dreamlike premises one potentially has and how many understandings had of no-one is here and the world is an illusion for examples sake when one finds their attentional awareness here and now. One keeps returning to this point regardless. So the one that can put aside self in meditation and transcend their worldly traumas and the feelings of abuse eventually return back to a point where the self is and world is. This is a point worth thinking about as to why that is. It's like a magnetic pull back to a point in reality.What does this word mean? |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 8, 2024 4:45:26 GMT -5
I'm an integrate all as you are kinda guy myself, and one may touch on the infinite outpouring of love, yet attention will return to what needs it, and things that get tied up in knots can unwind in their own time because you are just as you are without desire that you should be otherwise. Well there's the golden ticket. Attention does return to wherever that is and awareness and attention go hand in hand. So it doesn't matter how many dreamlike premises one potentially has and how many understandings had of no-one is here and the world is an illusion for examples sake when one finds their attentional awareness here and now. One keeps returning to this point regardless. So the one that can put aside self in meditation and transcend their worldly traumas and the feelings of abuse eventually return back to a point where the self is and world is. This is a point worth thinking about as to why that is. It's like a magnetic pull back to a point in reality. A premise is essential for logic, and plausible premises are essential for a sound conclusion, so if you can tell me a plausible premise for the conclusion that someone is here I might be convinced, but I'm currently convinced that the common conviction that someone is here is assumed on the following grounds: There is experience; therefore I am. The premise is a given, but does the conclusion necessarily follow? |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Sept 8, 2024 4:56:18 GMT -5
The way I look at the magnet is like gravity that pulls you into a void, but it's behind you and your attention is always looking out in front, so you can't turn around and pay attention to that source, but somehow you suddenly become conscious of it and are like, "Oh, that". However, since your body and mind are not fully resolved, attention is drawn to this life, but it is no longer something of 'mine'.
|
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Sept 8, 2024 7:18:16 GMT -5
Well there's the golden ticket. Attention does return to wherever that is and awareness and attention go hand in hand. So it doesn't matter how many dreamlike premises one potentially has and how many understandings had of no-one is here and the world is an illusion for examples sake when one finds their attentional awareness here and now. One keeps returning to this point regardless. So the one that can put aside self in meditation and transcend their worldly traumas and the feelings of abuse eventually return back to a point where the self is and world is. This is a point worth thinking about as to why that is. It's like a magnetic pull back to a point in reality.What does this word mean? What it takes to be functional. Like when you come to a traffic light, and it's red, you stop. Reality is that which when you quit believing in it, doesn't go away. Philip K D!ck The first obligation, protect the body. (You can't operate, here, without a body). |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Sept 8, 2024 9:03:06 GMT -5
The problem with edicts regarding reality is their slippery nature. Telling people(hahaha-nonexistent people) to stop chasing might as well be telling them to chase stopping chasing. There's quite a bit more to it.
|
|
