Until last night I was convinced that this is not a simulation. I have been shown otherwise. I saw a lot of things that helped me understand more about spirits and reincarnation but I keep getting these glimpses of reality. This world is a single entity and nothing is actually what it seems. This is a dream and the dream our spirits could agree "works". The big bang never happened. There are no planets or stars. There could be but what I know is that we cannot access them. Using DMT removes the illusion and shows us the "coding" behind it all. I believe there will eventually be a breakthrough where actual reality is reached, can be touched and remembered. I'm going to take another look in 3 days. I definitely have my breakthrough technique down, two pens with CBC and DMT work so well. I've been looking for another way to do it and I don't need to look any further, my setup works perfect.

One very cool thing I saw last night is that my 'pets' that passed away are still here more than I thought. Their spirits merge just as ours do upon death. Just wanted to share that, thought it was cool.

Very cool Dirty T. I'm enjoying it.

Some food for thought: is it not an assumption that there is what we would like to call "reality?" If there is a reality, do we not assume it's "rational." If there is a reality, is it possible it's an amalgam of other, potentially contradictory and disparate realities? If there is a reality and what we experience is not it, then what is our standard, metric, and framework for identifying the "real" reality? Do we not simply have only what seems and not what is?



One love

On the topic of persistence of spirit...

Do you believe there is individuality after death? Or is there only one? Or maybe even a singular one simultaneously conscious of many individual parts?

copied from another thread on the nexus. I think about this all the time....

This is all familiar to The Allegory of the Cave, Descarte's skeptical propositions (what if something is playing a trick on us and fooling our minds), and the "Brain in a Vat Theory," as well as certain ideas arising from String Theory.

One love

When I have been feeling low, it has been felt comforting to think that this is just a game. Certain visionary experiences have fit very well the concept of illusory nature of reality that Hindus have.

However, the more I have been able to get grip on my own life I have begun to enjoy the game with all it's drama and struggles and not fight against the illusion or try to escape it. Eventually the game will end, but there are lots of cool things you can do, and the more you do work with yourself, the more you can learn to appreciate the beauty of it.

Bis I truly believe that our spirits are persistent. I believe we have multiple spirits and that spirits hang around us. When a host passes the spirits "merge" with consciousness remaining intact. Outside of normal circumstances spirits can become "trapped" but all eventually enter a new host. The absence of memories of previous lives is the physical limitation of these primitive hosts but the ability to pick things up quickly and learn fast is the result of having lived so many lives. The intellect of humans today is no greater than the intellectual power of the Romans, Greeks or Egyptians yet we have made more material progress in the last Century than all 20 precious millennia combined (10 if you are a 'creationist' however I have a narrative that fits both the Bible and Science that revolves around time evolving rather than one or the other has to be right).

I truly got the feeling that this was all an experiment that went horribly sideways and was salvaged as best as we collectively could (we are all one entity, right) and eventually just like the matrix someone will 'break out' and the truth can be revealed. Until then everything is purr speculation but I have these recurring vivid images that are not my own or anything I have ever seen and it's hard for me to believe that it's my imagination. If I take LSD and watch "The Witcher" my mind will probably wander and fill with magic, witches and monsters but if I vape DMT and watch the Witcher I see code, not magic, monsters or witches. It's hard to explain the feeling I got. I know Sunday around 2 am was the stillest my mind has been in a long time and what I experienced is completely unexplainable.

I don't think we'll ever truly understand reality itself. We can only give our "real world user interface" a little upgrade sometimes.

We tend to believe that something is real if there is an actual object that corresponds with the concept of that something.

So then the material world as we know it, should be real, if we would be able to identify an object that corresponds with our concept of an object within the material world.

We often think that finding such an object would be impossible. But i can find such an object of wich i know it actually exists and that corresponds to something in our conceptual framework of the material world: "me".

The problem, i think, is the nature of the correspondance. It doesn't say anything about the true nature of the object. It could be something completely different from our concepts. Maybe even something that contradicts the concept it corresponds to completely.

But isn't that also true, when we do scientific research, wich completely takes place within the phenomenal world?

Would we also be inclined to say that matter isn't real, if experiments with particle accelerators would reveal that particles are not what we think they are?

I don't think so.

So what's the difference then? In both cases we know that there is something that corresponds to our concept of a material object, and that the true nature of it may be completely different from what that material thing seems to be.

But in one case, we would all believe that we've actually discovered something. While in the other case, it seems we've only been playing a semantic game.

It is true that in the case of the particle experiment, we could maybe deduce the link from our experience of material objects to "waves", or "fields", or "information".
But wouldn't that require, for matter to be real, that we should know it completely and there would be no information missing anywhere within the framework?

I don't know.

But i tend to believe, that in both cases, we can only speak of "real" within the context of the framework itself, and anything we can imagine outside of it, will always turn out to be only just an imagination inside of it.

At least for as long as we actually are inside of it ourselves.

So then we would have no choice but believing it's all real, even though it still could be a simulation.

Would that make any sense at all?

Strange phenomenon. One of the recurring visuals I see time after time I saw last nigby on the TV accompanied by the sound I hear when I see it. It was the Netflix special on Black holes. (True story I actually met Stephen Hawking once. It was really cool, I did some work at a 'retreat' home he owned by a lake in a suburb town) I think the black holes may be alive as well as what we are referring to as "dark matter". Non carbon based life. Truth is truly stranger than fiction. This reality is "the blue pill" and DMT is "the red pill" that strips away the illusion. We are still us whether we are comprised of matter or not. We are energy. Our bodies 'radiate' even after we die yet radiation is poison just as we are composed of water yet water miles us as well get without it we can't survive.

I always leaned toward this not being a simulation because if it was there would be obvious hackers but I believe its not that type of simulation. We are all part of a whole and the "whole rules" cannot be broken, in order for the rules to change the whole mush agree. The best way I can describe my concept of how this all works is we are all in a dream. I'm real, you're real, we're all real but we aren't really here or doing what we think we are. As many questions have been answered there are that many more questions that have arisen from the answers I have.

I should probably wait until I'm home on my computer to reply, but discussions involving epistemology, ontology, philosophy of mind, and linguistics really tickle my loins

Wittgenstein speaks a lot in the the Brown and Blue Books as well as the Tractatus about the divide inherent to language and the phenomenal world.

Due to the divide between our conception of the world (even through sense experience) and the phenomenal world itself, we can never be truly objective. Simply trying to add words to describe something moves us away from objectivity, and the closest we get is intersubjective verifiability, with the assumption that whatever most minds subjectively experience is the closest approximation of how the world is. It's statistical. Our senses as they act as mechanisms also move us away from objectivity.

Clarence Darrow said "Chase after the truth like all hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat tails." I feel that one could replace the word truth with objectivity.

Descartes only proved the existence of his mind through the paradoxical act of attempting to deny it; one must exist in some manner to be able to attempt to deny and question their own existence. He was able to suspend conviction of everything else. The problem of other minds still exists. We have to assume that others have a mind because of our indirect evidence and induction of such.

Solipsism: the one thing a mind can be certain of is its own existence (which doesn't say that everything outside the mind does not exist, but that it can't be known in the same manner as the existence of one's own mind can).

Hume raised great questions about etiology, asking things like, is there really cause and effect, or do things simply flow in a common order removed from cause and effect and our minds fill in the rest?

And due to multiplicity of contradictory seeming, we end up in a paradoxical state, which happens to also show our linguistic and intersubjective limits. And when we're honest with ourselves, brings us to, "I don't know."

One love

And before I forget, an assumption we take for granted is reality and existence being rational and that we actually make sense out of it.

I think rationality is the marriage between reason and feelings. Without desire, fear, pleasure or pain, i don't see how there could be (human) rationality. An AI could in this sense not be rational if it would not firstly be programmed with certain goals in mind.

Existence or feelings themselves are in my view not rational. They just are.
There is no reason for them to exist. They could just as well not exist, or exist in a very different way.

But once they existed, dealing with them became innevitable. So i believe that what we call rationality, is the "best" way to navigate the innevitable. Sometimes, logic is the best way. Sometimes it is not, and then the application of logic is irrational.

We have to try to make sense. But failure is innevitable as well. So not to have doubts is very irrational.

But there sometimes is something like a "best bet". Whenever something realy matters to us, like our own survival, or that of our loved ones, we have no choice but to go with that best bet. But given the fact it is still only a best bet, not to always be open to better options, would be deeply irrational.