More than one person is not required to make reality.
More than one person is what makes reality interesting.
Totally different things.
well i can agree with that. but i shudder to think how utterly devoid of interest any single person reality would be. but then i don’t need to shudder, for it is certainly is not the case.
Well Grizzly Adams, some monks, and many others in the word (including the guy who lives next door to me right now who only comes out of his cave-like house once a week to go shopping … see picture below … all his windows all the way around are boarded or shuttered) apparently disagree with your personal shudder.
I personally love playing with people, especially with people on the leading edge (so I don’t know why you directed that video above at me) … but your idea that people (plural) are required, or even naturally desired, for anything simply does not obtain … you shouldn’t generalize that way – to others.
I suspect that reality is something different other than what one makes.
Well let’s see you provide any evidence to that. All the actual evidence I can find says the opposite. Only tradition and traditional habits of thought seem to support what you say there … not actual evidence.
No evidence to the contrary either! Just my suspicion. Anectdotal evidence
has an “I’m right” component hard to resist for true believers. Nobody is willing to put the scientific method into the claims. How would one do that anyway. 7.13 billion world population & everybody makes their own reality – then too most of them can stand on the ground & say hmmmm…… that’s pretty real.
The challenge you pontificators face is arriving at a definition of the word reality
which is NOT #mungeworthy
Most people munge their senses with the perceptual with the mind with ….. for theirs & focus elsewhere between themselves & others.
okay i fixed the misdirection
perhaps multiple beings is not “required” but it does seem to be the situation that obtains. it is the situation which is given to us when we are bornn. notwistanding that some people keep insisting that it is a choice that we can just make up or not.
it might be interesting to grasp why you brought it up in the context from which this was forked. i still can’t figure why you laughed about a possibility of not having all these different lives running around in that context.
Anyway, I arrived on the Earth & it was already made.
The simple definition “Reality is your experience of it”
is not a munge and cannot be munged. No matter how you take it, from what direction or perspective, it still means the same thing.
So there you go. Challenge accepted and met elegantly!
How do you know? What is your evidence? If your reality is your experience of it, and you are always generating your experience now, then the Earth would be there now … which does not prove it was already there or not. You would be experiencing it complete and whole either way.
It is empty & meaningless & just serves up your Ego on a silver platter to pontificate on it. #juice off
Your sense of proof & evidence serves only you – no need to continue the discussion.
Nice little cop out you did there. Enjoy your contentless shitting.
Actually, it is very clear. It can be used to test and verify anything to determine if it is reality or not. It can also be used to predict what reality will be as well as how to affect reality. It is a very comprehensive definition. I challenge you to come up with one more grounded and usable.
Mind up your own ass, dude . No wonder you are always talking about shitting.
Why would I want to consider continuing your #AlreadyAlwaysArguing . Talk to yourself you will always find a willing listener & sometimes agreement.
“Reality is your experience of it” is very similar to Descartes 17th century "I think, therefore I am" both can work as definitions for me.
Kinda as enlightening as “That Which is, IS!”
#btw another word for “reality”, the way nathan
is using it here, is “life” … as in, “Hey, get a life”. Try it out … pick any sentence that rings true to you that uses the word #reality in the sense in which nathan uses that word, and substitute the word #life in that sentence and see if it does not say the same thing and ring just as true. For example, “Our reality is our life”.
As a matter of fact, if you find a sentence that changes its true meaning to you with that substitution, let me know. That might just be teasing out a new distinction
Language and Objective Reality
4:31 When we look into it more thoroughly, we see that all this language-intellect has less substance than a burp. The whole domain is ethereal and has no substance whatsoever, and yet it dominates our experience and overlays our entire perception of the objective world. When we make a distinction of a physical “reality,” we consider it to be outside of concept, intellect, and language. This is the distinction or experience that we refer to as objective—unalterable by mind, and independent of our beliefs, labels, or even our ability to perceive it. Although we intellectually understand that our experience of this “world” is not the same as the world itself, we still assume that the way we interpret what we perceive is what’s actually there.
Ralston, Peter. The Genius of Being: Contemplating the Profound Intelligence of Existence (Kindle Locations 1144-1150). North Atlantic Books. Kindle Edition.
Well, for example, one lives their life, that is making a life. Some people even frame that same thought as “i am making my way in the world”.
We have to use the words in the same aspect and context to be able to communicate with them.
i too arrived on the Earth and much of my life was apparently already made up to be “yada yada yada”. That was the #reality in which i grew up. The point of my particular life has been to stand on that which was given and go beyond it. Else #wtf is the use of the whole bloody experience.
Whatever you want to call it with language, reality, life, experience, ….. is still empty & meaningless so #MakeShitUp – enjoy!
Well yeah, if your words, if your language, is not bound tightly to what #PR calls here “physical reality”, then it is in fact “substance less and no better than a burp”.
And i also agree with #PR here the way he considers “physical reality” objective … it is that which we can, and do, #share. Unlike all that subjective #reality that is buried deep inside ourselves. Which is not to say that our subjective spiritual life is not paramont to us … rather if it is not expressed so that other may share it, then it is best kept secret and not traded out here like gold coins.
Your context & distinction is different – you have the #share obsession. XOR maybe nothing is shareable except that which is in words & language. xor maybe not .
well my life is not empty …
it is meaningful in relationship to the background of that with which i #share.
And yes, thank you, i do enjoy it.
you should speak for yourself here dear brother.
It is not empty & meaningless in that you #MakeShitUp … perhaps someone else will make one for you like religions, politics etc.
BUT (XOR) you won’t find the meaning objectively!
nope i am not saying that mark. in fact words themselve are the hardest thing to share just in and of themselves. to actually share (to bind language and words) we must go through our senses (or once removed from senses through examples)
← for example here is #MtRainier
so i say: we share, just exactly as #PR said, through objective (physical reality)
. it is those agreements (those #shared #associations) that make all the difference. They are what changes the edges upon which we crawl and #share. I do not think my context & distinction is different than is #PR’s . #thanks → mark
for quoting it here. Nowwistanding that your interpretation is different than mine … and me thinks that of #PR’s himself.
I am referring specifically to this …
When we make a distinction of a physical “reality,” we consider it to be outside of concept, intellect, and language. This is the distinction or experience that we refer to as objective—unalterable by mind, and independent of our beliefs, labels, or even our ability to perceive it.
XOR you haven’t read what he wrote beyond my quote., Try it!, bro.
and that transacton does not move things along.
yep writing our story … making up our beliefs … living our lives objectively with others is what makes is not “empty and meaningless”.
, #aug that into #MakeShirtUp all you want … it won’t change it for me … i love it
Ego- selfie intrusion got you panties in a twist #PantyMasterTwistyInspector says so.
Censor what I say – Go Fuck Yourself!
talk to yourself too. Adios! You read my stuff just long enough to trigger your own box of goodies.
just because objective reality xor physical reality is
outside the mind does not mean it is shareable. Language – the section my quotes are from – muddies the waters of shareable.
– how else can anyone share without language of some kind? languages include sounds, gestures & a bunch of stuff.
… language is part of the process of #sharing
back to the topic of the thought … if we didn’t have all these disparate and different lives … if there were just one … then we wouln’t need it at all
need to resolve some of the empty pointers.
which empty pointers do you refer?
Funny thingy when I read Peter Ralston of Cheng Hsin & his latest trilogy clarity bubbles up – the English is correct & eventually I grock what he is saying – some of his distinctions are very subtle too. I don’t have that experience when I come back here.
i have similar experiences daily. in one context i experience extreme clarity, then in another that clarity gets muddied, different aspects emerging. most dramatically that happens to me between dream-to-waking-reality, versus when i move in the world and even try to bring some of the former into the latter here at fbi.
now i could call that “context jumping” and still think it is similar to nathan
’s #MultiVerse jumping. i mentioned that to him the other day in another context and he laughed and wondered how i even functoned. i say get used to it, the meaning and #reality of each different context comes with how you #connect it up relationally to the backgroud forming that context … those who’s background never changes will never experience it … once i allow the background to change, and not get stressed out over it, it becomes kind of fun
XOR – Just do it!
Language is unnecessary unless you just don’t.
for some unnecessary bit of language to help focus upon what it is that us to be done.
If you are truly following your YES, your excitement, that part will be quite automatic. Try it, you’ll see.
Such is your Island, nathan
, your circus, your monkeys. Affirmation
was kinda an 80’s rage.
whereas today in the age of #Trump …
fighting and bullying and shitteing and lording it over others is the #RWG rage of the day
… in your demented mind only seth
& the people & fake news anti-trumpiteers who are programming your mind with memes.
– everyone needs a good sleeve-job once in a while just to see how well the shirt fits.
In every age “the rage” is what is being discovered and fine tuned on the leading edge. In the next age it has become more integrated so it is no longer up front in everyone’s consciousness.
Evolution happens. One can notice what is being evolved right now by what is “the rage” and present in most peoples consciousness … and with deeper reflection, one can see how the rages of the past are now part of the culture and habits and genetic coding of the present.
Or, one can miss all that evolution and just bobble along, a leaf in the current of the big stream of life.
Neither is right or wrong … there is just you.
XOR like you nathan
(just you? xor whomsoever you are channeling!) – spout generalizations & think you have actually said something besides try to spread more trance
Well, that’s where you bobble. I was giving you a window into a larger perspective, in case you wanted to bobble there. You are welcome to bobble where you want.