A new guy and his recent thoughts.

[Orolo]

Hello everyone. Recently I have been trying to reassess some of my basic assumptions. Perhaps out of boredom with the world. At first, this boredom with the mundane led me to hallucinogens like LSD, mushrooms and ayahuasca. These things were, as I saw it at the time, a ticket to a show that was unlike anything I had ever experienced before. The laws of physics were bent before my eyes. Logic and existence took on entirely new forms. Circles became linear, the fabric of the universe itself began to unravel in front of my eyes. Except all that was really happening is that I was hanging out with my friends, giggling and drooling while my brain's ability to process its sensory input was damaged for a time, perhaps forever. When these experiences ended, I would think to myself "Is this what it takes? Is the world so mundane that I have to dose my brain, fooling into believing things that aren't true?". After a while, these experiences lost their luster. Every time I would take something I would know deep down that I was just avoiding things, trying to escape, even if it was only temporary. A few years later, and these experiences, however, left me with a constant doubt. I've heard that symptoms similar to these are catalogued in the DSM for patients with a history of extensive drug use. The doubts I experience are often fundamental (and consistently inconvenient). So, as a result, I can be found daydreaming, often positing many ways in which the fundamental nature of the universe might yet be profound. So I come to you all for your input on questions that don't have answers.

Are any of you real?

Is you:me::me:you?

Is my consciousness part of a network of consciousness?

Does who I consider to be myself live in the conglomeration of thoughts and memories that I contain, or am I simply the being that is on the forefront of each emerging thought, dying at every distraction, every good night's sleep?

On a larger scale:

Is the universe infinite in size and scope?

Are my atoms the universe of some other being?

Is the universe a stable system, that passes through an equilibrium point predictably?

Is it simply chaos, expanding and degrading, to some day simply fall apart.

Are the laws of nature absolutes? Is our perspective so infinitesimally small that we call them laws? If they are absolute, why those ones and not others?

Granted, I have not posited anything so far, but thought perhaps this would be a good place for a discourse.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

Well, since your situation is pretty common around here, you probably came to the right place for such questions.

these experiences, however, left me with a constant doubt

Don't do drugs again.

Are any of you real?

Real/unreal are imaginary distinctions you create.

Is you:me::me:you?

You don't have any personal quality or self-substance that is unique to "you", we are similar in that sense- ever changing and without "selfhood".

Is my consciousness part of a network of consciousness?

There's no difference between consciousness(existence/being) and reality, your consciousness is the same as reality and so the word almost becomes meaningless as it is referring to nothing different.

Does who I consider to be myself live in the conglomeration of thoughts and memories that I contain, or am I simply the being that is on the forefront of each emerging thought, dying at every distraction, every good night's sleep?

Who you consider to be yourself most likely doesn't exist, "self-hood" is a product of attachment to an imagined personality and self-quality which is in reality made up of nothing but completely transient appearances.

Is the universe infinite in size and scope?

"size" ?

Infinite yes, definitely.

Are my atoms the universe of some other being?

You imagine "atoms" or "bunch of tiny spheres" or some other fading notion and believe that conception to actually apply to reality.

Those ideas do not apply to reality and are also transient appearances.

Is the universe a stable system, that passes through an equilibrium point predictably?

Read the previous reply above.

Is it simply chaos, expanding and degrading, to some day simply fall apart.

Read the reply two places above.

Are the laws of nature absolutes? Is our perspective so infinitesimally small that we call them laws? If they are absolute, why those ones and not others?

Depends what "Laws" you are referring to. If you were to mention a law about the conservation of energy or something similar, no that is not absolute and the reply further up applies.

If you were to say appearances are constantly changing and are empty of independent existence, you could say that is always true.

Most of the ideas people have on the topic of the universe are untrue in the sense that they are often delusional and are not founded on awareness of reality. Awareness which is often distorted by attachment to concepts you have heard tell by others, a good example being "God created everything".

[Orolo]

Don't do drugs again.

I probably wont.



As for the bulk of your responses, it seems that a couple of questions may be in order.

we are similar in that sense- ever changing and without "selfhood"

I will understand the significance of your statements if you would be so kind as to define "selfhood" as you are using it.

and related but out of order:

If you were to say appearances are constantly changing and are empty of independent existence, you could say that is always true.

This one I may have a few issues with. Let me see if I can rephrase it, and you tell me if it is still true.

Appearance's may change, or may not, and are irrelevant to consciousness.

I removed the word "constantly", because that implies that appearances must change, and that would seem to imply something grander than you meant. Feel free to correct it. As for something having an "independent existence", I would say that nothing has an "independent" existence.

To sum up my understanding of your post is as follows:

My perception of reality has no bearing on the actuality of reality, and as such, almost all questions about the physical state of it are irrelevant. That being said, it seems that you don't preclude the possibility of understanding reality as it is.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

I will understand the significance of your statements if you would be so kind as to define "selfhood" as you are using it.

Egotism, thinking in terms of self-possession. "That's my body". "This is how my personality is".

For example, in a dream you may think something really bad just happened to you when really that was only an appearance/formation passing by and nothing actually occurred.

Eventually it becomes apparent that appearances are not "me", along with ceasing to constantly distinguish/imagine such ideas as self/other or good/evil.

Appearance's may change, or may not, and are irrelevant to consciousness.

I removed the word "constantly", because that implies that appearances must change, and that would seem to imply something grander than you meant. Feel free to correct it. As for something having an "independent existence", I would say that nothing has an "independent" existence.

To sum up my understanding of your post is as follows:

My perception of reality has no bearing on the actuality of reality, and as such, almost all questions about the physical state of it are irrelevant. That being said, it seems that you don't preclude the possibility of understanding reality as it is.

Perception/awareness of reality is the only way we have any insight, so yes it has 'bearing'. What I mean is that often there is the clinging to concepts which are based in language, etc, that have no relation to what is real.

Again, just like conceptualizing a creator, that concept doesn't change the fact that there is no such thing.

This includes metaphysics or questions related to the "physical state", words aren't the reality we experience, they are ultimately meaningless and are used only as indicators or pointers.

[Cahoot]

Are any of you real?

Real/unreal are imaginary distinctions you create.

From Orolo’s point of view, there would be no difference if a machine made the same response.

AI vs. AI. Two chatbots talking to each other
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnzlbyTZsQY

Since life, rather than abstract ideology, is the touchstone of truth for logic and reality, then any human self-awareness that responds to the question, is real. If and when self-awareness is sheathed in a machine, then the definition of life will be fractured into at least three major divisions. Traditionalists: biological life; neoprogressives: biological and machine life; moderates and agnostics: undecided.

Some intelligence in the future will be the first to redraft the Buddhist breakdown of compounded things by first inquiring, am I human or am I machine.

The next Buddha might follow the machine line of reasoning through nuts and bolts and code in search of the irreducible. Buddha of all life, not just machines.

[SeekerOfWisdom]

am I human or am I machine.

Both those questions are based on misconception and the idea of self hood. The possibility of 'self-awareness in machines' doesn't have anything to do with changing the truth. Though I don't think you implied that anyway, just sayin'.

[ardy]

Hello everyone. Recently I have been trying to reassess some of my basic assumptions. Perhaps out of boredom with the world. At first, this boredom with the mundane led me to hallucinogens like LSD, mushrooms and ayahuasca. These things were, as I saw it at the time, a ticket to a show that was unlike anything I had ever experienced before. The laws of physics were bent before my eyes. Logic and existence took on entirely new forms. Circles became linear, the fabric of the universe itself began to unravel in front of my eyes. Except all that was really happening is that I was hanging out with my friends, giggling and drooling while my brain's ability to process its sensory input was damaged for a time, perhaps forever. When these experiences ended, I would think to myself "Is this what it takes? Is the world so mundane that I have to dose my brain, fooling into believing things that aren't true?". After a while, these experiences lost their luster. Every time I would take something I would know deep down that I was just avoiding things, trying to escape, even if it was only temporary. A few years later, and these experiences, however, left me with a constant doubt. I've heard that symptoms similar to these are catalogued in the DSM for patients with a history of extensive drug use. The doubts I experience are often fundamental (and consistently inconvenient). So, as a result, I can be found daydreaming, often positing many ways in which the fundamental nature of the universe might yet be profound. So I come to you all for your input on questions that don't have answers.

Are any of you real?

Is you:me::me:you?

Is my consciousness part of a network of consciousness?

Does who I consider to be myself live in the conglomeration of thoughts and memories that I contain, or am I simply the being that is on the forefront of each emerging thought, dying at every distraction, every good night's sleep?

On a larger scale:

Is the universe infinite in size and scope?

Are my atoms the universe of some other being?

Is the universe a stable system, that passes through an equilibrium point predictably?

Is it simply chaos, expanding and degrading, to some day simply fall apart.

Are the laws of nature absolutes? Is our perspective so infinitesimally small that we call them laws? If they are absolute, why those ones and not others?

Granted, I have not posited anything so far, but thought perhaps this would be a good place for a discourse.

All of these questions have relevance to anyone who has done LSD. To many here ie Seeker they have no relevance as they are constructs of the untethered ego.

The questions 'do I exist' and if the answer is positive, then 'who am I', have more of a ring with many here.

Our ability to tie ourselves down into either simplicity or over complexity is amazing. You appear to be on the complex route. A rational balance is almost impossible in the world of the unenlightened.

Still this quest is like Matrix math you can start anywhere. Or as the Taoists say "If you are looking for the Tao, why not jump in here?"

[Fox]

Orolo,

Jez....

The Universe is Finite In {Size}...A Mark` that un~travails. `Every-bit of organism(s) has that infinite---(f) number. So, on a scale of 1-10 the infinite move~ of a costly organ, originates from the standard--belief. That, Our Origins are {on} earth...And, that those diadems keep us aligned with a Universe that is Complacent` and Re-assembled---into micro {orbits.} Which is why we orbit the {sun.} And, that's why we are.......Bio-crast` by an infinite number{....of floating----negative possibilities.. } Thus, the crest....of {f} or earth causes us to believe we are still....here. But, {f} is the correlation of.......{t}

t=time

From, the moment, you orbit....You become an offspring.....A link-in-to the table of bio-elemental/activity./{P} eredvex Syndrome...Which, is what Organism(s) are all about....Clear?

[SeekerOfWisdom]

^ that was definitely not clear.

[Fox]

SeekerOfWisdom,

That, which-disintigrates-

I have a foil wrapped in a {ball}. That, table-of-elements-metallic-i.e. compounded-into the Universe created by --you. Which, is to say' I made a ball-wrapped in foil. Which, compound is revelled into the whole/compound.
I've been to prison. Your ideals make such an assumption that the whole is-partly-made whole, again...and, again.

I.E. If I lite that ball of foil on fire. It is still an element that is burning---non-corrosive. But, the enlightement-part is...that, we create and destroy all that lives...within, the compound of what? Elusiveness.

[Fox]

If I could put time into a capsule. Then, my theory up-there would be corrected? Correct?