PsychicBuBBLe
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2011
- Messages
- 139
-
P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat
Reality may be reversed
- Thread starter Dedbeet
- Start date
Nagelfar
Bluelight Crew
The "anxiety" of this thread comes from people claiming we can only know ourselves and never know the 'outside reality', but we already know it, because being able to pose the "outside reality" as outside is happening within us to whatever degree it exists.
Our mind is thus infinite and creative of the 'outside world' completely and totally, it is our creation and to say something precedes our mind logically is a fallacy; to know it as it comes to you is to already have known it; for how else would it incorporate with everything else you know? Nothing is alien, and to think there is an "alien-ness" that we should never know, like we are trapped in a 'prison of ourselves' or some 'windowless monad', is utterly silly.
We are infinitely free because we create the universe and all that it is, moment to moment, even if we make ourselves trapped into something which we are helplessly in the power of; it is we alone who pose that fact within us: rendering it truly superfluous, since we must want it to feel that we don't want it; we want the feeling of resisting. Our true will creates the opposition that our empirical will must struggle through, so that the true will doesn't cease to exist by losing its groundedness in contrast to 'our own other' that we create for our own existence.
To the original post in the thread: who says the truth is simple? Running toward complexity is what the simple did, and if that is the truth, then the truth aims at complexity or the convolution of the truth; and that must be the truer; simplistic nonexistence is a self-contradiction. Something cannot be a still, static void or emptiness, and not have definition and qualities which make it in fact a principle of some kind (remaining unmoving is a quality which defines it and makes it something rather than nothing). Therefore pure non-being is false and rejects its own static infinite nature because that would be limiting the absolute non-limit to its lack of qualities. Nothingness, to justify the infinity of its lack of anything, must become everything, from the simplest on toward the most complex, and that is toward infinity, to not contradict its pure condition and in fact realize it.
To reduce oneself back to some primal stage (Nirvana, the absolute, etc), is to deny the reasons of that primal stage, the very same primal stage that took off to become you; and if you became identical with it again; you would deny yourself there as well as you originally did to become you as you are now. Why would otherwise be the case? So strive toward complexity, strife, confusion and pain; that is the goal you set out for to begin with. To experience ever greater contrasts, as Nietzsche said. Otherwise do not think of things as stages or inside out, inversions, etc. of what is proper.
The search for hope shows that hope is a subject, in actu, and not an object to be reached, you've attained it in the searching... The search for what is desired, is desired because of the sense of increase, and if its object were attained it could not kill the subject of yearning for increase; because the sense of requiring increase remains as long as you think of yourself as empirical or as not already having something that exists as an experience to pose for yourself in some more vivid way.
How did existence get to be nonexistence? They always were the same; anything generalized and thusly universalized becomes its own complement. If everything were blue, there'd be no blue; blue is it's own other in every contrasted color that co-substantiates it as being there amidst other things, blue must contain the unity of its contrasts (all other colors) and their division at the same time (separating them as particulars).
So while the truth may be Solipsistic, it is not Solipsism: for you may be the measure and creator of everything, you are not the measure and creator of all as an object, wherein it all lays within, but rather an immanent Subject that poses true others, as true as you, as outside yourself. Communication with said others, when not received by them technically and on technicality, is essentially unity (that is, by its essence & therefore truly, and not meant "basically", as it could mean on a 'technicality'). Unity with them as others and yourself, as one. There is no Kantian 'noumenon', or vessel of interaction between to be carried if there is attained such a true unity and identification. There are other identities, and they are required for your own, and projected from your own. That is all.
Our mind is thus infinite and creative of the 'outside world' completely and totally, it is our creation and to say something precedes our mind logically is a fallacy; to know it as it comes to you is to already have known it; for how else would it incorporate with everything else you know? Nothing is alien, and to think there is an "alien-ness" that we should never know, like we are trapped in a 'prison of ourselves' or some 'windowless monad', is utterly silly.
We are infinitely free because we create the universe and all that it is, moment to moment, even if we make ourselves trapped into something which we are helplessly in the power of; it is we alone who pose that fact within us: rendering it truly superfluous, since we must want it to feel that we don't want it; we want the feeling of resisting. Our true will creates the opposition that our empirical will must struggle through, so that the true will doesn't cease to exist by losing its groundedness in contrast to 'our own other' that we create for our own existence.
To the original post in the thread: who says the truth is simple? Running toward complexity is what the simple did, and if that is the truth, then the truth aims at complexity or the convolution of the truth; and that must be the truer; simplistic nonexistence is a self-contradiction. Something cannot be a still, static void or emptiness, and not have definition and qualities which make it in fact a principle of some kind (remaining unmoving is a quality which defines it and makes it something rather than nothing). Therefore pure non-being is false and rejects its own static infinite nature because that would be limiting the absolute non-limit to its lack of qualities. Nothingness, to justify the infinity of its lack of anything, must become everything, from the simplest on toward the most complex, and that is toward infinity, to not contradict its pure condition and in fact realize it.
To reduce oneself back to some primal stage (Nirvana, the absolute, etc), is to deny the reasons of that primal stage, the very same primal stage that took off to become you; and if you became identical with it again; you would deny yourself there as well as you originally did to become you as you are now. Why would otherwise be the case? So strive toward complexity, strife, confusion and pain; that is the goal you set out for to begin with. To experience ever greater contrasts, as Nietzsche said. Otherwise do not think of things as stages or inside out, inversions, etc. of what is proper.
The search for hope shows that hope is a subject, in actu, and not an object to be reached, you've attained it in the searching... The search for what is desired, is desired because of the sense of increase, and if its object were attained it could not kill the subject of yearning for increase; because the sense of requiring increase remains as long as you think of yourself as empirical or as not already having something that exists as an experience to pose for yourself in some more vivid way.
How did existence get to be nonexistence? They always were the same; anything generalized and thusly universalized becomes its own complement. If everything were blue, there'd be no blue; blue is it's own other in every contrasted color that co-substantiates it as being there amidst other things, blue must contain the unity of its contrasts (all other colors) and their division at the same time (separating them as particulars).
So while the truth may be Solipsistic, it is not Solipsism: for you may be the measure and creator of everything, you are not the measure and creator of all as an object, wherein it all lays within, but rather an immanent Subject that poses true others, as true as you, as outside yourself. Communication with said others, when not received by them technically and on technicality, is essentially unity (that is, by its essence & therefore truly, and not meant "basically", as it could mean on a 'technicality'). Unity with them as others and yourself, as one. There is no Kantian 'noumenon', or vessel of interaction between to be carried if there is attained such a true unity and identification. There are other identities, and they are required for your own, and projected from your own. That is all.
Last edited:
I'm fascinated that this thread is still alive.
It constitutes thoughts I had while on an MDPV binge, for what it's worth.
And I still feel is suggestive of "something". The falsehood (unverifiability due to co-dependency) of all mental polarities, primarily, including self and other.
As worded, it represents... whatever it represents to the reader.
I apologize if it scared or freaked anyone out. That was not my intent, although I figured that it might have that effect. I was kind of freaked out myself when I wrote it.
IMV, facing fear can only be positive in the end.
Thanks for the replies, all...
It constitutes thoughts I had while on an MDPV binge, for what it's worth.
And I still feel is suggestive of "something". The falsehood (unverifiability due to co-dependency) of all mental polarities, primarily, including self and other.
As worded, it represents... whatever it represents to the reader.
I apologize if it scared or freaked anyone out. That was not my intent, although I figured that it might have that effect. I was kind of freaked out myself when I wrote it.
IMV, facing fear can only be positive in the end.
Thanks for the replies, all...
Last edited: