Does it matter?
It’s not clear that what constitutes the mind is matter thus I’m not sure it does matter.
lol
Even if it were, to what end would you be finding out? Is it purely an emotional necessity? The question exists and therefore begs for an answer, regardless of context? Or do you imagine there's some measurable value to be had in awareness of an objective reality, even if the exact bounds of that reality remain unclear?
AliceInWonderland said:For three days I hallucinated a separate reality and thought it to be surely real as those who perceive it properly watched, studied, and continually explained to me where I was and what had happened. Or so they tell me, in all actuality they were hardly a part of my appearances and only bleeding in when my mind deemed it time to dream them up. Only on the fourth day upon waking did this hallucinating stop and everything was as it used to be.
This sort of thing often accounts for how people who have NDE's claim to have seen heaven.
Butterfly said:For three days I hallucinated a separate reality and thought it to be surely real as those who perceive it properly watched, studied, and continually explained to me where I was and what had happened.I had a long dream that felt similarly, but as I saw later when I'd seen more movies it conformed similarly to principles from the movie The Butterfly Effect.
I'd gone to sleep and awakened in a different setting, still as myself but in another timeline. It was as if I'd never moved away from San Francisco, as if my folks pushed themselves that much harder to not have to move elsewhere, and by then it'd been years since moving away. Unlike former dreams my senses felt intact, real, rather than the pillow fisted numbness that's normally present in dreaming. When something hurt me in the dream, it wasn't a trivial forgettable thing like most dream injuries but rather a "real" twinge of pain, one that rather than jar me from the dream instead further immersed me into it.
At the start of the dream was a flood of memories, of every experience I'd had that led me to this point rather than the one I was on before the dream. Every memory was there, recallable like the ones I have access to now, as real as the experiences I take for granted while typing this entry. As far as I knew in this setting, that was me, and even after waking I was disoriented over having access to both sets of experiences, over having seen parts of the city I'd never even been to... later again in real life when revisiting there (there's all sorts of rational explanations for this, especially within the self-doubting range of heuristics, but the feeling remains).
Interesting, thank you for sharing.
I had similar experiences in which when I would go to sleep I would awaken in a new context but only subtly new. It was more like day to day changes instead of entering into wholly new situations. There was no denying its realness beyond the obvious ability to question it as I am now, but as is currently the case with my capacity to question the experience is real enough to not yield an answer. A key fundamental difference was that physics and causality fundamentally worked differently.
What was especially troublesome was the time each experience lasted. In all dreams but this one the experiences were ephemeral and discrete while this one was long lasting, it's whole duration seeming like it lasted decades and it was continuous.
I'd only dreamed like that once, never before it and never again since, and the only reason I don't give it more merit is over Occam's Razor.
I am not sure Occam's Razor suffices as I can't find one experience fundamentally more complicated than the other when. I could use bias to say "I am here now" so I chose this one but that may only be true only in its own context.
Does it matter?
It’s not clear that what constitutes the mind is matter thus I’m not sure it does matter.
lol
Even if it were, to what end would you be finding out?
It still has merit as the start of many future questions. What matters is the spark that comes from this rare moment of inspiration, regardless of it's validity. This stands to have her exit the canon of preconception, potentially to the point of finding newer paths yet explored, and is integral when it comes to philosophical conversion and development.
It is human to assume we must know what's going on, and it's in human nature to grasp at it when it wriggles from our fingers, yet it's rare to be given something that gives the room to push beyond the self (even if it is still for the self). This coma gifted her with doubt over something most people take for granted, and these sorts of discoveries often go somewhere interesting if given time and nourishment.
Or do you imagine there's some measurable value to be had in awareness of an objective reality, even if the exact bounds of that reality remain unclear?
It's a question of how much our reality is purely our own perceptions, the stepping stone for many who've theorized on the nature of dreams.
Does it matter?
It’s not clear that what constitutes the mind is matter thus I’m not sure it does matter.
lol
Even if it were, to what end would you be finding out?
Idk, I haven't found it yet.
Is it purely an emotional necessity?
Most things we humans get up to are at least partially if not completely. Why should this be any different?
The question exists and therefore begs for an answer, regardless of context?
Questions do not beg for answers, humans who ask them do.
Or do you imagine there's some measurable value to be had in awareness of an objective reality, even if the exact bounds of that reality remain unclear?
What makes something valuable?
There was no denying its realness beyond the obvious ability to question it as I am now, but as is currently the case with my capacity to question the experience is real enough to not yield an answer.
Exactly.
If we can be blind within the dreams towards if it's real or not, how are we supposed to be able to know if this is real or not? It's essentially the Matrix question before it was appropriated to be about speed dating, and goes further on to the nature of questioning if the outer world the red pill sends them to is real or yet another simulation (suggested through Neo's powers IRL in the second film that both must be fake).
A key fundamental difference was that physics and causality fundamentally worked differently.
How can we know that the world we're sitting in right now is consistent when we cannot gauge consistency from within the dream? This blind spot is what led to people questioning the nature of Solipsism.
What was especially troublesome was the time each experience lasted. In all dreams but this one the experiences were ephemeral and discrete while this one was long lasting, it's whole duration seeming like it lasted decades and it was continuous.
Starting to sound like the passage of time idea in Inception.
More importantly though, we only exist in the moment with our perceptions offset behind it based on our reaction time. The notion of duration is only held in our minds, in our memories, so a fake memory could just as easily be simply convincing you that it's been a while... rather than it having been a while.
If you remember years passing, that's why it felt like it happened. This does not even mean that there's a set duration attached to it, but rather that you in but a moment's time were potentially able to convince yourself of said passage of time. It's less about what we've witnessed and more about what we believe we've seen in hindsight.
I'd only dreamed like that once, never before it and never again since, and the only reason I don't give it more merit is over Occam's Razor.
I am not sure Occam's Razor suffices as I can't find one experience fundamentally more complicated than the other when. I could use bias to say "I am here now" so I chose this one but that may only be true only in its own context.
I can rationalize that it was still a dream, but that it was influenced by something amiss with myself like if it were a fever dream or something (I didn't go to sleep sick or wake up sick, but as an example of what could offset the dreaming experience).
Anything I believe I saw in the dream is merely a belief, and I have no way of proving if once I revisited California if it matched up or if I simply reinvented the memory so that it'd match up. As a matter of heuristics I cannot take what I believe now to be identical to what I once believed, even if it's over small shifts in details happening without my awareness. Memory is suuuper malleable, and our certainty in it is purely an ego thing.
We only exist now, right now, right this moment, and everything we believe to have experienced only has as much validity as our ability to prove it to ourselves.
Does it matter?
It’s not clear that what constitutes the mind is matter thus I’m not sure it does matter.
lol
Even if it were, to what end would you be finding out?
Idk, I haven't found it yet.
In theory. : P
Is it purely an emotional necessity?
Most things we humans get up to are at least partially if not completely. Why should this be any different?
I'm saying "purely" as opposed to an emotional drive towards an intended rationale.
The question exists and therefore begs for an answer, regardless of context?
Questions do not beg for answers, humans who ask them do.
lol It's a figure of speech.
Or do you imagine there's some measurable value to be had in awareness of an objective reality, even if the exact bounds of that reality remain unclear?
What makes something valuable?
Subjective need. I'm asking about your values.
Does it matter?
It’s not clear that what constitutes the mind is matter thus I’m not sure it does matter.
lol
Even if it were, to what end would you be finding out?
It still has merit as the start of many future questions. What matters is the spark that comes from this rare moment of inspiration, regardless of it's validity. This stands to have her exit the canon of preconception, potentially to the point of finding newer paths yet explored, and is integral when it comes to philosophical conversion and development.
It is human to assume we must know what's going on, and it's in human nature to grasp at it when it wriggles from our fingers, yet it's rare to be given something that gives the room to push beyond the self (even if it is still for the self). This coma gifted her with doubt over something most people take for granted, and these sorts of discoveries often go somewhere interesting if given time and nourishment.
I'm not saying the discussion has no merit, just potentially the answer. What is one meant to do with this kind of understanding? Maybe I'm being too utilitarian, but these questions can run circles around themselves for years, and as fun as that can be, I don't see it fundamentally changing anything about my experience of the reality I'm trying to dissect.
Or do you imagine there's some measurable value to be had in awareness of an objective reality, even if the exact bounds of that reality remain unclear?
It's a question of how much our reality is purely our own perceptions, the stepping stone for many who've theorized on the nature of dreams.
But even if we can prove that what we see in front of us is objective, our comprehension of it can never be. Knowing that doesn't change it.
Does it matter?
It’s not clear that what constitutes the mind is matter thus I’m not sure it does matter.
lol
Even if it were, to what end would you be finding out?
It still has merit as the start of many future questions. What matters is the spark that comes from this rare moment of inspiration, regardless of it's validity. This stands to have her exit the canon of preconception, potentially to the point of finding newer paths yet explored, and is integral when it comes to philosophical conversion and development.
It is human to assume we must know what's going on, and it's in human nature to grasp at it when it wriggles from our fingers, yet it's rare to be given something that gives the room to push beyond the self (even if it is still for the self). This coma gifted her with doubt over something most people take for granted, and these sorts of discoveries often go somewhere interesting if given time and nourishment.I'm not saying the discussion has no merit, just potentially the answer.
Merit kind of is the answer though, if it's not a single objective answer like "God did it".
What is one meant to do with this kind of understanding?
Live in relativity like we already are, but from a different part of the social spectrum.
Maybe I'm being too utilitarian, but these questions can run circles around themselves for years, and as fun as that can be, I don't see it fundamentally changing anything about my experience of the reality I'm trying to dissect.
Perception is reality, and the fun of it is over how there isn't just one answer, but rather a multi-path journey towards finding it. The question is the answer based on our very natures.
I'd compare the room for growth here to be about on par with psychedelics.
Or do you imagine there's some measurable value to be had in awareness of an objective reality, even if the exact bounds of that reality remain unclear?
It's a question of how much our reality is purely our own perceptions, the stepping stone for many who've theorized on the nature of dreams.
But even if we can prove that what we see in front of us is objective, our comprehension of it can never be. Knowing that doesn't change it.
It matters as much as the room for adaptation does, and who knows, maybe after asking enough questions there will be an answer that is indisputable upon seeing it. It may just take machines to find them.
There is no way to scientifically prove what's real and what's not. What we believe is mostly up to faith.
We could all be in a lifelong computer simulation.
You could be the only one in the simulation, and everyone else is fake and doesn't experience anything.
You could be a Boltzmann Brain with fabricated memories and experiences and will die in a few seconds.
We could be in a universe where God created us.
The last one is the only one that sounds good and you at least have some ability to find evidence for. So I recommend for you, Alice, to pray. Believing in God doesn't mean you've disproved that you',re Boltzmann Brain. It means that you changed your faith to that being God is most likely real.
