All is Self - Consciousness Collective

I found this uplifting. Perhaps some of you may as well ...

Yes Alex, very interesting topics.

My stories and the sound of my narrative... How do I construct meanings?

Achieving disidentification from my beliefs requires a long process of self-inquiry and I am not be able to see some of my beliefs because my "lenses" have clouded ... We also have central and peripheral beliefs, but that is another story to clean our "eyes".
The personal task of creating something like: freedom. It is a goal along the road, to enjoy it in the best way possible.

I liked The complementarity theory, because applied to my Being / Self ... then I can accept my imperfection in different degrees throughout my life and acquire good sense or balance.

The examples of Latin American worldviews are very familiar to me, but it seems a return to animism. When I discover foreigners fascinated by "our" pyramids and a multitude of goddesses and gods, I am always curious if what is absent in our culture is what calls us to visit other places.

I think one of the main nodes of the video / book, is: What do we do to the world with our stories?

That would lead us to consider that each person is a world of interpretations and the epic contrast: objectivity and subjectivity. The categories and ranges of both attempts serve us, and obviously the problem of thinking in opposite poles is clear.

We cannot perceive like the others, each look is a unique filter and each person imagines their affairs with a different processing. The interesting thing is that certain experiences or talks: reshape our vision of an event because something or someone contributes with new data: an aspect that I did not know and that for this reason my internal reality was incomplete.

Life is a Dream?
I think that in some way, every conversation is an attempt to clarify the meta-communication, I cannot cling to the fact that my vision of the world is correct just for being "I" and discarding others.
Using this idea of life as a dream, serves to me to create a winnable game: enjoyable and meaningful. Than to fight to be right.

Kauffman brings us back to the idea that: we are all one. And this links us to the concept of The Force. Which brings us closer to empathy, compassion and community. Or to play as a team while enjoying.

At some point of the video, we can listen the question:
How could something exist without someone?

Well, that question needs a context or to be dimensioned, because the car that is outside my house is still there although I have forgotten it moments ago.
Thinking about my problems, if I die, they would disappear, but that reality-check-system, is something radical in this matter of the existence of an idea or not.

Perhaps by way of conculsion, the author takes us again to the notion: We are all one.
That help us to create more understanding despite the natural differences of unique beings.


.

You do not see the outside, because it is constructed within you. Same with all outward senses. A deeper way of looking at it is simply the only for sure Truth is this is happening, 'meaning existence'. Since it is, it must have become, and can only become from a place of which it was not. So nothing. Not something that can be explained. Not even from a field of view or consciousness. This, the pre-beginning, was so infinitely nothing it was and becamebecame nothing. Like a tip of a needle. But a consciousness arose because nothing must be and needed a witness to define it as such. This consciousness arose within the singularity, and mathematically if you go within a point that doesn't exist it becomes infinite. A circle of points of nothing arose causing duality. Not this, not that, not up not down, not black not white, ect... This endless struggle spawned the dream like reality we are in. But do not forget in the beginning there must be a consciousness to have any form. We and all are that consciousness taking on the mask of the dream.

Glenn wrote: ... mathematically if you go within a point that doesn't exist it becomes infinite.

Please, elaborate. What do you mean by this?

Think of it like this dot •
You are looking at it from an outward field of view.
It is just a reference point and contains no actual size/ circumference/ diameter. All those are 0 to make it easier.
Side note, they are not 0, they are 'does not exist', but we will call it 0
• this field of view is actually impossible because the only thing stated or observed is the dot. Not the outside because it doesn't exist.
Think of it like the dot knows itself and only itself as saying,"I am nothing"
So you have a cavity or well that houses an observer. But the boundary in which the cavity ends is undefined. This boundary doesn't grow because its an undefined limit. Instead it devides into itself.
0/0=0 and 0xn(0)=0 so all proofs of original structure is maintained.
I'm sorry this is difficult because I'm trying to explain 15 years of constant deep thought on the nature of existence in a message.
What we see as reality is nothing doing a lot of nothing. We cannot explain substance in physics or mass and gravity but we can explain cause and effect relationships. We dont see the nothing, only the trail of what nothing is doing. If you have questions I will do my best to explain my understanding. Thank you for asking

An easier way of showing you that all is you and you are everything is this.
Imagine your looking at your TV. That light has to reach your eyes go through your retina to your brain and then your consciousness see it. You have never seen outside yourself. You don't see the TV where the TV is. You see the TV in your own mind. It appears to be there but you only see the hallways of your own mind.

Another interesting way of looking at it is you are experiencing life right now. If there is an afterlife it would be some type of observation of some kind of existence. So if you were to die and not be anymore probability states its happened at least once 'your life' so even if it takes 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years to happen again it won't be any time for you. You wont experience a damn thing. Like I said it happened once for sure if not for the rest of humanity and all sentient beings. Just happening once means if it doesn't take infinity to happen again you will be.

That means you have a 99.9999 repeating probability that when you die you instantly will be. There will be no cross over. Now there is an infintessibly small chance you won't with this way of looking, but I like those odds.

Thank you for your attempt to explain what you meant. I'm still not sure what this "it" that apparently "becomes infinite" when ever some "you [goes] within a point that doesn't exist" is, or what the connection with mathematics is. So my question as to what you meant by any of that stands completely untouched (or at least I haven't learned anything about it from what you responded so far), but if you wish to not address any part of it and carry on with something else, by all means, let's.

Glenn wrote: So if you were to die and not be anymore probability states its happened at least once 'your life'...

Again, what do you mean? Since my quoting you last time did not effectively communicate what it is that I was inquiring about, I shall this time clarify my question:

• What is this "it" that "happened at least once" already, if I were to die and not be anymore?
• And assuming that this "it" is an event of some sort, so that a probability can be assigned to it, how exactly did you go about computing said probability, so as to conclude that it did indeed happen as a matter of statistical certainty?
• Since by all accounts I did not yet die and not be anymore, what are practical implications of that theorem in the actual world?
• In what sense is any of this "another interesting way of looking at it", if 'it' refers to the passage I inquired about in my last post before this one?

One of my shortfalls is messaging. It is very difficult as is to explain let alone send over a message.

I go to sleep for 6-8 hours a night. I wake up and time from sleep to wake seems to me like 2-5 minutes. If i was dead like dead dead. Athiest death, yolo, and I woke up from death a million years later like Fri from futurama, the time from death to waking up from death would seem like I blinked my eye lids. Dead-wake up, "shit I thought I was going to die, apparently not." That would be my reaction because from my perspective i would seem to have just blinked my eyes.

OK. But the good news is I'm alive. I'm really sure I'm alive.
Are others just meat bags with no souls or cociousness's. Highly unlikely but hell could be true. Anyway lol. (1 person= me) is alive. That a 100% success. Shit, I'm alive! Lol. I would have to exhaust 100% of all future time which to our limited understanding is trillions of trillions of years when black holes evaporate and shit like that. over the course of timetime that kind of span how many probable times will a body be assembled on a planet probably through sex that can house my being. Its a big big place in outer space. Like really really really big. Lots and lots of chances baby. Lol. To think it won't happen again is almost laughable.

It's just as laughable to think that the "you" is something meaningfully distinguishable from the body that "houses" it, let alone that it could be transferred between different bodies. Yet, here we are.

It does seem like all is self.
Or should I say all is the force inclusive
What I mean is for example you or a hand and I am and ear the hand says I don't understand what you mean by you hear ? and i feel things
Are very soft or pretty can't you understand what I'm saying
But we all look at it from different perspectives because we all are part of the force just experiencing life in different ways

I know this is going to sound crazy to most of you
But it seems like for me that is what is going on
It's like the force just wants to experience itself and know who it is from different perspectives.

I just made a quick video on the force and God if anybody wants to look at it today

https://youtu.be/NcSIeR7usAE

You can't ship-of-theseus consciousness without at least vaguely attempting to explain what the necessary and sufficient components are. The robots I use at work are reflexive enough to identify themselves (you can query a robot subsystem, and the robot will identify that component as belonging to itself), be aware of their surroundings, and execute commands based partially on those sensory inputs, but no one says they're alive. On the other hand, if they are, that makes me robot god, and I'm due new business cards pretty soon.

I was just thinking on what is actually fact?

For example from what I have seen and understand only The victors write the history books.
If not for example for sure the United States would have to be labeled as an extreme Terrorist group from its foundation and how it was started and moving forward.

From our history books to or science books we have someone Do a few repeated tests and it is labeled fact even on the chemical periodic table.
For example even let's say gold you look up what molecules make up gold.
And most of the time you put it under a microscope it's right but not always
Sometimes all the molecules don't show up like they should.

I've heard even when splitting and Adam or something similar they say it's actually not split it's actually the same ada. in 2 places at the exact same time.

But it's much easier just to say the fact is it was split.

The same goes with gravity Or even making laws even if the law was illegal to make to begin with.
people would only get stuck on the fact is it's the law you have to obey it .
even if it was a total erroneous illegal law to begin with

We could easily go on all day almost about everything in life that we hold true whether it's religion faith the force laws of nature or whatever it is.

I like the website who shows different people's perspective the North's the South's the right the left Poor middle class or rich

It's all just different sides of the same coin it depends how you look at it.

Just like after taking a psychology class debating whether
" The old is the glass half full or half empty"

Of course the old wise grandmother always has the answer to the most complicated debates on the planet.
She said if you're trying to drink it it's half empty if you trying to fill it up it's half full hahaha.

Sounds a lot like "returning to the source". As if everything is simply make believe and what really is won't happen until what isn't is done playing with itself.

The way we communicate anything will have bias and flaws, but that doesn't mean that we can't approximate accurate communication.
Isaac Asimov received some fan mail rather similar to this:

The young man then quoted with approval what Socrates had said on learning that the Delphic oracle had proclaimed him the wisest man in Greece. "If I am the wisest man," said Socrates, "it is because I alone know that I know nothing." the implication was that I was very foolish because I was under the impression I knew a great deal.

My answer to him was, "John, when people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."

Just because something might not be 100% accurate doesn't mean it's useless or has parity of wrongness with any incorrect idea.