Do You Know What You See

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoMMNlX6Ny4

 

I didn't watch the video, but what use is it to wonder about the reality of reality, it's like asking if one knows what knowledge she's obtained.

 

I know I've seen you post this video before.

 

I know what I see.... That doesn't make it real though.

 

A legitimate question is how much can one know about reality, and how accurate is one's knowledge. How real reality is, isn't a legitimate question.

 

I quite like this guy.I've seen a few of his talks and stuff.He's like some kind of subcultural intellectual guru in a way right,although he would probably hate being called that.Are his books still available?Anyone recommend one? He's pretty funny too.

I really can't answer the question this thread poses,except I have to put some trust in reality as I experience it,whilst being wary of fully committing to it's conceits.

 

That's funny. I don't even remember starting this thread, it must have been in response to some other conversation or perhaps to start discussion of the topic specifically.
In reviewing the video it talks about truth and not reality per se. Actually I have a somewhat different take of truth in saying truth can only really be accurate in terms of truth saying or telling which is in making demonstrable comparisons. I regard hierarchial ontological hypothesis or theories as forever just that. I have no question about the validity of reality at all. I have many questions about the way it works.

I heard terence mckenna for the first time and only the once until recently through ram dass and my wife in 2002. I read his book true hallucinations at that time. It is the only mckenna book I have read. I only started using the internet in 2009. Only became familiar with these videos of his in 2014. He is popularly recognized around subjects such as the psychedelic experience and particular expertise with dmt and his theories on the evolution of human consciousness perhaps being the result of a symbiotic relationship with psychedelic substances in plants that are ingested as part of the primate diet around 50,ooo years ago. It's been quite the discovery for me as I have some personal connection in terms of experience. I have an affinity for the recognition of the biases of scientism posited by mckenna, sheldrake, leary, lilly, and hancock.

 

just because there is no such thing as completely objective positive certainty, doesn't mean i'm going to act as if everything were a figment of my imagination. i think my instinct for self preservation is a little bit stronger then that. if something is coming down the road toward me, i really don't care if its and elephant, a dust storm or a railway locomotive; i'm going to get the hell out of its way. if i stub my toe on something, whatever it is, it is still something that is there. and there outside of my skln too.

 

I see pride.
I see power.
I see a bad ass mother who don't take no crap off of nobody.

 

I see I don't know what to see when knowing is seeing

 

I see what you did there...

 

Oh, who is that? i DID NOT KNOW THAT YOU WERE A MOTHER.

 

Cool Running?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9G0y9x0wIds

 

There's two sayings my daddy always told me and they are

You look but you don't see

And

You hear but you don't listen.

And I find they ring truth in so many ways with people. Often people will only see and hear what they want to.

 

i know i have my own internal way of classifying what i see. what i don't know is how anyone other then myself will see it. many people have a lot of cultural and belief filters through which the interpret what they see. this is something i try to avoid. a tree isn't just a tree, its THAT tree. a rock isn't just a rock, its THAT rock. and rock to me, means something to sit on when you're going for a walk in the woods.

everything is its own individual thing, and that's what i try to see when i look at it. not someone else's cultural baggage they attach to it.

as for solidity being in many ways something of an illusion, that may be true enough, well no maybe about it, the solidity is the forces between the particles, that, were it not for those, everything would be able to pass through each other, there being more space inbetween then there there. while true, that part of it really doesn't matter, and if you want to call a rock or a table or a tree or whatever a solid object, well functionally it is, so that part of it really doesn't matter.

but if all you are seeing, is what someone else told you something means, then you're really not looking at all.

 

If I entertain and accomodate the notions of several different understandings and beliefs regarding reality for a moment... What one can know seems like it becomes increasingly miniscule.

So let me emphasize that I don't actually hold all these beliefs but allow me to be inclusive and entertain them for emphasis to the seeming difficulty in approaching such questions....

We live with a brain which has a limited capacity to process information, a brain which discards information it can process that seems unecessary and/or focuses on certain information to allow for smoother functioning, a mind which may be comprised of several different parts; some of which are not readily available to our conscious thought processes, a mind which may or may not exist within the scope of our heads, possibly more dimensions than we can recognize, a simulated reality, different realities which may or may not be accessible to us, possible varying afterlifes or reincarnations.

 

Use the words of others as guides, but in the end use your own reasoning and perceptions. There's no reason to be inclusive about entertaining others' thoughts, be selective so as to better use your time.

But, they can be accessed through dreams and meditation.

Our brain is in our head, our mind doesn't have a location. We use our whole body to think and our body is fundamentally connected to what's outside of it. But, just the fact that we posit an inclusiveness which constitutes our body, or our skin and all that's beneath it, is because we posit ourselves as a being distinct from the rest of reality. When a person loses that distinction it's either because he's lost his life or his mind.

You mentioned earlier the subconscious which we may have limited access to. It exists in that it's conceivably accessible, if something isn't accessible at all, that simply means that it's not real, but only imagined.

It's a misuse of language to say "afterlife", to mean anything other than death. It's like saying afternoon to mean a time that may still be during the morning. A life conceivably could go through dramatic changes and/or goes through periods of prolonged stasis (such as a comma or hypothetically being cryogenically frozen), but why worry unless there's evidence?

 

Good advice, which I think reflects the cerebral process of the next part.

I don't think so, at least not beyond limited senses as well. I recall reading a science paper a few years ago, which suggested dreams are essentially non-sensical. I may not go that far, the technique of lucid dreaming certainly intrigues me and I find the works of Freud interesting as well. I reside somewhere in the middle in regards to dreams, I see them as revealing aspects of our consciousness, some of which may not be accessible in waking consciousness, however I still view this as limited and I do think dreaming sometimes is a rather arbitrary process which does not necessarily reveal much.

In regards to the scope of meditation, I don't really know the full range of revelatory capacity it can elicit, not being very skilled as a meditatior however it is a practice which requires focus , so with that being said we have already limited the capacity of our mental realm in some ways, which I think still leads to discarding information.

We have a brain (and body) with a finite size and there are autonomic and regulatory functions which have to be accounted for, so since I'm not a philosophical idealist, I see the brain necessarily having to discard information to function efficiently and only so much can get stored subconsciously.

Interesting thoughts...

I think you are misunderstanding me here. I am literally referring to different dimensions, dimensions which may or may not effect us but which may be very real components of reality. I am not referring to anything that's to do with the subconscious.

This thought experiment from Carl Sagan represents what I am talking about. Checkout M-Theory as well:

http://youtu.be/X7ZfsT1cPPk

You mean it's a misnomer? It's not a misuse of language because it's a very well understood idea. Although, the speculations regarding what happens in the afterlife greatly vary.

I really don't worry about it personally, lack of evidence suggesting anything being a primary reason.