Originally Posted by Original Poster
When I say life's hallucinations remind us how precious the present moment is, what I mean is that because you die, all life is therefore a hallucination. Because nothing is permanent, everything changes, and there is no thing which has any sort of eternal structural integrity, therefore all of reality is a temporary experience. Life, itself, becomes a dream when considering death, and not just your death but the death of the present circumstance.
When I talk about the absurd, I am talking about absurdism. Absurdism is essentially the encounter between the world and the mind that attempts to make sense out of it. This encounter creates, from time to time, a feeling as though one does not belong. All truisms are reduced to poetry. Even if there is something true out there, it remains out of the mind's grasp. Meaning remains out of the mind's grasp. And that feeling that there is no meaning is the absurd.
And you're right in that I do have a model of reality, or an ethos. To clarify, I mean to say that I do not believe my model of reality is true. Innately I am full of beliefs, but logically I understand that none of them are actually true, nor their opposites. It's all just information for me to utilize for making decisions. In my previous post, I explain in detail why it is more serviceable not to believe in soul mates. I do not believe for the sake of grasping truth, I believe for the sake of making better decisions. I am going to appreciate someone more if I believe they are a temporary experience rather than a permanent companion. I am going to anticipate change better if I understand it's inevitable and do not get locked into thinking the love will stay as strong as it was at the beginning without any effort. I get more out of a relationship without adding soul mates into the concoction.
Hey Original Poster, thanks for clarifying that. I apologize for my inability to get what you really meant just from the word “absurdity” before. Now that you mention absurdism, which is now a mentality how one sees the universe and their existence in it, that I understand.
It's just that meaning of “absurdity” was just the person themselves being unreasonable and chaotic, and not the concept of the universe being purposeless and chaotic. I mean, I apologize if I was being too serious in how you used those words, but I had a feeling you meant something else, which is exactly what you said. So again, I understand what you mean now.
It ties in with another concept you mentioned pertaining to not rebelling or resisting it (The Universe).
Originally Posted by Original Poster
All the big, bad tribulations at present will mean absolutely nothing in 10 years, and you'll probably wonder why you spent so much time fixated on them instead of enjoying life. That is why I call them hallucinations, because life's circumstances are but passing dreams and nightmares which we will eventually wake from.
I guess that's a better way of putting it in unique and poetic way of defining our ability of retrospect, or hindsight. But I still think that the hallucination association you're using is a bit too extreme. And I know you know what a hallucination is, but again, it's just an experience pertaining to something that wasn't present; something that wasn't static in your reality.
Now again, I'm sure with your mentioning of tribulations, we DO take things too seriously in life and should just enjoy it instead, and I agree that your usage of hallucination makes sense for that interpretation. But still, even if the experiences themselves are fleeting dreams, to that person, it was static to them at the time; and I mean static as something they were accustomed to.
They were either not mentally prepared enough to see things from a different point of view, which is essentially why they “suffered” for it and finally utilized hindsight/retrospect to realize,
“Wow, I got so serious over that?”
That's the thing that I feel is superb about hindsight/retrospect, because it's just a way of interchanging intuition and logic to realize that certain things we've done and obsessed over what should be right and wrong was in fact just preconceptions skewed all over the place.
Originally Posted by Original Poster
However, that does NOT mean that one should close their mind... to anything. Like I have repeated in this thread, exploring is integral. Just because my information is neither true nor untrue and all the information I ever find on the subject will also be neither true nor untrue (as well as their opposites) doesn't mean I can't gain anything by finding more information. And besides, at least I know the qualifiers of soul mates, twin flames and karmic mates. At least I'm better suited for a proper diagnosis.
There's always some risk of the information we find to be true, untrue, etc., and that's what concerned me in your principle of “absurdism” now. Now it's clear to me that you have the mentality of someone who is interested in exploring, but wants to analyze things first and utilize what he knows as a whole to make interpretations of it.
So really, with the general definition, absurdism also involves that the attempt to understand will ultimately fail, but from what you stated here, your practice of it, or clinging on to it is just everything about it but the "ultimate fail" part because you're still engaged and interested in understanding and gaining from it.
I wouldn't say your interpretations are true nor untrue by the way, if you go about it through scientific means, repeated trials (because again, the exploration obviously means you find something different to experiment with), and even going through peer-review is what's practical.
Even if the repeated trials might equal to "4 x zero power = zero power", the scientific process of understanding them is what I believe leads to patterns that you can add on to your perspective, both good and bad; and even though our time is short here (a fleeting dream), I would presume that people who sustain your perspective as well in the generations to come will realize that the mentality of “absurdism” itself pertaining to their inability to find truth from the Universe (out of the mind's grasp) was just a “hallucination”.
It's easy for people to be absolutely awed and amazed at the wonders of the Universe, and it's no surprise that we think of it as vast, thus potentially being purposeless and chaotic simply because we do not have enough information to catch up with the progress of the Universe's expansion (and probably won't have enough anytime soon if religion keeps degrading our potential to use scientific method before believing in something without a shred of evidence).
And even if we can manipulate 1000s of genes instead of one gene at a time, it still won't be enough, but the thing is, like you said, despite the Universe being chaotic and purposeless (absurdism), the endeavor is AT LEAST worth it for attempting to ease away from that same “hallucination” that the Universe is purposeless and chaotic.
Even if our horizon is limited (the range in which we can percieve), as long as science continues "to be getting there" in understanding and interpreting concepts that don't have a shred of evicence, the speculation of defining the unknown will be less of a suffering and more of a motivation.
In fact, people can fall into a false soul mate trap more easily if they choose not to research it, or worse yet if they wait to research it until after they've already fallen head over heels and become victims of confirmation bias.
I completely agree with most of this, so I'll just avoid being an echo chamber for this. But for the part that I don't agree with, I do feel people do research it to some extent, but see, here's the thing:
They don't want to research it to the extreme before attempting it because then they'll start having expectations that leads towards greater confirmation bias.
(Because if they researched it well enough, they will most likely believe a certain thing has to happen to confirm it being probable (the twin souls in this case)).
There are limits and qualifications that establish what should be an ideal amount of knowledge before engaging into something like twin souls. But honestly, a person is going to want to get the basics of it down first (light research), and then learn from their own eyes and experience instead of potentially relying on psychological predispositions of it.
Now what you said about the person going too far in the deep end to be able to research it properly, it sort of depends if the person can or cannot shift back to the foundations they had before going into that deep end.
An analogy of this is what I used for someone before:
You're a google search engine. (The foundation of what you believe in before you went into the concept of Twin Souls)
You send Google Spiderbots to learn something (twin souls).
You rely that these spider bos (which is you exploring), will come back to the foundation (the base of the search engine) and add on to your totality of what you think Twin Souls, Karmic partners, etc. really is.
Some people aren't able to go back (which is why they're essentially in limbo or "hallucination" because the google spider bot had an error in sending that information back), but it doesn't mean it's impossible for them to come to a revelation that they must go back to that foundation.
|
|
Bookmarks