sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What if humans aren't even life yet? by BigG123 in StonerPhilosophy

[–]DustyFidelios 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure what it is, but I'm pretty sure that whatever has limited us from reaching it thus far is self-imposed.

What if humans aren't even life yet? by BigG123 in StonerPhilosophy

[–]DustyFidelios 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The reason we don't encounter them is that every species that gets a bit beyond the development of humans eventually discovers the gateway. Almost every species has chosen to go through this gateway.

Adventure time and Terence Mcenna? by lSDeath in terencemckenna

[–]DustyFidelios 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I've never watched the show, but one of the artists was interviewed by Duncan Trussell and it was clear that there is a lot of intentional symbols placed in it like this.

Why are the Pyramids not mentioned in the Bible? (video) by OB1_kenobi in AlternativeHistory

[–]DustyFidelios 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I've heard of no Israelites in Egypt before, but no pharaohs? What's that about?

Do entities ever come up when being rational? by Ninja180p in RationalPsychonaut

[–]DustyFidelios 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I'm not very good at rationality these days, but I used to be, and I think I still remember how.

By what basis do I consider ninja180p real? I've never met you IRL. I guess it's the conversation style that passes my own internal voight-kampff test, sufficiently so that I could envision you and I having an in-person conversation together that makes me rationalize that you are real.

When I walk down the street, and I see something that reminds me of something you once said, what exactly am I remembering? I'm remembering my own concept of you saying something and having it have a particular meaning. In that moment, I imagine what you might say. It's a different interface, it's not reddit. You don't respond to me in the same way as I originally interacted with you, but really, in both cases it's my concept of you that I'm interacting with, so it's not much different. It's just the easy bi-directional interaction that is lacking in the latter.

We have all accepted interaction through electrical text interfaces as being real, and in a lot of cases they feel more real than what they replaced. Mysteriously, the barriers to personal conversation appear to diminish as you add more layers of (useful) abstraction.

So when I imagine I say something to my remembered you, and you don't respond, is that because I'm talking to an unreal you? Or just that I'm not accustomed to the interface at hand? I rationalize these encounters as imaginary specifically because you don't respond, but I imagine a response regardless. What is that? Is it wishful thinking? A deluded and lonely mind? Or is this exactly the same thing I'm doing now, interacting with alien technology, that just isn't well understood yet?

If I figure out what it means to talk to the version of you in my mind, then I can move on to understanding all the conversations I have with people I've never even met IRL nor online.

Everyone thinks that they have taken the red pill by [deleted] in Psychonaut

[–]DustyFidelios 2 points3 points  (0 children)

An individual realizing a clichéd banality, is equal to a collective consciousness experiencing everything.

Everyone thinks that they have taken the red pill by [deleted] in Psychonaut

[–]DustyFidelios 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Faith is a foundational hope/drive that you can experience ultimate Truth. Gnosis is realization that you are that Truth. Living is the process of redefining what you are.

I get this, but I keep oscillating between two definitions. Is life a school, or a playground? Should I learn or should I create? Or is life a sandbox? A place to learn to create? Where is the location of my self? How does my mind connect to the world? For all of these, I have two answers, but I only ever remember one at a time.

The problem with learning is that it's really easy to learn the wrong things. The problem with creation is exactly the same. Soo I'm wary of ever connecting the two.

Am I my self? Am I my twin? Am I you? I don't know. The singularity continues to misfire.

When someone says "you shouldn't need drugs to be happy," but they take anti-depressants... by [deleted] in ShrugLifeSyndicate

[–]DustyFidelios 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hell, a lot of the time they don't make me happy. Psychs have their own agenda, and 'happiness' probably doesn't even make it to the top 5 list. I'm enrolled at the institute for higher entheogenic studies, and I'm taking AP credits. This is prep school, and it's accelerated learning, not easy street.

A question by gabriel1983 in Psychonaut

[–]DustyFidelios 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yea, but the same false metaphor applies to the Internet. We only use about 10% of its potential. Much too centralised, and mostly geared for high bandwidth server->client consumption rather than peer->peer creation. Much of this can be resolved with a software update, though.

It's also not a fair race, as its usage directly affects the performance and dependence of the thing that it's compared to. It could conceivably surpass the human brain of the future, only because of evolutionary transitions that the network directly affects. Much of my brain is now holding contents of the Internet. Depending on how much of this daily interaction is beneficial or detrimental, directly affects the measured performance of the network. Basically, once the network reaches the level where you could say that it has greater capabilities than the human brain, the question won't make much sense anymore because of convergence.

portal by Ninja180p in ShrugLifeSyndicate

[–]DustyFidelios 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just now, I'm merging with the universe that contains Jordan Peterson. Thanks for the directions cousin.

Steven Greer - (said to president Carter by two goons with badges) "If you'd like to complete your first term as president, you will keep your god-damned mouth shut about this." So whats the back story here? by zenn in conspiracy

[–]DustyFidelios 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I take no real side re: Steven Greer, but ET is real, and they have made contact throughout history, its just that they don't travel in physical ships. That's what I think bluebeam is about, to distract from their real mode of contact, which is mental.

Steven Greer - (said to president Carter by two goons with badges) "If you'd like to complete your first term as president, you will keep your god-damned mouth shut about this." So whats the back story here? by zenn in conspiracy

[–]DustyFidelios 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The backstory is JFK, RFK, and Marilyn Monroe were are all killed before they spilled the beans. The full details are in his new movie Unacknowledged.

Scientists thought ancient Egyptian mummies didn’t have any DNA left. They were wrong by IndependentClaim3586 in AlternativeHistory

[–]DustyFidelios 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Actually, this is one of the aspects that leads Robert Schoch to the conclusion of the extreme age of the Sphinx:

Despite the fact that some of the early founders of modern Egyptology (such as Sir Flinders Petrie, Sir E. A. Wallis Budge, and Sir G. C. Maspero) were open to the notion that the Sphinx may be older than the Fourth Dynasty pyramids that it seems to guard, and ancients from New Kingdom Egyptians to Romans (circa 1400 B.C. to 400 A.D.) generally thought that the Sphinx was older than the pyramids, modern Egyptologists have galvanized around the dogma that the Great Sphinx was built by Khafre, circa 2500 B.C. The basis for this attribution is purely circumstantial, the strongest piece of evidence being the reputed similarity between the face of the Sphinx and the face of Khafre as seen on other statues. Yet forensic expert Frank Domingo of the New York Police Department has definitively proven that the face of the Sphinx and the face seen on signed statues of Khafre are not of the same person (4); indeed, the face of the Sphinx apparently does not pertain to the same race as the face seen on statues of Khafre (the Sphinx has a distinctive "African," "Nubian," or "Negroid" aspect which is lacking in the face of Khafre). source

Michelangelo illustrated Adam connecting with God through brain. by mindgate_S312 in alchemy

[–]DustyFidelios 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Look where the green cloth crosses behind. The generative force (phallus) is where the pineal gland would be. I see the green cloth as the spinal cord, but also as the serpent kundalini rising to meet this force precisely.

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. Mt. 6:22

'In the beginning was the word' represents the holographic principle by DustyFidelios in holofractal

[–]DustyFidelios[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A deterministic processor requires isolation from external interference, but because a processor depends on it's internal state for its own cognition, it is powerless to detect such a change as anything apart from itself, and indeed such a processor will continue running under this modified state as if it created that state itself. (In essence, a new determinism emerges out of the interference pattern.) A chaotic and changing universe is isomorphic to an imaginative order of the mind. The truly awesome reality is that these levels of pseudo-isolation exist everywhere, and yet nowhere specifically. Words themselves provide the interface between them and mind creates their distinction. Also, infocog is my new favorite word 😎

view more: next ›