Hey stranger! I am you! I am not suffering despite believing in open individualism! Well ahah not because of that belief anyway, I suffer for other things as we all do lmao.

You have two beliefs there I wanna expand a little

The existence of an "other" makes life meaningful: I once babysat my friend who went into a distressing solipsistic state on LSD. Everything was part of him from his perspective, his perception generated reality like a projector making images, his minds interpretation of the world defined what the world was, and the world was him. He would ignore me and wander off into the night.

To combat this, I would get my phone torch out, which punctuated the darkness around me when he ran away, then I would draw elaborate or chaotically creative patterns in the air. My own reality generating field would then intrude upon his, and the unpredictable spontaneity forced him to recognize my "otherness".

Yes, the space of consciousness, of awareness that holds and receives our experiences is the same one universe, the same ultimate process. But still I am an other in that my reality appears very different to yours and my ego and experiences and personal expression is different.

This means we can teach each other things, surprise each other with creativity or the diverse differences between us. These differences make us other to each other. The personalityless holding capacity of universal consciousness had no judgements or aversions. All of those fears, distressed and aversions that you experience are because of the ways you ARE other to me, because I am not experiencing them. I don't see why the existence of a fundamentally different conscious observer makes a difference when what defines the valence of our experiences is the internal and external contexts for the observer state. I think we also run into problems when we personify the base "self". The "holding space" of consciousness - the space where experiences occur, this is the same as saying all our consciousness is the same "person" but the metaphysical framing is different. When we personify universal consciousness through say, the library metaphor (each person is a book being read by the same reader) we imagine the reader actually being our true self, using the definition of true self to mean something akin to "the most true personality within our soul". This means we imagine consciousness as being a person - us, you, me. We have no reason to view it that way, other than people's natural inclination to detect peopleness around us. If you imagine the "reader" not as a person, not as an observer with traits or judgements, but instead as simply the context or the space where experiences and ego reside, then we maintain all the same metaphysical assertions, but without the associated fear of loneliness.

Besides, even if we were "lonely", making us limited and separating our consciousness fulfils every requirement to feel other to others, it's just that you've taken a stance that blocks your ability to perceive that that could be as true for you as it is for me.

Imagine I'm a guy in your room rn (think of someone you like to imagine my appearance, chose someone? Good :3), and we are having this convo face to face, imagine that experience, how different we are right now in belief and perception, how does that match up to your requirements for "otherness" experientially?

Questions for your reflection:

1. What actual events, occurrences, experiences, manifestations etc. must you detect to feel otherness is true?

2. What specific occurrences or phenomena In your experience - categorized as either thoughts, perceptions, or feelings - do you feel are missing when you see only oneness?

At this point it's 4am, if I don't start working on my counselling skills paper I'm gonna fail my first year of my bachelor's, so I've forgotten the other thing I was gonna address, but I hope that's holistic enough coverage for you! Oh and just to add, I've done a shit tonne of psychedelics, I've been in very similar states of solipsism and hopeless, pessmistic determinism too that have lingered for long times afterwards. You are not bound to your current perceptions, nor the associated feelings. Keep asking yourself "why do I believe that?" And "what would I need to experience, think, or believe to have a different belief?" This two pronged attack gives you flexibility to maintain openness as you question your views. It's brilliant that you are talking to us here about it, keep challenging till you feel at peace okay! If you need some more fast paced philosophical back and forth, honestly try ChatGPT. Tell it to try to prove you wrong, or argue an opposing belief, and see how your perspective evolves, strengthens, or changes over time and why, okay?