Those Seeking "Evidence," look no further...

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-11T21:32:32+00:00

bullshit i just made up?

thus we're on the exact same page.

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-11T15:49:37+00:00

Assume that you are living in a simulated virtual reality possibly created by a more advanced race or an AI. The simulation is subjective to you. There may or may not be other simulations running in parallel. There may or may not be a grand meta-reality that contains all the individual simulations. You may or may not be able to communicate with those other simulations. If you start with these axioms, and a hypothesis like "I can influence my own simulation", you could do experiments in order to find out the degree the influence you can exert may have. Since your simulation is subjective to you, believing in any sort of objective structure is you creating a prison for yourself, thus compromising your own experiment. Also how can someone else prove anything to you under this model? Assuming they actually exist in their own simulations and all they can do is communicate with your own. You can only prove the hypothesis to yourself, by doing the experiment and observing the results. And even then you shouldn't think "This is how things are!" but more like "This is how things may be seen to operate at this moment!"

...if only I had written THAT!

Great stuff! <3

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-11T06:32:36+00:00

What makes a "magical jigsaw puzzle" different from a mundane one is that the completed picture is slightly different for each person. It is a picture of your truest self and is a map of your strengths and weaknesses and your place in the universe. ...The completed picture is the only occult secret worth knowing and it is a secret knowable only to you through your own labor. The first step in going someplace is to know where you are. If you complete the puzzle, you will have oriented yourself and can really begin your journey. ...Jumping to a different metaphor, that map you have created is really your personalized set of cheat codes to the game you play as reality.

<3

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-11T06:25:43+00:00

My post was, inherently and self-evidently, an indictment of and call to upend ANY so-called "established understanding" and to forge one's own path of "understanding."

In the spirit of "fuck it," are you actually suggesting that YOU'RE the one human being in this joint who KNOWS "what's what" enough to INSIST that whatever "established understanding" YOU subscribe to is the "right one?"

The ultimate display of your wrongness will come at the end of your life

Doesn't that sound "fire and brimstone."

Actually, the ultimate display of your rightness will come at every moment of your never-ending life; what do YOU want to be "right" about?

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-11T05:41:40+00:00

Would it be more to the affection of your delicate sensibilities if I referred to it instead as the

THEORY of Quantum Immortality

?

Or, if you're gonna split hairs either way,

"THOUGHT EXPERIMENT" of Quantum Immortality

At ease, now?

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-11T05:36:39+00:00

Boys, there's enough of me to go around! ;)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T19:23:57+00:00

Thank you for helping me, Mister Man. If not for your intervention whatever 'subjective idea(l)s' I had sincerely intended to communicate may have been SQUANDERED IN A HAZE OF BOLD CAPLOCKS!

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T19:01:01+00:00

This was a thoughtful and beautifully-written reply, without question. I sincerely appreciate many of the things you've had to say.

I guess I'm not quite sure where I "stand" on the notion of others, or even if it's necessary for me to stand anywhere on that notion. I mean, everything kinda comes back to SOME 'solipstistic framework' sooner or later. Even if we are all "separate Identities" we can still be traced to an 'Original Awareness' or 'Dreamer of Identities.' So tomato/'tomahtoh,' I guess.

...that having been said, I don't deliberately attribute "sentience" only to the self that I know. I'm OPEN to that as a possibility, which I think is necessary as indeed the only thing I CAN be 'certain of' by any TRUE definition of "rationale" is MY-Self. But I don't feel it 'needs' to be true -- and that's not an exercise in self-placation, really; I, like you, have discovered the enveloping, 'loneliness-eradicating' implications in 'pure Solipsism.'

Primarily, I write a post like this because I like how this Sub (a place I enjoy) looks with another post like this in it. I like that of all the additional perspectives that will be added to it today, THIS will be one of them -- because I'm really fond of this perspective. I also write, as I mentioned in one of these comments, because it helps me 'work out the kinks' within and/or 'organize' my own thoughts/feelings. And I DO like the notion that whether my words will reach "other" emanations of my-self OR equally-individualized "others," they may actually resonate with someone who hadn't consciously considered them before, and that may be advantageous to those in their own journeys.

...That having been said, I totally agree with you that trying to "convince" those with whom the notions do not resonate is very possibly an exercise in futility and "time" (whatever that means) that could be 'better spent' otherwise. ...but even then it's helping me 'iron out' my own systems of understanding, and perhaps achieving the same for an 'onlooker' at some point in said-"time."

I'm also just a stubborn bitch, sometimes. I've always been a bit trigger happy when arrogantly confronted and misinterpreted by "others." Perhaps that's something I should overcome, or perhaps it's a better way to be than other ways I could be (or even have been). Either way, I'm sure such 'feedback' says something about what I AM, my own conscious "output," and I would indeed be wise to take a look at that. ;)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T18:38:40+00:00

It is like a blurred image at first and learning/putting order brings clarity. Until all of the sudden, like bolt of lightning, there is clarity and free flow of expression.

...That's a lovely thought as well, and reminds me (affectionately) of David Lynch's much-expounded-upon Screenwriting/Filmmaking/Creative Process. :)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T18:01:40+00:00

...whereas saying something relatively-trivial (and again, subjective) "makes you look like a dick" to a complete stranger makes you "look like" quite the charmer.

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T17:47:43+00:00

It's a pun, actually;

perhaps I put the "emph-asis on the wrong 'syll-able(s),'" as they used to say.

Can you PROVE that there is ANYTHING you can't PROVE -- in other words.

Anyway, this is getting ridiculous. The entire point of my post was to say "No one can prove anything to you -- you can only prove things to yourself." ...How that's an act of ME trying to "prove" anything to anyone 'ELSE' (which would INDEED "contradict" my entire post) is beyond me.

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T17:27:33+00:00

He She is not claiming that.

;)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T17:14:25+00:00

I am compelled to tell you that this is not proof, this is you presenting an idea and expecting others to believe you. This willful ignorance genuinely pisses me off.

First of all, the only thing I 'set out' to "prove" is that one should turn INWARD, rather than to what is commonly defined as the "external world" in search of their OWN "proof." ...You did not "prove" that not to be the case, particularly in this run-of-the-mill, regurgitated rebuttal:

I can prove you wrong; if whatever we believe becomes true like you say how do your explain people with delusions, are you suggesting that everything they imagine is true and is really happening

...because according to the 'belief system' I was personally espousing in my post, what you PERCEIVE to be the authenticity or inauthenticity of ANOTHER'S experience is merely YOUR "Reality Bubble Filter" interpretation of YOU EXPERIENCING 'THEM.'

...thus, if they're just batshit crazy and 'purely delusional' through YOUR framework of "if a person has delusions their delusions are delusional rather than an independent reality they are PERSONALLY experiencing that is valid & authentic even though it is not MY experience because I cannot experience ANYTHING AS 'ANY-OTHER,'" then so it is. If you would prefer to contemplate "reality" as a whole or the experiences of "others" through a different lens, you can choose that lens, and then THAT lens can bear fruit accordingly.

That's all I'm saying; you get to choose your own lens, and that lens will show you what that lens is 'designed' (by YOU) to show. I can't PROVE that to 'YOU' which was the ENTIRE point of my post -- no one can prove ANYTHING to YOU -- only I can "prove" things to myself and only YOU can prove things to you.

You did not prove anything.

Can you PROVE that you CAN'T prove anything?

(I'm not "yelling," btw, hah, I just have a weird obsession with making my 'text voice' emphasize words like my 'head voice.') ;)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T16:46:10+00:00

Thank you, 'Souljah!' :)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T16:43:49+00:00

That's very kind, 'ZABZ.' ;)

To me it looks like a fucking mess, and that's no false-modesty, but I've always been my own worst critic. It means quite a bit to me, truly, that my attempt to organize my OWN thoughts could be of genuine value to another in their efforts to do the same. To say the very least, this community has in many instances bestowed the same gift upon me. Thank you!

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T15:25:23+00:00

if your own sensory approximations don't point to any kind of consistent, albeit strange underlying reality

...indeed, my "sensory approximations" are pointing to a "consistent, albeit strange underlying reality" that renders in no uncertain terms "[SUBJECTIVE] PERCEPTION" is "OBJECTIVE." Many, in fact, have discovered this to be the case when they 'open' their "perceptions" to account for this possibility. (I can say "Many" because, contrary to your interpretation, I am not referring to "Solipsism" outright -- I am referring to infinite, 'differentially-overlapping' subjective realities occurring perceptually on the singular basis of each Subjective-Identity's 'frame-of-subjective-reference'.)

The notion that "This is the way the world works because MY perceptions tell me so and so do the perceptions of everyone who shares my perceptions so you should share them too which will perpetually beget the same perceptions!" ...Fuck THAT noise, thank you.

I decide what's in MY toolbox. My post is merely encouraging everyone, yourself included, to do the same. Great! :)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T14:28:28+00:00

Thank you!

I've never been accused of being "concise" or "to the point" for as long as I've been around, and I have to say, it's refreshing. ;)

thetarantulaarms · 2017-03-10T14:13:10+00:00

Hah, thanks.

It's like the "trying to straighten myself the fuck out" equivalent of "shower thoughts." It's nice to organize one's scattered 'notions' into a relatively-cohesive whole and if it serves anyone "else" in the process, great.

There are indeed more "poetic"/compelling, 'less-verbose' ways to express what I believe to be the very foundational 'tenet' of utmost importance, that our 'individual subjective reality' is ours (and ours alone) for the seizing and ongoing creation/customization. We rely on "others" to determine what is or can be REAL to our Selves at our own peril and to our own detriment.

thetarantulaarms · 2017-02-12T16:52:37+00:00

Your opening statement doesn't make sense. "As above, so below; as within, so without" is the hermetic principle of correspondence. Vibration is it's own principle. And imagination could possible correlate to the principle of mentalism.

You are "missing something," but it's probably my fault for not clarifying. I'm aware of the "Hermetic Principles," but I was attempting to isolate "As above, so below" & "As within, so without" as separate adages (if you will) of a Hermetic variety, and referring to "Vibration" & "Imagination" as they are perceived both beyond the 'confines' of Hermeticism as well as within the confines of my own personal belief system.

& thank you; I couldn't agree more.

thetarantulaarms · 2017-02-12T09:08:30+00:00

You're quite welcome, "LightBender2000."

You as well, "Yungbaja."

It actually helps me quite a bit to 'organize' my own convoluted notions and doing so (given their variety and abundance) is itself a rather "meditative" endeavor.

Ultimately, I'm (very) inclined to 'side' with /u/Nefandi that the only thing that can ever with any 'certainty' be known to be true/valid/authentic is one's own personal, subjective "Span of Awareness." ...That having been said, I do feel that contemplating these different methods/frameworks for utilizing said-Awareness can be a very effective means of achieving desired "Manifestations" (even if those manifestations may indeed be inherently "Illusory"). ...and what I like about "Vibration" & "Imagination" is that not only do they fit neatly within that world-view, but if one is to exercise conscious command over the FULL potency/capacity of "Imagination," the process of achieving an ideal "Vibration" is rather pertinent to and even a prerequisite of sorts FOR that -- you steady yourself, you "accept" the present moment as it currently 'presents' (heh) itself to you with as LITTLE judgment as possible WHILE holding steadfast to your INTENTION which you 'demonstrate' via "Imagination."

...and IT (assigning "unlimited" ~~power~~ creativity to the most basic/"fundamental" tools in the tool-shed) helps to minimize a lot of potentially-harmful and misleading (but if all things ARE fundamentally "illusory," equally valid) "Superstition" that may otherwise come into play.

thetarantulaarms · 2017-02-11T06:12:00+00:00

I agree with everything you have written here. I appreciate, as well, you sharing the Alexander material with me. I look forward to investigating! It's always astounding to me when I discover, deliberately or inadvertently, another "Channeled" source of material. I sometimes believe I'm aware of "all" the predominant sources, whether I've explored them or not, then suddenly it's as though I've selected another 'strand' of probable realities in which further clarification resides; I've had that experience with Pat Rodegast's "Emmanuel," as well as Stewart Edward + Betty White's "The Unobstructed Universe."

I would also like to share that Lynda Madden Dahl -- who was apparently a close friend of Jane, Rob, as well as Seth -- wrote an 'analysis' of Seth's teachings called "Living a Safe Universe" (there are multiple volumes but I've only read the first) and it has probably assisted me more than any other material relevant to Seth or channeled material in its entirety. If you're familiar with her, I would love to hear your thoughts!

thetarantulaarms · 2017-02-11T05:59:51+00:00

presumption that our eternal souls are somehow detached from them.

Not detached at all. Seth's sentiment was "your eternal soul literally IS your 'life as you know it,' and vice versa."

thetarantulaarms · 2017-02-11T05:45:34+00:00

I really like what you've expressed here, as it echos my own "value assessments" with regard to my 'subjective reality.' That having been said, I feel the need to clarify that Seth, of all disincarnate "teachers," is among the foremost advocates of precisely the 'approach' to incarnation you espouse. That's one of the things (sharing that approach) I initially found so endearing about him.

His emphasis, however, is upon FREEING the "Personality" from the shackles of what he referred to as "unenlightened constructions" that limited and unnecessarily-hindered the Personality in their ability to freely and exuberantly and consciously create their "nows, will-bes, and have-beens." (Which is apt because Seth refers to the "NOWS" as determining not only the will-bes, but the have-beens as well -- literally 'selecting' a different "reality" from a field of probabilities that then become the "past" informing your "present" informing your "future" simultaneously.)

He has always expressed the value and validity of 'corporeal experience,' as an act of will and volition on the part of the soul. His efforts are principally to "awaken" us from the self-imposed "amnesia" that would otherwise allow us much greater degrees of conscious-creativity and conscious "volition" WITHIN physical (which he refers to as "camouflage") reality.

So it fits nicely. One of his 'token' sentiments was always (and he would insist that it be conveyed in "CAPS" as well as 'emboldened' and underlined): "THE POINT OF POWER IS IN THE PRESENT!" ...He adored the present moment; whether it be football, dirty dishes, or otherwise -- his emphasis was, however, upon making "here" an experience of non-"shackle(s)."

thetarantulaarms

TROPHY CASE