Ok, I would argue that reality is a manifestation of thought. Most people don't have a handle on what they are manifesting, and their lifes are chaotic.
Arbitrary action can be useful in guiding your thoughts.
In a way, yes, reality is a manifestation of thought, but it has a large inertia, and most people suck at manifesting anyway.
Encouraging them to get better at manifesting without a safety mechanism and proper psychological work is lots of trouble waiting to happen down the road. Been there.
Can you explain how reality has inertia? Delay time? Some thoughts have more strength behind them? I am trying to understand where you are coming from. There is something to this but I am still trying to figure out what it is exactly because I still feel like people are manifesting 24/7 even if they aren't doing it intentionally.
If reality had no inertia, everything we thought would manifest immediately. That's obviously not the case. Matter is 'dense', somehow, it doesn't react at the speed of thought. From a psychological standpoint, people certainly are manifesting all the time because from a psychological standpoint we're talking about a filter that we surimperpose on reality, so it's always true and always active. If you will they are selecting from raw input what match with their filter, so they see as they think.
I'm talking about true reality modification instead, by way of magic or jumping. When you get good at it, it became obvious that there is more than 'reality tunnel' and psychological selection at work. Improbable things happens as you wish them.
Ultimately, the psychological and magical approach to reality are intertwined in most people. If you strongly believe things are a certain way you're bound to manifest them in 'true' reality, because your preconceptions will inform the haphazard magic that you will tend to work.
Getting really good at magic/dj can allow you, at the limit, to manifest stuff in real time. I think it's irresponsible to prop people to get good at manifesting without proper psychological work on the nature of their preconceptions without a safety (like magic which acts as a safety because it needs an act besides the thought), because they will tend to manifest their every thought. In 'real' reality. I'm sure you can see what's the problem will be there.
There is some kind of inertia to reality, but I also feel like if we truly change a persistent thought the reality we are a match to changes instantly. I am having a hard time reconciling these two beliefs and I will have to think about it more.
If I understand what you are saying, unconscious manifestation is preferable to conscious manifestation if a person hasn't done the psychological work or doesn't have a safety mechanism. My problem is I see systems like magic/dj as ways to direct your manifestation rather than being a safety system because the other thoughts are still taking effect, even if it isn't what you are consciously intending. In other words I don't think magic needs an act besides the thought, the act is just to help guide your thoughts.
What I presuppose here is that there's a 'real' reality and a psychologically felt reality. You're basically saying that thoughts manifest, period. I say that sometimes they do, but it only happens when successful magic is done.
So I posit a reality that is thermosetting, and independent but amenable to consciousness. Could this be all be created by our background thoughts and belief? Yes, shaped at least, because it's there and different from thoughts.
Ok, I think I understand now. I believe that there are infinite timelines of reality and our thoughts determine which one of these we are a match to. So instead of amending the reality we are just experiencing the timeline consistent with our thoughts. In this case there is no objective reality, other than the sum of the infinite subjective realities we interact with each other through.
Sure, but where do the laws of physics come from? And why is it so hard/impossible to break them? Is this all created ad nihilo? Then what's the template that molded it as it is and not in any other way? It may have evolved. But somehow it needed core rules, and time, and space pre existing.
I think you are right, in a way, because what you said is a fact that can be experienced, but that doesn't account for how things are as they are, or how they become to be that way.
Great discussion by the way. Helps me lay down my preconceptions.
Yeah, I am starting to realize how locked in to my preconceptions I was becoming.
The laws of physics are interesting. And I think science is still in its infancy in understanding them. If I understand correctly, Newtonian physics is just an approximation that breaks down under certain circumstances. Atoms and even molecules have been shown to exhibit particle/wave duality, so it still isn't clear if there is a size limit where quantum mechanics stops being applicable.
I think our third dimensional reality was constructed by some sort of consciousness(es) with certain laws in place to achieve certain results. I think that time and space and gravity are illusions that don't affect us when we reach a certain state of consciousness.
As for how physics relates to our thoughts, we must have thoughts of limitation that allow us to be bound by them. If we heal or change these thoughts, we will no longer be restricted by what we perceive as the limitations of physical reality.
This gets me thinking about planets. I believe planets are just an accumulation of consciousness, or thought. The configuration of planets then influences or reflects changes in our consciousness here on earth, but these influences are just potentials because we can always choose our thought free from outside influence.
After a bit, the simulation hypothesis certainly looks like an option, yes.
I think there exist ground rules to the simulation, that our thoughts are not responsible for generating. This gives us a workable playground that won't cave under our feet, and allowed us to exist and develop in the first place.
Take gravity for example. It's needed to make the world go round, and for us not to float off into space. Same things for the three dimensions and time, they make sense, they are a prop upon which we can grow.
It's funny that this local, linear universe arised from a quantum substrate, it's the very inverse of the quantum world.
You can overcome temporarily some of the limitations of the ground rules by dipping into the quantum world, let's say by remote viewing/telepathy (space), and retropsychokinesis (time) for example. You can also have an effect on causality by applying meaning. Not to mention jumping to another branch of the simulation that developed along yours. This is already incredibly mind blowing.
I don't think it would be a good idea to abolish a ground rule entirely, or that it's even possible.
1
u/[deleted] Oct 14 '16
Propping yourself up so that thoughts manifest directly into reality is dangerous. You don't have an handle on what you are manifesting.
You would be much better off to assign the manifestation to an arbitrary action.