Does a mirror work as an analogy?
You don’t have mirrors, at least I never said that. External reality is a mirror. It does not contain the emotions you feel, or the thoughts you think, does it? It is not your complete experience, is it? Isn’t it only a sensory reflection of a part of your experience? The part of your experience that is easy to share with others because they also have senses so they can view this partial representation of your experience too?
Reality … is your experience. Reality is complete. Your experience is the only thing you know that is so complete, so exact, the thing that contains everything that represents all that you know, is it not? External reality is not like that. It is only there, only accessible, when you are having an experience. When you are experiencing Port Angeles you can access Port Angeles. When you are not experiencing it, you can’t access it. At best, you can only imagine it right? At least, try and access something new about Port Angeles when you are not there and next time you are there, see if that new thing is in your experience. I bet it won’t be. It must have been imagination.
Your reality is your experience of it. Your reality experience travels. As it travels, the external mirror provides your senses with a representation of the reality experience you are having. This way you can experience it as something more than imagination, and as something that others can share with their senses. Wherever your reality experience is not traveling this moment is not in the sensory mirror … you can’t see it there. If you are not in China, you can’t see China, you can only imagine it.
But don’t get lost in all this contemplation. Simply go back to the beginning of this comment, this idea. What is out there is not complete. It does not contain all the elements of reality. It does not contain all the elements of your experience. That alone is enough to recognize what is out there as something less than reality … something like a reflection. It has all the elements a reflection has, and nothing more … at least nothing more that one is not imagining there between the looks they take at it with their senses. What is happening in the mirror out there when we are not looking, we don’t know. No one does. No one is experiencing it … therefore it is not reality. That too is like a mirror. When you are not standing in front of a mirror, you don’t exist in the mirror, do you? You only exist in the mirror when you are looking in the mirror.
#munging our internal #reality with external #actuality is like confusing the part with the whole. The relationship between those two distinct domains is not that of a mirror. That appears to me to be just a mental trick you do to justify the way you talk about what is not you yourself.
It is equally valid to realize that there is only one reality and what is “out there” is a reflection of it. That works just as well to explain everything … and in fact explains many things we experience that the subjective / objective model does not … and, it is simpler and easier to use once one develops proficiency with it.
Subjective and objective is not a fact, and does not absolutely describe reality. It is just a map humans have been using until they have come to believe that map is the actual territory.
For example I can take any observation and point out that aspect of it that is objective and independant of the being reporting it, and that aspect of the a report with is dependant on the observers subjective #reality. Drawing that distinction is a useful tool allowing me to better match up and synchronize my #reality with others and with #actuality.
Sure, abandon the distinction if you don’t care to do that … and yes you will garner more freedom for yourself … but bear in mind that the freedom pole in a spectrum from freedom-to-restraint is the same pole as meaninglessness ← which is a generalization that i started toying with this very morning
Try that out for yourself. Take some kind of creation that you manifest … even something mundane so that your feelings about it will not dominate the patterns you notice. Give yourself more and more freedom in how you manifest that thing. See if you can notice it becomming more or less meaningful even to yourself as how you do it becomes more and more just whatever.
You have used this subjective/objective map until it has become how you think and what you know. When you think, you always reference this map. Another person, with a different map, may see features and pathways you never knew were there because they were not on your map. Another map may be more useful, or more complete. But you have used this map you are using so long and honored it so deeply that it is no longer easy for you to separate the map from your way of thinking and any attempt to do so feels like chaos or insanity … it feels like the destruction of all that you know and are comfortable with. It feels like you will no longer be able to communicate with the others who are also using this map.
Inside and outside has a usefulness only in practical communication with others, but as a point of perspective only. In my own concept of how things relate, there is no inside or outside, it is all just me, my experience, and most important, how I feel. The feelings ARE what we are always trying to obtain. No matter what we do or think, what we call desire, as beings, is ALWAYS related to moving toward a better feeling.
When we communicate with others, what is far more useful than facts or perspective of inside and outside, is how we feel. The “external as a mirror map” allows us to more easily focus on feelings and the sharing of those with others and less on the facts and other things that are not what we are all actually going for as we live. In actuality, it allows us to communicate better … moves us all closer to the source of the meanings we are actually desiring. No one ever desires money, or a car … people always desire the feeling that they think having money, or a car, will give them. The reality is a mirror model allows people to focus on aspects of feeling foremost instead of the separatism of physical things the subject/objective model emphasizes. #ThisIsGood
I am totally with you … there must be millions of other maps that i am not using … i am open to discovering them … but i an not going to GPS thinking my senses are only mirroring my own experience … that map has died for me.
We all have GPS built in. It is our emotions. One emotion is more important for navigation than all others. It is the emotion of excitement. (other emotions are important for other reasons, such as love). Our emotion of excitement is always telling us what is the best way for us to go in every situation.
We can access the emotion of excitement through our senses. We can look around and see “things” and “directions” and notice a lot. In that noticing, some directions feel better, more exciting, to look in so we focus more there … that is the right sense to follow.
An ideal way to navigate reality experience is to pay very close attention to the emotion of excitement at all times and follow it’s guidance diligently. Then one does not need physical maps, and GPS computers, or anything sensory based to navigate with. For instance, if you were purely following your guidance of excitement on your adventure with Elaine (and maybe you were to a degree) then you would have turned at the exact right time to have the best possible adventure you could ever wish to have (and perhaps you did). But you needed nothing other than attention to your emotion of excitement for that to take place. The rest of what you did do, all the physical and sensory and memory stuff, was to get you outside of the fixed reality maps you were currently using, your expectations, so that you could receive an unexpected impulse to follow.
It is paying better attention to something that improves navigation ability though the reality experience that is desired … but not specifically more attention to sensory information. What actually improves the experience is attention to the emotion of excitement. Some people have merged those. Some people use their senses to discover what is exciting and tend in that direction naturally. But in all cases, it is the emotion that is the guidance. The senses are there to receive and delight in the experience and to view the experiences of others!
However when i become acutely aware of what another is expressing of their feelings and intentions and observations, and if my own feelings and intentions are tuned complimentary, and if i am acutely tuned to the #actuality surrounding both of us, then sharing that moment best happens for both of us.
I love when that happens .
I describe that as “living in the world with others” rather than living in my my own little #reality .
Mathmatically: my #reality + others #reality + #actuality > my #reality
Or said differently, my box is bigger than yours
When you are focused on your excitement, you will be in the best possible place to respond to others. There is no exception to this. It works every single time. Whatever best possible interaction and outcome is available in any moment, for all interacting, is available though the emotion of highest excitement … and for each person, not just you.
You can test this anytime you wish. I have, over and over. It has never failed. What does fail is my ability to stay on a path of following my excitement moment to moment to moment. That is not so easy as it sounds. It is easy to get side tracked by shiny things and rabbits to follow down enticing and mysterious holes, that look great, but are not actually highest excitement … and those are the places best interaction with others break down. Never when actually following excitement. True highest excitement is always the indicator of the path of greatest harmony for all.
Also, “focusing on yourself” is not the same thing as following excitement. One is rarely focused on their self when looking around to see what feels exciting. The feeling of excitement comes all by itself, just like all feelings do. One does not need to be focused internally to notice it. It’s just there and noticeable if one has any emotional acuity at all. It simply wells up when attention outside falls upon that which is most exciting.
It is interesting to me that whenever you talk about my philosophy you characterize it as “focus on self”. My philosophy is the understanding that all is self, all is one. But it has very little “focus on self” at all. Focus is wanted to be “out there” on the greater part of me, not on my self identity … which would be quite boring and unproductive. I am highly interested in life and interaction with others. That is my prime goal in every story. In fact, I would tend to say that my philosophy has less focus on self than yours, even when meditating. Somehow, you seem to have things all turned around.
go clunk over here.
When you are focused on your excitement, you will be in the best possible place to respond to others. There is no exception to this. It works every single time. Whatever best possible interaction and outcome is available in any moment, for all interacting, is available though the emotion of highest excitement … and for each person, not just you.nathan
For me, this thing you call “excitement” is an energy thing … sometimes this energy (this spirit) comes from within and then i express it with enthusiasm … other times it comes from without and then i absorb it with glee. I am aware both times. Were it always to come only from within, like you talk, then my life would be quite different than it is being now. I don’t think i would like that. That energy flow doesn’t feel exciting to me.
It is interesting to note your last paragraph … sometimes things do not come out the way we intend … at the end you talked of me not yourself … your point comparing the two. But when you talked of me you lied … trust me on that, i know myself quite better than you ever could … especially that part of me which breaths out … that last paragraph was all your own “self awareness” … #MirrorMirrorBack stuff all the way down …
when i breath out … it works best if you breath in … maybe think of it that way.
It is interesting to me that whenever you talk about my philosophy you characterize it as “focus on self”. My philosophy is the understanding that all is self, all is one. But it has very little “focus on self” at all. Focus is wanted to be “out there” on the greater part of me, not on my self identity … which would be quite boring and unproductive. I am highly interested in life and interaction with others. That is my prime goal in every story. In fact, I would tend to say that my philosophy has less focus on self than yours, even when meditating. Somehow, you seem to have things all turned around.nathan
Yep, #CycleOfDoing is a breathing cycle.
“sometimes it comes from within and then i express it with enthusiasm … other times it comes from without and i absorb it with glee.” ~ Seth
Yep, “One does not need to be focused internally to notice it. It’s just there and noticeable if one has any emotional acuity at all. It simply wells up when attention outside falls upon that which is most exciting.” ~ Nathan
“but when you talked of me you lied” ~ Seth
Nope, you simply have not moved your attention sufficiently outside your own skin to see it yet. When you do, you will. Trust me on that.
each of us is so very special, unique, particular and peculiar … we do not generalize well to each other. i can not generalize me and apply it to you without telling a lie. that is just how this unique identity works … otherwise we are in a whole different ball game.
incidentally where i “characterize your philosophy as focus on your self” … i am telling the same kind of lie …
funny how that kind of interaction feeds on itself, eh?
Your interest seems to be the very specific way you choose to live and relate to life IMHO. I agree, you seem to have that choice tied down very well … so why? Why are you sending your attention out to all these other things, like the things I represent? Why not simply live within the life boundaries you have chosen and forget about all the rest? What does looking at all the rest that is out there and available, but not taking it into your self, your own being, do for you?
Fact is I am quite exhilarated with our interaction whatever you do. Steal as many cookies as you want to eat … it is all the same to me.
Sorry , what i said about you, was from my perception of you, … it was not about me. So what you said came as a surprise again … i didn’t expect you to go there quite so soon.
Of course my perception of what you say is certainly tainted by my own #egoo. You are right, that perception is my choice. But shucks i have tried to solve that equation so many other ways … yet i cannot ignore the constant edges of your behavior. It is only you yourself who seem oblivious to the effect of the shit you continually make up about me … oblivious to what it does only for you, in and of itself … excused to yourself because your own made up a story that you are helping me.
But yes …
I totally agree … we need to cut that shit out … if we want to talk about, what we really can’t talk about with that kind vocabulary, “Higher World interaction on the leading edge of human evolution”.seth
Come on … this isn’t rocket science, just human language. You very clearly threw out all the normal language signs that you believe my “knowing about you internally” is “wronging you” somehow, and actually, you gave a lot of “hows” right there.