Hi Snowbat, I don't think Bernardo assumes such a simulation (a kind of solipsism?) or is this thought experiment for the sake of 'what if'? "Make love" as Bern

Hi Snowbat, I don't think Bernardo assumes such a simulation (a kind of solipsism?) or is this thought experiment for the sake of 'what if'? "Make love" as Bernardo says in this sense implies genuine meaningful relationship, even though both persons are dreams within 'the godhead', transcendent or ultimate reality or whatever you call this 'timeless meaning'. If so there's still both illusions of active agents (humans who love), which are meaningfully 'real' in the socalled "mind-at-large". Even if you were all alone, crashed or stranded on this planet or another, you can find unity in relationship with the environment which is 'not you'. I think you could relate to plants and animals with love, admiration, beauty and an intense purpose. Animals can return this love as well. Of course other humans would amplify the meaning significantly as I think the love between men reflects the transcendent better, perhaps mystics disagree and their union with God is above anything else. I have no clue, but I for sure would agree with you. This aspect is - for what I understood of Bernardo Kastrup's views - not undervalued and likely just as much emphasized as you and I do. But it's sure good to point it out, love gets it ultimate expression in human relations. I wonder though what theologians and/or mystics would say about this. Bernardo Kastrup argues theology can (and should if the ideas are true) be re-examined in light of the implications of his thought. I'm not sure if I make sense to you or in general? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1cHg_S3X3A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1cHg_S3X3A