4 ms·

If you are a secular person, it should follow that you are a non-dualist. Yet that is not so common. There's no "whats its like to be a bat". Because that invok

If you are a secular person, it should follow that you are a non-dualist. Yet that is not so common. There's no "whats its like to be a bat". Because that invokes a sense of a "soul" or "spirit" or "self" being transferred from one being to another. There is only is and its content. That's it. The easiest way to see or get a sense of this is to replace any "I am ..." with "There is a ....". For example, instead of "I am thinking of writing of using stable sort", replace it with "This person have a thought of using stable sort". This is much closer to the actual reality underneath. Even attachment itself can be put in this term. "There's a feeling that this person own this" or "There's a sense of I". After doing, perhaps this is mental illness, I already see glimpse of the sense that everything is everything at the same time. As there are no real difference between this rock and the other rock behind the mountain that I can't see. There should be no difference between my thoughts, senses, feelings, emotions etc and that of other people. Now your sense of self captures the entirety of the universe. If you die, the universe dies for all you know. I think this is what the ancient books have been talking about by rising and being a God.

selcuka 1y ago
> If you are a secular person, it should follow that you are a non-dualist. It depends on your definition of "dualism". If you define it as "having a soul that was created by a higher being", then yes, they are mutually exclusive. On the other hand, one can also define dualism as being purely evolutionary. David Chalmers [1], an Australian philosopher and cognitive scientist, has some interesting ideas around how dualistic consciousness may relate to quantum mechanics. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Chalmers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Chalmers
fsckboy 1y ago
>There's no "whats its like to be a bat". Because that invokes a sense of a "soul" or "spirit" or "self" being transferred from one being to another. what's it like to be a human? "There's no "whats its like to be a human". Because that invokes a sense of a "soul" or "spirit" or "self" being transferred from one being to another." -- anon-3988 it does?
- anon-3988 1y ago
  If you become the bat, you become the bat. There is nothing permanent that is being transferred. When you think of "being the bat", you have this image of thinking "oh shit, i am a bat now!? I can echolocate and shit". Its more like, ...what? The imagination of being another person is simply an imagination that arises within this body, spirit, soul, or whatever it is.
  - fsckboy 1y ago
    "what does it feel like to be a bat" means what you think you are telling me. it does not mean "what would it feel like to become a bat" "what does it feel like to be blind from birth?" can you, a sighted person near-sighted though you may be for this example, even/ever comprehend it no matter how extensively described. can someone who has never seen actually describe it to you?
    - anon-3988 1y ago
      > "what does it feel like to be blind from birth?" can you, a sighted person near-sighted though you may be for this example, even/ever comprehend it no matter how extensively described I am saying that it is not possible. It is entirely possible that you can "see" but not comprehend anything, hence effectively being blind. Is my red your red? Is my hotness your hotness? Is the universe upside down? Is your 3d the same as my 3d? Even all of this imaginations and hypothesis is coming purely from my sense of experience. I don't even know that you exist, you might simply be a figment of reality, there could be nothing behind this post. I wouldn't know.
      - fsckboy 1y ago
        sounds like you are grappling with the question as intended. you are not answering the question. keep going. consider what it would feel like to be Boltzmann's bat DesCartes in Plato's cave. Ask yourself, "Flappito ergo quod?"
        1y ago
derektank 1y ago
Secular != Strict Materialist There are far fewer of the latter than the former
- anon-3988 1y ago
  I am not that versed in the terminologies and the differences, but I am talking about people that the physical reality is all that there is.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
astrange 1y ago
This is a spiritual error called monism. It's taking non-dualism too far. > As there are no real difference between this rock and the other rock behind the mountain that I can't see. There is a real difference between the two; there must be because they're in different places. Monism requires you to deny actually existing differences by saying they're not "real". > There should be no difference between my thoughts, senses, feelings, emotions etc and that of other people. This is what in therapyspeak you'd call "not having boundaries". You aren't the same thing as other people; you can tell because the other people don't think that, won't let you borrow their car, etc. It opens them or yourself up to abuse if you think this way.
- 4gotunameagain 1y ago
  > There is a real difference between the two; there must be because they're in different places. That is according to our human perception. For example a single, uniform 4D object could have a projection in 3D that appears as two distinct 3D objects. I am not claiming that a fourth spacial dimension exists, only that we cannot possibly know what exists.

selcuka 1y ago

> If you are a secular person, it should follow that you are a non-dualist. It depends on your definition of "dualism". If you define it as "having a soul that was created by a higher being", then yes, they are mutually exclusive. On the other hand, one can also define dualism as being purely evolutionary. David Chalmers [1], an Australian philosopher and cognitive scientist, has some interesting ideas around how dualistic consciousness may relate to quantum mechanics. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Chalmers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Chalmers

fsckboy 1y ago

>There's no "whats its like to be a bat". Because that invokes a sense of a "soul" or "spirit" or "self" being transferred from one being to another. what's it like to be a human? "There's no "whats its like to be a human". Because that invokes a sense of a "soul" or "spirit" or "self" being transferred from one being to another." -- anon-3988 it does?

anon-3988 1y ago
If you become the bat, you become the bat. There is nothing permanent that is being transferred. When you think of "being the bat", you have this image of thinking "oh shit, i am a bat now!? I can echolocate and shit". Its more like, ...what? The imagination of being another person is simply an imagination that arises within this body, spirit, soul, or whatever it is.
- fsckboy 1y ago
  "what does it feel like to be a bat" means what you think you are telling me. it does not mean "what would it feel like to become a bat" "what does it feel like to be blind from birth?" can you, a sighted person near-sighted though you may be for this example, even/ever comprehend it no matter how extensively described. can someone who has never seen actually describe it to you?
  - anon-3988 1y ago
    > "what does it feel like to be blind from birth?" can you, a sighted person near-sighted though you may be for this example, even/ever comprehend it no matter how extensively described I am saying that it is not possible. It is entirely possible that you can "see" but not comprehend anything, hence effectively being blind. Is my red your red? Is my hotness your hotness? Is the universe upside down? Is your 3d the same as my 3d? Even all of this imaginations and hypothesis is coming purely from my sense of experience. I don't even know that you exist, you might simply be a figment of reality, there could be nothing behind this post. I wouldn't know.
    - fsckboy 1y ago
      sounds like you are grappling with the question as intended. you are not answering the question. keep going. consider what it would feel like to be Boltzmann's bat DesCartes in Plato's cave. Ask yourself, "Flappito ergo quod?"
      - 1y ago

derektank 1y ago

Secular != Strict Materialist There are far fewer of the latter than the former

anon-3988 1y ago
I am not that versed in the terminologies and the differences, but I am talking about people that the physical reality is all that there is.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

astrange 1y ago

This is a spiritual error called monism. It's taking non-dualism too far. > As there are no real difference between this rock and the other rock behind the mountain that I can't see. There is a real difference between the two; there must be because they're in different places. Monism requires you to deny actually existing differences by saying they're not "real". > There should be no difference between my thoughts, senses, feelings, emotions etc and that of other people. This is what in therapyspeak you'd call "not having boundaries". You aren't the same thing as other people; you can tell because the other people don't think that, won't let you borrow their car, etc. It opens them or yourself up to abuse if you think this way.

4gotunameagain 1y ago
> There is a real difference between the two; there must be because they're in different places. That is according to our human perception. For example a single, uniform 4D object could have a projection in 3D that appears as two distinct 3D objects. I am not claiming that a fourth spacial dimension exists, only that we cannot possibly know what exists.