All of reality is a product of human perception.
>>18544297Your body will still age and dieCountless people have tried to "manifest" health in their dying children and failed
>LEAST DELUSIONAL ATHEIST.
I perceive you as a gay retard. Your move OP.
>>18544297Congratulations, you reached the german idealism tear. If you wish to proceed, I shall leave you the key.https://www.imagomundi.biz/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Syntrometrische_Maximentelezentrik_Teil_A_Syntrometrie.pdf
>>18544297I’m sorry for making the modern world so gay and retarded bros.
>>18544331There are documented people from China who have lived over 400 years before mysteriously disappearing. Age is another product of perception.
>>18544297Perhaps action
No. Only the way people perceive reality is the product of human perception. Everything else, is not.
>>18544297If the world was solipsistic I would control my reality, the fact that I can experience undesirable, unwanted stimuli that make me unhappy is proof that my consciousness doesn't control my reality and my reality is controlled by a consciousness that is separate from mind and hostile to mine. There has to be at least 2 consciousnesses in the world, mine and the one that opposes mine, but there probably aren't more than two.If it's my imagination then I would have control over it and therefore the world and other people, if god's imagination is separate from mine then we're separate entities and it obviously is separate or I would have the same degree of control over the world as I do over my imagination. Not to mention my imagination is self-(ego)-centred whereas in real life I only get abused by others, their egos dominate mine meaning their egos are separate from my imagination, if it was MY imagination controlling reality then my reality would be as ego-self-centred as my imagination instead of being centred around the egos of others.
>>18544586Experiencing "unwanted" stimuli is still proof that your thoughts determine reality because you're constantly immersing yourself in negative unwanted thoughts that create an infinite feedback loop of misery instead of taking steps to reorient your thinking patterns. You're creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of perpetual misery that's utilized to reinforce your worldview of passive learned-powerlessness. Thinking that your own thoughts do not influence your reality is in itself a thought, and it is through this thought that you then experience "unwanted" stimuli that dooms you to a perpetual cycle of unhappiness. In other words, you think bad, negative thoughts and thus your reality reflects your own thinking.
You can't actually fully control reality until you've reached the fully enlightened state of a Buddha. Then you gain the ability to travel unimpeded between alternate worlds and so on.Until that point you are limited by your ignorance and notions. You believe the world is a certain way and so that's how the world stays.I don't make the rules, that's just how it is.
>if my thoughts control reality why can't I just perceive that I have a trillion dollars and magically make the trillion dollars appearBecause you don't actually perceive that you have the trillion dollars, you believe that the trillion doesn't exist and that making it appear is impossible by the physical laws you believe inIt's not complicated, mr. genius
They say, men create their own destiny. But children follow their parents. So for men who create their own destiny, do you choose to believe you can do nothing and do nothing? Or do you choose to believe you can do anything and do anything? The unfortunate take is that if there are two men who both take those respective path, they will both be correct in their path. The failure who cannot imagine success will stay on the path of failure. The successful who always imagine their success will stay on the path of success.
>>18544863The mental hoops that God has to jump through to try to justify his retarded sadism is profoundly delusional, this post is the equivalent of raping someone then saying "I'M ONLY RAPING YOU BECAUSE YOU'RE SAD ABOUT IT!!! IF YOU WEREN'T SAD THEN I WOULDN'T RAPE YOU!!!"It's profoundly retarded and delusional to even try to make that argument. God abuses me through his retarded tranny hivemind because he's a sadist and this abuse makes me mentally unhappy. The unhappiness is a reaction to the abuse not the other way around and even if it weren't the other way around it wouldn't be a good excuse for it. If my thoughts controlled reality there would have never been an "other" to impose negative stimuli on me to make me think negative thoughts in the first place. This post is so stupid because the idea that I should be abused materially or be forced to experience negative stimuli for thinking negative thoughts isn't something I believe in the first place. My genuine, strongly held belief is that the only way for me to experience unwanted stimuli is for it to be imposed on me by something separate from and hostile to me, so by your own logic I would inherently be right, if my mind dictates my reality then my genuine, strongly held belief that there is a mind separate from mine that controls other people and abuses me through them would be true or else I wouldn't believe it. Even by your own logic anything I believe is true, so the post you're trying to argue with would be inherently true since it represents my genuine beliefs.
>>18544519Sure, lil buddy, whatever you say.
>>18545043This is a dumb argument because there's definitely things I didn't believe until experience contradicted my belief, and in general other people have the power/freedom to impose their beliefs on mine that contradict my still held beliefs.
He said product of perception. Nothing about control or manifesting.
What do you think best explain why I perceive some things instead of other things? If perception is all there is, it doesn't seem particularly expected that I would, for example, perceive having hands - as I could be perceiving anything. However, on the theory where I actually have hands, and just perceive those hands, it seems entirely predicted that I would perceive my hands.
>>18545496>the theory where I actually have hands... ... which is based on solely on your perception of having hands, and every other aspect of which also derives from perception, is supposed to explain why you perceive that you have hands?
>>18545378I think if you examined those specific circumstances where outcomes seemed unexpected, you would find that those outcomes still fell within the bounds of what you believed to be possible or reasonable.None of the unexpected outcomes would be completely inexplicable just based on the rules and boundaries of reality as you perceive them.If something like the existence of a unicorn suddenly occurred, you would still be able to examine the existence of the unicorn and find an explanation for the causes and conditions that led to the unicorn, and eventually you would think "Oh, now I understand that there actually are unicorns, and why there are unicorns," without having to completely upend your reality and no longer being able to trust that any of your senses are accurate.The reason that unexpected things can still happen, and that different consciousnesses can exert influence on each other's perceptions, is that we are able also to perceive those other consciousnesses and their perceptions.So that for example when someone else perceives themselves flying an airplane through the sky, you can look up and also see the airplane in the sky, without any explanation being available as to why your own brain and perception would suddenly invent the airplane out of nowhere.The disparate consciousnesses are able to influence each other where they intersect. When one consciousness does some action that has causal results, another consciousness can still perceive the continuing results even without being able to directly observe the root cause.All of this is just Yogacara, and the texts of that philosophy would do a much better job of explaining it than I can.But there's no point in trying to convince another consciousness to change its beliefs about what's happening in this case because we've already decided how we think reality is and to try to fundamentally undermine those beliefs is to commit a horrible violence
>>18545328So what steps have you been taking to create different thinking patterns? You still haven't answered this question. You argue that bad things aren't a result of your thoughts but it is precisely because of this thought that you experience "unwanted" stimuli. From your perception, pain is outside of yourself therefore it isn't your responsibility to think differently nor change & it's the world's responsibility to treat you differently, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of suffering brought on by limiting beliefs of learned-powerlessness. Pain is an illusion brought on by the perception that reality should operate differently than it does; instead of approaching your life through contentment, you instead actively choose to reinforce the ideas of discontentment, pain, and suffering. Pain & suffering are just ideas, ones that you've sculpted into an identity. Your worldview is inherently passive.
ITT:>naive realist brainlets>getting filtered by the fact that their brain synthesizes all of their mental content, including their so-called reality, even on the level of "raw" perceptions>being oblivious to layers upon layers of abstract interpretation needed to support the ability to even describe one's current situation>never been in a sensory deprivation chamber>never done astral projection>never heard of hypnosisImagine being this ignorant about your own mind.
>>18545531What best explains perceiving handshaving hands, and perceiving them orperceiving hands for no reason? this pure perception stuff makes everything insanely ad hoc
>>18545644>i perceive that there's some "i" that can "have" things>i perceive these things i call "hands">every single aspect of "hands" is defined by how i perceive them>but i still perceive that i can "have" these "hands" independently of perception>i perceive that this explains why i perceive that i have hands>i perceive no confusion in this perfectly good explanation >i perceive that i am le smart
>>18545679What best explains perceiving hands? (hint: It's having hands)
>>18545698what you're fundamentally asking is why the thing you perceive (hands) are the way they areand the answer to that could be that it's because God made you in his imageor that sentient life evolved in our world in such a way that the appendages that would become hands were the most useful and successful for creatures, so that their appendages grew more like human hands over billions of yearsthe ultimate explanation depends on what your personal perception of reality is, just like everything elsebut it's a different question from "do my hands have an inherent existence independent of conscious perception"the endless chain of cause and effect that makes up our reality decides the current state of things, which decides the future state of things, and so onbut the cause and effect in itself also only exists in suchness through our perception, we cannot find any trace of it independently from perceptionyou might as well ask anything else, like "why do I perceive myself taking a shit?"the answer is because you ate something ~12 hours ago and now it's coming back out of youbut that doesn't imply that the food or the shit or the eating or your digestive tract all exist somewhere outside of and independently of perception
>>18544297Almost there.
>>18545698>What best explains perceiving hands? (hint: It's having hands)You haven't explained anything. You said the same thing twice, just by jumping through the hoop of projecting your perceptions into some other hypothetical realm you can neither access nor meaningfully distinguish from the perceptual one.
>>18545731Do you have hands?
>>18545914Sure. Too bad "I", "have" and "hands" are grounded exclusively in perception and don't mean anything whatsoever outside of it, even if we suppose "outside of it" means anything itself.
>>18545396If it was a product of my perception I would control it retard, you could say "reality is dependent on human perception" and that might be true (reality wouldn't exist without a human perceiving it), but if you say "reality is a product of human perception" that means human perception produces reality not just actualizes it and that obviously isn't true because to produce reality would mean to control it and I don't control reality I just perceive and actualize it through my perception but what I perceive isn't controlled (and therefore not produced) by me.
>>18544297No. The world (this illusion) is a product of your thoughts. Reality is God, beyond your perception. You cannot see God with your perishable eyes. All you can see with your physical eyes is what is also perishable like them. All you can see with your physical eyes is what is transitory, not eternal. All you can see with your physical eyes is what your mind made, not what God created.You cannot see creation with your physical eyes. God only creates that which is like Him, perfect. If you see imperfection in this world (diseases, war, attack, envy, ...), then you're not seeing what God created. You're seeing what your mind made. You're seeing hell. You're seeing duality, where if you go after pleasure, you'll give rise to suffering also. That's the nature of duality.
>>18545997>If it was a product of my perception I would control itWhy is this nonsensical line of reasoning so popular with sub-90 IQs? Is it the lack of self-reflection?
human perception is a perception of reality by humans
>>18546004Tell me what you think it means to produce something idiot, the only way you don't control what you produce is if someone else was forcing you to produce something you don't want to produce which defeats the point of your argument because you're trying to shift agency onto me for what other people force me to experience/perceive. If someone else is forcing met o produce something I don't want to produce then their thoughts are determining my reality and I'm just being exploited
>>18546010You had no control over producing the retarded thoughts that culminated in your writing that retarded post but you're too dumb to catch on.
>>18546006Reality is formed from human perception, and as your perception changes, then so too does your reality.
>>18546010You produce things unconsciously every day, CO2 being a great example as exhaling is an unconscious mechanism that isn't a product of manual intentional control. Your thoughts are equally produced unconsciously as you aren't taking steps to reorient your own thinking patterns into a different direction nor framework, but just as you can develop different breathing habits through concious intentional techniques, so too is the same for human thoughts.
>>18545585This post exposes your true agenda. You admit that the world won't change regardless of what I think (which is the core of your argument) but say I should delude myself into feeling good about being abused regardless (to preserve the ego of my abusers). Pain isn't "outside me" either its a reaction to unwanted stimuli that emerges from outside myself. Pain is the natural response to negative stimuli, responding with "contentment" to negative stimuli is called delusion.
>>18545578>I think if you examined those specific circumstances where outcomes seemed unexpected, you would find that those outcomes still fell within the bounds of what you believed to be possible or reasonable. None of the unexpected outcomes would be completely inexplicable just based on the rules and boundaries of reality as you perceive them.Even if you try to define "belief" this broadly its still not an accurate claim. The world constantly demonstrates things that fundamentally opposed what I believed the "rules" of reality are, for example people violating my mind (this is something I only believe is possible because it happens, I never believed it was possible whatsoever until it happened, its a fundamental violation of the fundamental rules of reality). Other people generally not being persistently real or affected by material/biological stimuli, other people demonstrating that they're part of a hivemind, other people operating as if they're under a shared delusion ( I might accept its possible for one "crazy person" to exist and behave in an unreasonable way/say nonsensical things. have unreasonable beliefs, but I wouldn't believe its possible for everyone I encounter to behave this way, especially repeating the exact same nonsense), etc. The world doesn't align with my "general structural beliefs" it opposes my beliefs about the fundamental nature of reality and you can't try to argue that I believe this now so that's why it happens because these are beliefs that 100% definitely would not be held is my pre-exisitng beliefs about the fundamental nature of reality weren't challenged repeatedly (my pre-existing beliefs about the nature of reality were so strongly held that it took literal decades of repeating external challenges/experiences to arrive at my current beliefs)
>>18546047>You produce things unconsciously every day, CO2 being a great exampleThis is just proving my point though because the fact that I unconsciously produce C02 is proof that there's something beyond my perception that forces me to, if my perception PRODUCED reality then I wouldn't perceive things unless i intend to, the only way I can perceive things I don't control is if my perception either doesn't produce reality but only perceives reality that something else produces, or if my perception is being forced to produce reality somehow by something separate from it
>>18546144>Pain isn’t “outside me” either its a reaction to unwanted stimuli that emerges from outside myselfThis is extreme double-think, admitting that you believe pain originates from outside yourself while denying it at the sane time. In any case, you do not believe that pain is being generated from your own thinking, which is in itself a thought that leads to pain because you are depriving yourself of the agency required to consciously think differently in order to produce a different reality. This reality you live in is a product of your own thinking, ideas, and beliefs; if you changed your thoughts, then your reality would subsequently change. The delusion is that your ideas aren’t your own, but they are. How you choose to react to anything, invite anything in, or negate something are actions that result from your own thinking & beliefs. The entire concept of “abuse” is delusion that you’ve curated a schizophrenic identity around; there is no abuse going on outside of the abuse that you perceive and bring into the conversation, as we’re two people discussing philosophy on an internet message board. Your worldview is an excuse you’ve chosen to prescribe to in order to remain in a perpetual state of eternal misery.
>>18546155Your body’s breathing functions are a result of your own organs. There are no outside entities tying you down & forcing you to breathe; it’s a process that originates from yourself, and can be manipulated through conscious effort. You breathe faster & more often then your lungs subsequently expand in capacity, and if you breathe less with frequency then the lungs shrink. You can choose to inhale helium, air, or the exhaust from a car, or a cigarette. Your thoughts are similar, and that you can take steps to reorient them in a direction that then produces a different life & reality than you currently experience. Just as you can develop lung cancer by smoking, so can you develop a new existence by thinking differently.
>>18546144The world you live is a result of your thinking. You’ve created the idea of a “bad” world, and then place responsibility on this world to change, and then suffer when the “bad” world doesn’t change & from your perspective seeks your harm. At no point do you ever place responsibility on yourself to do anything; it is always a concept that is for things outside of yourself to uphold. The idea of the world is still an idea that originates from your own perception. You’ve written a story of your life that places yourself in the role of a background character where events just happen. There is no “world”; just your idea of it. You change your idea of it, then you experience a new one.
>>18546308You've already exposed your intellectual dishonesty by admitting that reality won't change regardless of what I think in your last post. I don't control other people, their behavior is abuse, and my ability to interpret it in any other way is very limited.
>>18546631When was that ever stated? Your posts come across as extremely schizophrenic as you interpret things that aren't present & assume that everyone has an agenda that is somehow against you. If you cannot interpret the written word as it is stated then that is unfortunate, but it doesn't change the fact that your misinterpretation is still a product of your perception because your thoughts determine your reality.
>>18546743NTA, but>So what steps have you been taking to create different thinking patterns?>Pain is an illusion brought on by the perception that reality should operate differently than it does; instead of approaching your life through contentment, you instead actively choose to reinforce the ideas of discontentment, pain, and suffering.These phrases alone show that your philosophy is simply to become delusional, that bad things in your reality are good if you force yourself to see it like that. Its ultimate passivity. So don't ever engage in polite society without expecting heavy backslash against your foolish mindset
>>18546311I didn't create my lungs, something beyond my perception did and as a result I'm forced to breathe and perceive myself breathing despite not controlling (because I didn't create) the organs responsible. Again you're just proving my point. My lungs were CREATED by something separate from me not by me, when I breathe I'm not "creating my reality" I'm perceiving a reality that was forced upon me by something separate from me. The limits of my lungs were also imposed upon me by something separate from me, if I try to breathe water I don't become able to breathe water I just die. My broader reality and its limits are also imposed upon me and there's no amount of "thinking" that will create a better reality
>>18544297Everyone is an idealist until they get punched in the face.
>>18547181"Bad" things in your reality are the delusion, though. If your mindset is that the world is bad then your confirmation bias will intentionally search out things to confirm this self-created view of the world. So, when the "bad" world formed from your perception behaves badly according to the notions you've established for it, then pain sets in as your perception is that the bad world should operate in a manner contrary to the notion you've set for it instead of changing the notion outright. You expect bad things to take it upon their will to operate contrary to the notion you've set for them, then suffer when they act badly in accordance with your preconceived notion, instead of looking for good things out of a different notion of the world.
>>18547412Yeah, like I said, its toxic posivity mumbo jumbo.
>>18547439That in itself is a thought that determines your reality. Thinking differently is "toxic positivity", therefore negative thinking patterns are reinforced & accepted as normal regardless of their effect. Your perception is that thinking differently isn't acceptable & so the way you think doesn't change, which then causes your reality to stay exactly where it is because nothing is done to change it. Congratulations, you have decieved yourself into normalizing stagnation.
>>18547268You were just given tangible examples of how to change your breathing patterns & your reaction to this information was to discard it because it doesn't fit your preconceived notion of reality being determined only by forces outside of your own thinking, which is in itself a thought, which has led to your current reality where you cannot create a different world by thinking differently because the notion of thinking differently is contrary to this worldview, resulting in exactly where you are.
>>18547447You lot always go straight with the gaslighting when you're cornered like the snakes you are.>"No, its your fault you got raped by your uncle, you should have thought happy thoughts">"No, it's your fault you came out retarded, you should have thought happy thoughts while still in the oven buddy">"Its your fault your grandmother died because of her sickness, should have thought happy thoughts you dingus, you need to start thinking about her still being alive to resurrect her."You're too far gone
>>18547512Why is there assumption of "fault" or negative intent? That concept isn't being generated from any aspect of this conversation other than what is brought into it by your preconceived notions. Your view of the world is so hostile that neutrality is instantly interpreted as a form of attack. No one is out to get you, and this is nothing more than a discussion about philosophy online.
>Speaks nonsense>"Why are you guys mad?"Another sign of an idealist too far gone. Being self aware is a thought that limits them, or something
>>18547574"Idealism" isn't an idea that's been discussed itt; that's an idea that you've brought into the discussion formed from a preexisting notion. You're assuming that there are idealists, looking for that as a hammer looks for a nail, and then condemning whatever you perceive that your thoughts can squeeze into this notion.
>>18547512>being retarded is a bad thingThat's your idea & yours alone. Plenty of happy retards in life, otherwise this board wouldn't exist.>grandma diedMan, good for her, she gets to explore whether or not an afterlife exists. >Muh uncle rapeDamn that sex must've felt really good Your notion is that all of these things are inherently bad, when thar isn't anything other than a product of your own perception. Whether or not something is desirable or undesirable is entirely up to the individual. One man's trah is another man's treasure, which is why India exists as it's a literal landfill. It still hasn't clicked for you that everything you experience is entirely a result of your own perceptions.
>>18546321>>18547412>>18547447I don't create the world I perceive it, something else creates the world and whether the experiences it imposes upon me are experientially good are bad is largely objective not subjective. The idea of the world doesn't originate from my perception it originated in the mind of its creator while perception only perceives the world as it is, perceiving the world differently than it is is called delusion>>18547616this post for example, you're literally saying a person should delude themselves into believing that being raped is a good thing, you're a retarded nigger. What change will this effect in your world? Getting raped more? You're a stupid piece of shit.
>>18547454My reaction is to point out that your example represents the totality of "control" that a person has over their lungs, an organ they didn't create and now can only perceive within a set of limits imposed by the creator of the lungs
