May

11

Let’s assume for the moment that you exist

Filed under Thoughts |

Sometimes I run into old blog entries that are lost somewhere in some long forgotten blogs (even by Google) - and if they are still able to tell something, I take them an re-publish them here. This is one of them, originally written 7 Nov 2004 - and yes, it was I who photoshopped that image …

Bush reading Mein KampfIf this sounds offensive, please consider. From my point of view I only know that I exist and that is the only thing I can be sure of. OK, there are people out there that are not so sure about that but we are not going into that. Beside me I see a lot of people out there - from Osama bin Laden to George Bush (maybe that difference is not that wide but again this is not something I will get into here).

Now that person I am talking to - you - might just be a figment of my imagination - sorry if you indeed exist and if that is important to you.

That’s why in the beginning I suggested to assume that you exist. Starting from this premise you are now reading this blog and you might ask yourself if in fact the writer of this blog exist or if he is just a figment of your imagination.

Let’s now take the attention away from this writer of the blog and concentrate on you. You have lots of people in your world ranging from Mother Theresa to George Bush (now we finally have a bigger range).

Some of these people we love, some others we would prefer to not have in our world, but why are these undesired people there in the first place? If they are a figment of our imagination then we must have put them there. Just like the dream where the boogy man chases us - nobody but we ourselves put this boogy man there. For the dream we usually accept that premise, but often not so for what’s called the real life.

Now let’s look at the teachings all these gurus try to instill in you - you know this thing about the glass half full or half empty - the world-is-as-we-see-it thing. I know all these guys can be just figments of your imagination (possibly), but then it is you who try to teach yourself something. Why not listen to that - it might be right.

When you wake up and see the boogey man as what he is, I guess you usually forget about it within minutes and maybe laugh about it, but you will not get worried about him. Only if you don’t put him away, forget or laugh about him, he will get and stay important. You might even be afraid to go to bed the next night because he might come back.

Looks like you would create him by giving him importance, isn’t it?

So - why do you give the external boogey man any importance? Is he really that important to you? What do you need him for anyways? But I will not step on your toes, you will have your reasons, I suppose.

But now, let’s roll this back - what if you don’t exist? Don’t I have to ask myself all these questions?

Like …

Why do I have Bush in my life, and the IRS and crooked cops, and corrupt politicians? What the heck do I need them for?

PS: I found proof that all this is a figment of my imagination - Bush even teaches a foreign language to children, and that where others try to tell he can’t even read.

And here are the collected comments for that post (don’t want to loose those!)

9 comments

10 Nov 2004 @ 03:18 by Kathie Lynch @68.101.175.211 : Imagination?
I know we create alot of this ’stuff’ cause we need a game. I was just pondering the ‘Bush’ win in the election today. I was thinking about why a dumb bunch of Americans would elect that yahoo into office again after what he’s done to make the world distrust us. And that’s putting it mildly. But instead of making it SO serious, which would make me the effect, I decided to actually feel some affinity for the guy. We created him in our lives, so why not look at the good points. He makes it a real challenge to unite the world, so we should thank him for making a real challenging game. After all, a thetan in good shape likes a good fight, right? A pusillanimous wimp is easy to beat, and who likes winning an easy game? The more challenging the game, the sweeter the victory. And if he’s just a figment of my imagination, boy, am I screwed!!:-)))

10 Nov 2004 @ 03:34 by ov : Bush met the challenge
met the challenge with flying colours. In just three short years he has united 5.5 billion people with his “with us or against us” speech. 5,500,000,000 people, that is a historical record. There has never ever been a single person that has come close to uniting that many people before.

11 Nov 2004 @ 22:58 by Dennis Dragomani @68.111.136.45 : I assume I exist as much as Santa does
It’s a lot of fun to witness the excited anticipation a child experiences when waiting for Santa. To the child, Santa is real. But this is merely a minor myth-within-a-dream. The big dream I wish to highlight here is the one that we call “the universe”. Do “I” exist? Heck, no. Do “you” exist, Gunter? Sorry,
but once again, the answer is no. The house you live in seems quite nice,
but “it” doesn’t exist. Please excuse “my” use of quotes around pronouns,
but pronouns by their nature denote separateness, and separateness is what the dream is all about. And it all seems quite real. Am I certain of these assertions? Of course not. The nature of the dream is such that certainty is but an illusion, until the moment we awaken ourselves, and now no longer subject to time, know that You/I/Everyone is God.

12 Nov 2004 @ 04:27 by Ge Zi @24.127.146.67 : I knew there was something wrong with me
… but now I at least know what it is - “I” don’t exist - darn!
But - Dennis - well said - thanks.

12 Nov 2004 @ 21:41 by ming : To Exist or Not Exist
Yeah, I suspected there was something wrong with you, Gunter. Now it is clear: You don’t exist. I thought something was missing.

But, seriously, yes, me too, the only thing I can be sure of is that I exist. Others are not so lucky.

And if we play with the interesting thought experiment that others don’t really exist, or rather that their temporary roles don’t, then it makes things have different meanings. Like, if we pretended that it was all just characters in a movie. We laughed, we cried. There were good guys and bad guys, and good&bad guys. Things get blown up, people die, etc. But we know it is just a movie and just good effects and good or bad acting. We know that nobody really got hurt and it was all just an act. So we’re not seriously dismayed about the bad stuff that happened, and we take the good things with a grain of salt too. What matters then is not any irreversible events in the movie itself, but what it makes us feel like afterwards. What are we taking with us?

So, we might look at life in a similar way. It is not the events themselves that are terribly serious, but what is important is what it does for us, what process it takes us through, and what we take with us.

For that matter, if we assume that all the actors are basically immortal, even if their roles aren’t, then the only stuff in the long view that is really important is the stuff we take with us and how we have evolved from it. The props and the roles and the studios don’t last for more than a blink of an eye anyway.

12 Nov 2004 @ 22:14 by ov : To influence or simply observe
now that is the question. If one is to simply witness then why incarnate, why not watch from the box seats with the unobstructed view, wouldn’t feel the grief, couldn’t be controlled, the ultimate lurker. So what is the point of playing the game? To engage in a bit of sex. To influence the outcome. Can’t see the former being worth the grief that goes along with it, and the latter seems too futile to be worth the frustration. But heh, I wouldn’t have known for sure unless I incarnated at least once.

I liked that part in Vanilla Sky where Kurt Russel is protesting that he is real when everybody in the audience knows he’s not.

www.simulation-argument.com is just as valid as any argument given for the existence of god, and in a simulation you can be God. If you were given the option of being god, and living forever, with the only catch being that you would have to download to silicon, would you take it?

12 Nov 2004 @ 23:48 by hgoodgame : Kurt Russell, Vanilla Sky?
Sorry ov, but I believe that was Tom Cruise unless you’re referring to a different movie?
By the way, he was real, it’s the audience that’s an illusion.

12 Nov 2004 @ 23:58 by ov : Yup
In the Vanilla Sky movie Kurt Russell played the psychiatrist Dr. Curtis McCabe. The audience I was referring to were those in the theatre watching the movie, or those sitting at home on their coach watching the VCR; I was one person in the audience and whether or not I’m an illusion is kind of what this thread is all about now isn’t it.

13 Nov 2004 @ 00:58 by ming : Why am I here
Yeah, I’m just here for the sex. Well, no, I don’t think it makes the game not worth playing just because it isn’t really, really real. Because it IS really real, for one thing. The effects are amazing. It is just that we might end up taking it all a little too damn serious. And we might forget who we really are. Watching TV isn’t as good as actually taking the ride, with all the sensations and adventure that goes along with it. This stuff has to be experienced. But it only becomes better by still remembering who we actually are. At least occasionally. Yes, I think I already have taken the option of living forever. Or, for that matter, it was never really an option. It was an option to occasionally forget about it, in order to experience the thrill of life on the edge.


Posted by Merlin Silk - May 11th, 2007

Comments

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind