Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Discord Now Fully Linked With 420chan IRC

Can DXM save the world

- Mon, 12 Aug 2019 03:52:05 EST r1qxYhgN No.367823
File: 1565596325102.jpg -(645833B / 630.70KB, 1500x1500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Can DXM save the world
My research is showing a hopeful possibility. Could DXM usage on a mass scale trigger a spiritual movement powerful enough to halt to rise of fascism in the hyper capitalistic neoconservative west? Resend the motor of your mind, do not accept their sick lies.
James Dobblewot - Mon, 12 Aug 2019 08:04:50 EST ItTs89/9 No.367828 Reply
Not this again, every "enlightened" pseudo intellectual thinks their way/method(psy, dis, veganism or whatever) is gonna save the fuckin world. I'm glad you can see the benifit of not being an extremist, but all your idea would do is cause mass hysteria and a bloom of early onset schizoaffective disorder across random demographics.
Augustus Chipperhire - Mon, 12 Aug 2019 15:30:18 EST IloN6QLN No.367832 Reply
You forgot fasting

I HEAR a ten day fast cures everything.
Simon Chattingstone - Tue, 13 Aug 2019 08:14:23 EST fKxn+Zc0 No.367836 Reply
Sounds chill. I'd recommend ketamine and subjecting people to an intense imagery comprising the world's best and worst actions. All the cover-ups and corruption, all the altruistic acts, all the bizarre-but-neutral ones. Let people decide for themselves which force they feel more drawn toward, but let's give everyone the same information at least. We deserve to be equally educated, though we may not all be drawn to factual information the way some are.
Nicholas Creffingchudging - Fri, 16 Aug 2019 15:17:49 EST jR/q9jYi No.367882 Reply
All I learned about the economy from dxm is that capitalism is nature and capitalism is everything and it is in everything and unstoppable
Wesley Neddleshaw - Sat, 17 Aug 2019 08:22:16 EST jPo0kOKS No.367896 Reply

>capitalism is nature

No. Nature has balance, harmony. If someone upsets the balance the whole system shifts to become stable again.

Capitalism is based upon the delusional expectation of infinite resources and infinite growth. Capitalism left unchecked is a cancer.
Nathaniel Wugglestatch - Sun, 18 Aug 2019 02:28:46 EST 9/y9NC5p No.367911 Reply
1566109726122.jpg -(479622B / 468.38KB, 1440x1440) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I agree with giving all people access to free information. I wish we could provide a free space where people could watch any show or movie together free of charge and then converse freely and share ideas, substance, and positive experiences. Healing and non-capitalistically oriented. Just about sharing and coming together again. 2020, lets make it happen?!
Nathaniel Wugglestatch - Sun, 18 Aug 2019 02:36:37 EST 9/y9NC5p No.367912 Reply

Capitalism is an economic system, there are lots of economic systems available we can use for different “things”. Gift economies for example. Free exchange of ideas, free information. Giving of services, substances, what do you need? Nobody can provide it! And free of cost, no capital needed! Nobody’s game isn’t pay to play.

In a gift economy your value isn't determined by how much you can privatize, it’s by how much you can give. Can you dig it? Nobody can.

Jarvis Piblingstock - Sun, 18 Aug 2019 03:26:00 EST +y5AJZLx No.367914 Reply
Nope. A substance alone cannot "save" the world. The only way to "save" the world is to restructure its citizens' minds. Getting derped on a drug won't impact long-lasting change into the people. I feel like the truth and answer is honest human connection. We need to love the unloved. Support the flailing. Our way of life must change if we are to ever have an effect on each other again.
Cedric Bunkinspear - Sun, 18 Aug 2019 17:57:35 EST wpVL/p9/ No.367926 Reply
Taking drugs for long enough might, so we need to do multiple infusions on people on a weekly basis. If you have perma disso tolerance, does it mean your mind is altered in some way?
George Doddlehidge - Sun, 18 Aug 2019 18:27:37 EST bZy9xtdz No.367927 Reply
Drugs do restructure minds.. that's what everyone's been saying for a long time. Terrence Mckenna for instance. There's things I would touch on, that I don't want to, that are further reasons why drugs can have the effect you're talking about. I wish I understood the mind better..
Fucking Fendletid - Mon, 19 Aug 2019 00:30:59 EST PmyRfM0y No.367936 Reply
nah, DXM made me into a racist nazi
Jack Fullyshit - Mon, 19 Aug 2019 03:14:30 EST Tw8O+9JO No.367943 Reply
The problem is that how they restructure minds isn't always predictable
Phoebe Gaffingpedging - Mon, 19 Aug 2019 10:54:47 EST bZy9xtdz No.367944 Reply
That's not a problem. You can feel and think a different way 20 minutes from now than you do right now, even sober. It's a matter of putting the right pieces together and focusing in the right spot.
Edwin Werringshaw - Tue, 20 Aug 2019 01:38:18 EST Tw8O+9JO No.367951 Reply
No it isn't on a personal level, and anyone who understands that may or may not be a good candidate for dissociatives or psychedelics, but more likely may. But it is on a sociological level when you dose billions of people all at once who were all accustomed to being nothing but drones plus compensatory pleasures (if even that) beforehand. Imagine the mass confusion lol.
Edwin Werringshaw - Tue, 20 Aug 2019 01:40:47 EST Tw8O+9JO No.367952 Reply
To be fair though I've literally had the same idea before and it felt like as massive as an epiphany as I imagine it does to OP and I'm still a proponent of it.
Edwin Werringshaw - Tue, 20 Aug 2019 01:50:38 EST Tw8O+9JO No.367953 Reply
So damnit fuck my PC "not insane" bullshit
I actually, literally believe that aliens induced humans into inventing DXM for the sole purpose of accelerating our evolution. What I'm not sure of is if they're the "good" or "bad" guys, but they both seem to have a stake in it.
But I'm leaning towards good, because of how the initial experience, pre-magic loss, kills the idea that our current manifestation in this reality is genuine.
Inb4 the forum troll dons a new IP and decides to discredit me in a predictable manner, or a regular normalfag decides to use their own misinterpretation of my insecurities to harm me for no reason, as is human nature.
Edwin Werringshaw - Tue, 20 Aug 2019 02:01:26 EST Tw8O+9JO No.367954 Reply
(sorry for posting so much)
However, if it was so important in the grand scheme of things, government intelligences would have eliminated it by now, unless they're retarded (which they actually probably are, and the real conspiracy is conspiracies themselves causing them to appear to be more powerful than they are).
My guess is that it's some kind of experiment, cast with an exceptionally wide net. Which is evil, because the substance itself is so damn beautiful before petty people, who are too cowardly to do it themselves, ruin it for you.
Fucking Fannerridge - Tue, 20 Aug 2019 03:13:21 EST 2Qm0plaN No.367955 Reply
You fucking dip why would you want to stop what's saving the west? What dose did you take before writing this?
Edwin Dammlefield - Tue, 20 Aug 2019 13:28:20 EST lDy5kvJ4 No.367957 Reply
How tf is the source of our species cancerous disease ‘saving the west’? You’re deluded af if you think capitalism is a blessing. It’s a pyramid scheme you dolt.
Shitting Foblinggold - Tue, 20 Aug 2019 15:49:48 EST s/LsdI2k No.367959 Reply
How could one thing ever be the answer to such a complicated issue? What are you, 14?
James Shittinggold - Fri, 23 Aug 2019 21:28:10 EST br/7EUOR No.368017 Reply
Fuck off leftist scum. I take DXM so I can free my mind from people like you.
Hannah Backleted - Wed, 11 Sep 2019 11:59:01 EST 76gXaXcy No.368532 Reply
1568217541257.png -(385228B / 376.20KB, 674x384) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
i support your cause anon, but u cant force people to do stuff. i find most people dont enjoy the dxm high.. it takes a rare breed.
ur better of with mushrooms
also i think they tried this in the 60s with acid and it didnt work.
but hey spread the dex gospel all u like. i try to.
i tell people it can get them off heroin and they never even try it. some people just dont want to better themselves. sad but true.
George Gandlefut - Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:43:27 EST NXjdEwL6 No.368537 Reply
1568234607067.jpg -(312628B / 305.30KB, 720x797) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
How do you guys not just implode from the cognitive dissonance of doing the degenerate stuff that you do and posting on a canadian drugs and gay porn website all day while still holding the beliefs that you do? The internet broke your brain more than DXM, PCP, or ketamine ever could lmao, take a step outside
Fuck Croffingwater - Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:44:50 EST mTo2hdWA No.368538 Reply
1568234690989.jpg -(223402B / 218.17KB, 1080x1277) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
dex nazis rise up. 4 more years
Fuck Croffingwater - Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:46:51 EST mTo2hdWA No.368539 Reply
Here's a thought we were degenerates before we matured mentally and saw that our leftist ideals were retarded, maybe some day you will too, one hopes
Eugene Sellerbury - Wed, 11 Sep 2019 16:49:59 EST 3jTm8tij No.368540 Reply
1568234999685.jpg -(15826B / 15.46KB, 253x280) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
this is just sad lls


>anyone who isn't a nazi is a leftist

you are either in your parents basement getting high on over-the-counter cough suppressant that you tricked your mom into buying for you or you're a grown adult who still gets high on over-the-counter cough suppressant, either way you're kidding yourself if you think you aren't part of the dregs of society
Clara Mirringshit - Wed, 11 Sep 2019 18:40:48 EST ZuQJFjhZ No.368544 Reply
1568241648011.png -(31924B / 31.18KB, 296x282) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Fuck all yall fascists. Any form of leftism in the world is corrupted by the right. All forms of socialism are puppeted by and for capitalist countries to keep up the narrative that "green paper good, unalienable human rights bad". This is truly a world meant to snuff out what little good is left in the human spirit.
Hannah Buzzdale - Thu, 12 Sep 2019 19:28:02 EST 6A+vXK17 No.368563 Reply

has this not been the norm since the beginning of civilization? this is specifically regarding your last sentence.
Von Villings - Thu, 12 Sep 2019 22:28:33 EST zL5EYkyP No.368568 Reply
>>367953 I agree, DXM is very extraterrestrial indeed, but it's also very atemporal. (You're not the only one who believes this , it's also an excellent medium for contacting advanced intelligence due to its effects of stripping the mind of programs/belief systems.

The fact that a substance that can make you have full out of body experiences and complete dissociation/psychedelic highs is available at your local pharmacy or grocery store is Cosmic, because access to that experience is only a few blocks away... skateboard there...or take a bus, load up and then propel your consciousness into space, or inverted space?

legal to consume

And to the subject of this thread: The effectiveness of an Economy will always be influenced by the current state of human nature, this is why Socialism has always ended with horrendous abuses of power, and has ultimately led to human suffering.
This is also the reason why Capitalism has produced the 1% and 99% wealth distribution situation, however in Capitalism there is promise for the productive, creative, and ambitious. Which essentially means if you want to be successful and make your dreams come true, you can! I would also like to address people saying that "The Earth is limited in its resources", the Universe isn't limited in anything, the only thing that's limited is human thought. So with the current state of human nature/evolution yes there will always be greed and abuse, however this greed and abuse is asserted from a corporate consolidation of power, and though brutal it is not nearly as brutal as if it were asserted from a Government or State, if power and control was asserted by the State over free enterprise, the operators of such power would inevitably abuse it, and it would be hell on Earth. Far worse than Capitalism, I mean hell look at the Consolidation of leftist Media companies, it's a highly disturbing thing.

Think Objectively
Also look at history
Psuedo Maharaj - Fri, 13 Sep 2019 18:24:09 EST fg0gRQg3 No.368585 Reply
the universe exists in the mind.

it's impossible to think objectively. what you know as objective thinking or reality should be more of a consensus one we arrive at using the scientific method. assuming you give a shit about logic and rationality, and not just mysticism.

you believe in aliens. that is or is part of a belief system. if dxm strips the mind of belief systems, ...well you see where I'm going with this? an obvious contradiction. or maybe you can explain what you mean more clearly?
Henry Duckforth - Sat, 14 Sep 2019 19:57:18 EST 6A+vXK17 No.368625 Reply

oh you were serious? i am sorry, i had doubted your convictions.
Isabella Becklehut - Sat, 14 Sep 2019 21:53:00 EST EZ+uTxCE No.368628 Reply
1568512380676.png -(86234B / 84.21KB, 603x431) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
uh OP..
fascism is a side effect of NMDA antagonists ya know
Von Villings - Sun, 15 Sep 2019 13:05:42 EST zL5EYkyP No.368631 Reply
1568567142181.jpg -(238611B / 233.02KB, 664x817) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>368585 "The Universe exists in the mind" vs. "assuming you give a shit about logic and rationality, and not just mysticism." cancels your previous statement out?

If the "Universe existing in the mind" isn't farther from "Logic and Rationality", then I don't know what is.

Logic and rationality/the scientific method: You exist in a physical universe subject to the measurable laws of physics, these laws exist for everyone.

Mysticism: The Universe exists in the mind, consciousness etc. is what postures that existence.

I get that logic and rationality are important (never said they were not), but any kind of psychedelic/dis/spiritual experience can't really be quantified with science or the scientific method, only the effects of the physical drugs on the brain can be studied in relation to their effects. The real enigma is that even when you're not on drugs, your reality is comprised of biochemical responses to your exterior environment that your brain interprets from the senses.

What I'm getting at with all that jargon: Science and Mysticism are more like Yin and Yang?

Aliens: whole other subject; not a belief system, plenty of evidence (and even more ignorance/disinfo)
Randxm - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 03:35:20 EST fg0gRQg3 No.368642 Reply
how is that mysticism? can the universe exist without a perceiver? what even is the universe, other than a word we humans invented? so the universe is a word. sorry I can't be more articulate. just dosed 660mg dxm.

I don't consider logic/rationality and science to be one and the same. you can be rational and not know a thing about science.
Cady !HeronoBLQk - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 03:44:34 EST fg0gRQg3 No.368643 Reply
I dont care about whatever the fuck you guys are talking about. I just thought you were posting dead kennedys lyrics lol.
Von Metanaut - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 14:48:27 EST zL5EYkyP No.368656 Reply
1568659707413.png -(540421B / 527.75KB, 525x751) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
We're really on the same page it's just that communication breaks down with this

What you said with your question of Can the universe exist without a perceiver, is really where this is. Sure, take science away and have clear rational thought, it still depends on the perceiver for that thought to exist, for the universe to exist, really for anything at all to exist.

It breaks down to two things (concepts): Consciousness and Information,

Information cannot Inform anything without Consciousness (the word cannot be enacted), so without consciousness- Information (the Universe) cannot exist,


Consciousness cannot be aware of anything without Information, because without information or distinction, awareness cannot be aware of anything, Thus there is no "Conscious" in consciousness. (It can't exist then)

This breakdown is the result of probably about 30 or 40 3rd Plat trips (I hope it's simple and doesn't just sound like a bunch of entitled jargon) I really can't break it down any further, I usually don't remember 4th plat trips. I just wake up from them. Happy dexing!
Awe' God !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 17:03:54 EST kVHwGU4H No.368661 Reply
1568667834266.jpg -(50927B / 49.73KB, 960x784) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
you are basically just taking one concept which is awareness/energy/beingness/existense/experience/information and some other synonyms that I don't recall atm and unnecessarily splitting it into two concepts which are pretty meaningless without each other. It's like splitting the world into the self and the other, but I encompass both of those into one makeup which is awareness, it's all fucking awareness, matter, ideas, concepts... Although I do get what your saying, you may very well separate the two, I just can't think of an application of that because both are completely meaningless without the other.
Awe' God !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 19:10:17 EST kVHwGU4H No.368676 Reply
you do realize that that wasn't the point being discussed?
Ernest Sovingman - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 19:14:32 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368678 Reply
No dude I get it like...... everything is awareness. Why bother differentiating between concepts all is ONE!
Awe' God !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 19:27:37 EST kVHwGU4H No.368681 Reply
Well, there may be a point differentiating between concepts, just perhaps not in something like awareness and information in fundamental metaphysics context, because both become pretty meaningless without the other. Although if it is meant as self vs other than yeah I think it makes sense, I just think it's more useful to reserve the word awareness to encompass both since the reasons mentioned above, but I'm no einstein in this, so there may very well be good motivations behind it which I do not grasp yet or I'm simply using the symbols/language in a different way from the guy. At this level of abstraction it's usually very easy to loose common ground and descend into miscommunication.
Ernest Sovingman - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 19:39:34 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368682 Reply
Say all awareness in the universe disappeared for an earth hour, then reappeared. Would objects in the universe arbitrarily stop interacting with each other during that earth hour (if they did, there would be no way to measure an hour anyway)? Awareness is still necessary to make information meaningful but that doesn't mean that it is dependent on awareness to exist.
Awe' God !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:04:46 EST kVHwGU4H No.368685 Reply
the very word exist implies awareness. so yes you need awareness for something to exist aka be a being aka experience. Also yes, if you remove objects from the universe they would stop interacting.
Von Metanaut - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:26:28 EST zL5EYkyP No.368687 Reply
>>368685 this

"you need awareness for something to exist"

Okay let's start here, I agree with this statement. You're saying Awareness is everything, but awareness of what what exactly? The state of being Aware implies a subject, what... awareness of awareness? When you break it down into words (and Ernest is right All is really just ONE) but when you break it down into words like we are, you're saying awareness... but... awareness of what exactly? You cannot be aware of Nothingness (welcome to the Void)

I'm not complicating things, if you think that "everything" is just awareness, yet not designating that Awareness to a subject/subjects to be "Aware" of, then that word isn't enacted. Are you trying to explain Voidness by using double negatives?
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:34:52 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368688 Reply
And I know that awareness is required to confirm existence but the lack of confirmation presented by unawareness isn't evidence in and of itself that something doesn't exist, only that it might not
Von Metanaut - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:38:58 EST zL5EYkyP No.368689 Reply
>>368688 How would you know if something didn't exist unless you were aware of it not existing?
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:45:55 EST kVHwGU4H No.368690 Reply
I'm not trying to explain void, i don't think there is awareness in void because as you say it implies something to be aware of. My logic is that since it implies the object of awareness, the object is part of the definition of awareness. You can define a kingdom of mushrooms without necessarily describing it as a particular mushroom or listing all the mushrooms in that kingdom, right?
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:47:19 EST kVHwGU4H No.368691 Reply
I don't really know how to answer your query, but if you provide your definition of existence, maybe I'll be able to help.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 21:53:31 EST kVHwGU4H No.368692 Reply
it may not be evidence, but think about what evidence is, if not something that is a very subject of awareness. In that same vein you may start noticing that every "thing" "concept" or really anything you have any reference of is manifested through awareness. Dunno if that strikes a chord for you, but as I said I don't really know how to explain... something so simple, self explanatory and basic/fundamental. I think you yourself agree with it, but simply are a bit misled by your convoluted compartmentalized definitions that are bleeding into each other and short circuiting.
Von Metanaut - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:00:18 EST zL5EYkyP No.368693 Reply
" the object is part of the definition of awareness."

I agree, and now that I know that, we both do agree

I have the same definition of existence, You said that the object is implicit in your definition of awareness,

I was saying that an object is a piece of information, and that information cannot exist without consciousness (consciousness needing something to be conscious of), which means we were communicating the exact same thing
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:12:31 EST uSOyyfeC No.368694 Reply
logic has difficulty in working if you treat variable A as A in one instance and as variable B in another. We are all guilty of this and it is increasingly easy to do that the more abstract and detached from the pragmatic low level definitions that we have learned this language based on, but as you start taking notice of those higher order categories and abstract ideas you start to develop your own set of symbols untying the convoluted symbolic map of your language and adopting it to describe those new ideas that you encounter as you grow up. I mean most people don't do it, hell most people hardly even encounter or simply lack the curiosity and motivation to sit for hours sorting this shit out, but to some degree it is possible and it really helps if you are ever to engage in any kind of analytical philosophy. Most people don't do it, but instead of realizing they didn't do it and thus should be not only very skeptical of themselves in terms of ideas they derive through that kind of abstract symbolic logic, but also humble in how they offer it to the world... Dunno, most of us find ourselves relying quite heavily on our reasoning and cerebral activity to motivate our actions to have at least some kind of a keel in the water to navigate our sailboat in this fucking sideways wind. Intuitive and wise action based on very rudimentary logical symbolic map is never the less not only possible but employed to great success by some people, just probably not for most of us enthusiasts... But again we are all guilty of this bleeding into, although to wildly varying degrees... But if you start to get fundamental enough I honestly believe it's pretty much impossible to have clear definitions as human beings on those things, they are just so far beyond our intellectual grasp.
Von Metanaut - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:21:06 EST zL5EYkyP No.368695 Reply
>>368694 Right, especially as each Human being is a unique node of consciousness, but I do believe that similar experiences and thoughts can be shared in a stimulating way, no matter how abstract
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:32:03 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368696 Reply
I don't think I'm conflating the definitions of anything. Awareness is simply not a prerequisite for existence, only to prove it. It's true that awareness is a prerequisite for proof, but I don't see what that has to do with my point. If there was literally no awareness things could conceivably still be happening without it. It would just have no significance.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:34:51 EST uSOyyfeC No.368697 Reply
I'm getting banned left and right on this forum, dunno if will be able to engage in further discussion. Good hang bros.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:38:52 EST uSOyyfeC No.368699 Reply
>I don't think I'm conflating the definitions of anything.
Relax dude smoke some herb, we all do it.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:41:26 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368700 Reply
If you're going to tell me what I'm saying instead of listening to me than why bother talking to you
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:43:54 EST uSOyyfeC No.368702 Reply
Oh oh, actually I think I know what is the culprit here. The culprit is that fundamentally we all believe we are separate from what we experience, but what I've come to realize symbolically and intellectually is that actually the reality I experience IS me, which is to say we are one thus I include that into my definitions and therefore logical operations with the symbols that I use.

Also being butthurt is not a reason to ban or even report for that matter ;)
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:45:08 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368703 Reply
What we perceive is not what exists but is a symbolic representation of the relationship between ourselves and something that exists. What actually exists is the thing that we're relating to (but can never truly know). We don't "manifest" these things, what we manifest is a simulacrum that may or may not be flawed.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:48:25 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368704 Reply
Oh nice putting the responsibility of your shitty behavior on me.
Von Metanaut - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:48:45 EST zL5EYkyP No.368705 Reply
I was using the term awareness=consciousness

"things could conceivably still be happening without it" = this is a thought is emerging from your consciousness
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:49:07 EST uSOyyfeC No.368706 Reply
I did listen and even hint at the answer that I didn't bother to write out. The hint is in the first word.

You must admit some conversations are better left to slide or peter out. Not that this is unworthy subject, it's just that some of us have too different of a vocabulary/symbolic-map to find common ground easily enough to justify the effort.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:49:52 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368707 Reply
But the things that are actually happening, not the thought I have about them, are not
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:52:06 EST uSOyyfeC No.368708 Reply
How exactly did you derive that information from the post you were referring to? I was actually taking the time to explain myself having had a small epiphany of a new way that I could do that.
Dextrolord - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:52:37 EST 1tpnrEB8 No.368709 Reply
cmon Awe', don't be picking fights with the anons.

Even if I do so enjoy watching it play out
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:54:32 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368710 Reply
>being butthurt etc
You're removing yourself as an agitator by making it all the reactor's fault
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:57:12 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368712 Reply
Translation: because you assume you're superior to me and if I don't agree with you it must be a result of miscommunication.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:57:17 EST uSOyyfeC No.368713 Reply
>The culprit is that fundamentally we all believe we are separate from what we experience, but what I've come to realize symbolically and intellectually is that actually the reality I experience IS me, which is to say we are one thus I include that into my definitions and therefore logical operations with the symbols that I use.
Are you listening? I was listening to you, even taking the time to explain myself. Which part of this don't you understand. I was saying that we all believe we are separate, hence the easy confusion of including that definition into your intellectual understanding too. On a primal level I see a tree or another human looking at me and I believe it is separate. This is me and that is another... That doesn't prevent me from structuring my intellectual map of definitions in such a way that says you and me are one in fact all of the reality I experience is me, we are one.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 22:59:40 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368714 Reply
I don't disagree that we aren't separate from our experiences, but I do believe that our experiences are indicative of something that is separate from us and never truly knowable
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:00:41 EST uSOyyfeC No.368715 Reply
I was just expressing my honest opinion that people should only get banned for rule violation or as a joke, never for getting butthurt because somebody rode in on a high horse. Then I said relax some herb as in don't take this personally dude.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:05:36 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368717 Reply
>Dude I just insulted you but you're supposed to pretend like I didn't
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:08:21 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368718 Reply
Sorry man but I would like to have just one conversation about something like this where all that's exchanged is ideas related to the discussion instead of this posturing bullshit
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:10:10 EST uSOyyfeC No.368719 Reply
Ok I see. It's just that I believe that as above so below etc and so as I am a being, so if there is anything it in all likelyhood is a being alsoa guess, but one that gives me a working model(just like assuming existence outside of myself instead of solipsism is a guess but one that makes sense and gives me a model that works, leads to less contradiction and compartmentalization) and so if my reality is only because I am aware of it so probably any other being's reality is subject to it's awareness.

tl;dr I'm panpsychist/quantum-animist which is to say a burnout hippy who thinks rocks have feelings too and thus not everyone can relate to me or even catch my drift, but I think we are starting to find some common ground Nathaniel
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:13:06 EST uSOyyfeC No.368720 Reply
As I said my intention was other, I was just commenting on the new banning policies and the influx of fascist mods. You getting insulted is more in your control than in mine, if you are really adamant about it you can get insulted about someone giving you flowers which is why I commented that IMO this matter should be left out of the banning procedures.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:15:15 EST uSOyyfeC No.368721 Reply
You were the first to comment about the banning, I simply brought it up in case I disappeared, you found it as an opportunity to involve feelings into the discussion which was as efficient as it could have been given the circumstances up to that point.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:15:59 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368722 Reply
I can imagine that being true but I don't know if I believe it.
I also think solipsism makes a lot of intuitive sense and simplifies things so it's tempting but also terrifying
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:21:57 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368723 Reply
Also I can understand the assumption that all objects have some kind of quasi-awareness because if consciousness is just an energetic pattern than any energetic pattern could be awareish. But what I don't know is whether only certain patterns key into consciousness or if all do. I have no way to tell.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:24:10 EST uSOyyfeC No.368725 Reply
Actually if you assume the position of solipsism that conveniently kind of gets rid of the need to explain most of this shit, but not only does that seem escapist and lazy, it's also no way to live, cause how would you create any meaningful relationships only pretending to engage something real... but i digress.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:27:18 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368726 Reply
Yeah it does but it also leaves a lot of things unanswered, like why there would be aspects of oneself that appear not to be aspects of oneself and behave unpredictably. If solipsism is true than we're absolutely insane and the sole cause of that insanity, and there's nothing out there to stop it. Very lonely.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:31:50 EST uSOyyfeC No.368727 Reply
Yeah, me neither, in fact I don't believe anything I "believe". it's all a guess with a fluctuating probability I associate with it, but at any given time I have the best working theoretical intellectual model I can refer to and so if I'm not completely clueless and think that some area of intellectual exploration can be referenced in my model, I do so. To add to that those beliefs I expressed have been able to integrate a lot of previously compartmentalized ideas and definitions, make great intuitive sense and I haven't encountered seemingly any contradictions to them in many years now which is why I call them beliefs at this point even though they are just a guess.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:38:37 EST uSOyyfeC No.368728 Reply
>why there would be aspects of oneself that appear not to be aspects of oneself and behave unpredictably.
well for starters as has been already expressed, the awareness needs a subject. Relation to - not only is the cause of experience which for me is synonymous with being/awareness, experience is synonymous with relationship, so yeah I dunno why things be like it is but it do and on a second thought that's the only way this could even work.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:45:35 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368730 Reply
But in a solipsistic universe I don't think that model would be necessary. Things could exist and be perceived self-evidently (and in fact are, because only perception would exist) because it's all one person anyway, and there isn't really a subject or an object. The idea that there are relationships between things crumbles. Which is why I don't believe in a solipsistic universe, because subject/object duality seems to imply otherwise.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:49:49 EST uSOyyfeC No.368731 Reply
I wasn't talking about solipsism and refer to above post for reasons I find it uninteresting. I mean you could pursue it for science but even in purely logical endevours the thing looks like a cop-out and doesn't really explain much nor does it make much intuitive sense.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Mon, 16 Sep 2019 23:50:59 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368732 Reply
But I was and you quoted me as if I wasn't. You took what I said out of context then.
Von Metanaut - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:04:05 EST zL5EYkyP No.368734 Reply

The One Infinite Creator IS all beings, all planes of existence, all Universes and dimensions, and has always existed and always will exist because it is all that is, ever was, and ever will be. There
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:04:53 EST uSOyyfeC No.368735 Reply
Oh I assumed it leaves those things unanswered because it gets rid of the need to answer them cause everything is kind of like a given because the entire reality is so self referential. And so was trying to get to the bottom to why that might be the case in the alternative where we could at least attempt to find some reason behind it. Really dunno much about solipsism and how it works for folks, never delved very deep into that. Sorry I didn't realize you were looking for the answer in actual solipsistic paradigm... Gets me thinking... but it seems completely ungrounded the whole paradigm and I can't even tell why, maybe because of lack of exploration, or maybe because it just makes the whole thing into axioms and thus completely unreasonable. This is interesting and at the same time confusing and maybe not even worth entertaining.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:13:02 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368737 Reply
I get that everything is everything but it doesn't do much to answer why I'm me and you're you and what that means, and why we're perceptually crippled and forced to fumble in the dark
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:17:36 EST uSOyyfeC No.368738 Reply
But it's turtles all the way down, infinity is endless by definition, all that is/god always has his own god, so even though it works to refer to god as all that is, every all that is has his own all that is and so there is god but it's not THE god, THE god is just a figure of speech to reference ALL THAT IS without constantly having to add and even higher than that and even beyond etc. Shit's admitedly bonkers.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:22:59 EST uSOyyfeC No.368740 Reply
just another facet of the infinite multidimensional crystal, why wouldn't you be you and me you and mean what that means etc.

Explaining why this particular moment is exactly this and not the other may require to unravel the entire universe to do so like a blockchain, or you need to understand something so fundamental that we will never be able to conceptualize it or how about you aren't this whole rant
> I'm me and you're you and what that means, and why we're perceptually crippled and forced to fumble in the dark
but instead you are this AND that which makes the question absolete. Kind of the same idea behind the starting sentence of this post.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:23:16 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368741 Reply
>free will
I dunno I have a pretty deterministic view of things. Imo a lot of what we think is either random or the result of will are actually results of variables that are unaccounted for. If will exists it certainly isn't free, and if it isn't free it can be quantified, which gives it its own deterministic qualities.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:28:54 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368742 Reply
I don't follow how that question is rendered obsolete. I think it's a worthwhile question even if it's a difficult one to answer.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:42:42 EST uSOyyfeC No.368743 Reply
If you are asking why you are this particular thing while in fact you realize that you aren't this particular thing, but instead are this and that and all the other the question is nonsensical. It only makes sense if you don't believe that you are this AND that. Like a person who wins in a lottery doesn't wonder why he won unless he doesn't understand how the lottery works and that someone is bound to win. I;m not sure if that's the best analogy, because real world makes the system more complex and the question can be interpreted in more ways in case of lottery winner, but yeah, if you realize that you are what you are and at the same time you are somethings other than that it shouldn't raise a question of why you are what you are because you already understand that that's not the only thing that you are, so it makes the question absolete.

BTW I'm sorry if I was a little condescending, it's just sometimes this attitude really helps to stir up discussion, helps with the dynamics, but as I said ultimately it's your responsibility not to get offended, I understand the value of being kind and nice, but you have to admit there's also value in a little bit of adversity and of all places this should be one where people do not allow to get their jimmies rustled if not for anything else than for science and the sake of the discussion/humor.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:55:18 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368744 Reply
No I don't think that's what I mean, and I'm not following your first sentence. I understand that I'm a composite entity and all that if that's what you're saying, but why is my locus of awareness focused on this composite and not another? I don't know how to phrase it. The only solutions that I can come up with are either that there's a soul (lazy), or that there's only one consciousness that flip flops between states, or that each locus is literally one infinitesimal particle that networks with others to generate a larger perceptual network (which would imply trillions of very slightly different awarenesses to each body). But even then, how? Why would my soul or particle be my soul or particle and not another's?

Like if you split my brain in two, which side would be me and which side would also be me but not the locus of this particular awareness?

I always have a lot of trouble expressing this
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:58:29 EST uSOyyfeC No.368745 Reply
I think it's this and that. Like there is a tunnel we have to walk through, but it's up to us how we walk through it and the tunnel is more like a force that pulls rather than something with hard impenetrable walls.

Honestly have no rationale for free will other than intuitive sense and observation that everything is paradoxical and a belief that it is so fundamental that we cannot grasp it nor reason about it and an observation that things like that or in fact all things are paradoxical and an observation that it is highly poeticised which means it's relevant and as above so below, and my simple preferance, because the alternative is a cop out and boring and the observation that the assumption of responsibility actually leads to beauty and improvement where as otherwise leads to nihilism and degradation (I'm talking about responsibility here still)... So I choose to believe in free will even though most rational pursuit on the matter and sometimes even experiential seems to indicate otherwise. You know if the idea stands ground and you in fact do have free will then choosing to have free will actually leads to great results where as if you were wrong all along nothing was lost. Maybe the universe ain't finished, maybe it's all in flux and is created/determined exactly by what we believe, maybe everything begins with a choice and you know if infinity is really infinite then we are always at the beginning. So yeah I have some reasons maybe not the most rational ones, but I choose to take a leap of faith on this one even if that means being a bit biased and turning a blind eye on some things. It's paradoxical but if you assume determinism, determinism is confirmed, if you assume free will free will is confirmed, doesn't that sound a lot like free will though?
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 00:59:16 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368746 Reply
Also I disagree with the competition bit. It really inhibits my ability to think freely and I don't like it when people take a might is right approach to discussion (X is right because I have Y unrelated characteristic).

I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense to muddy the waters
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 01:07:35 EST uSOyyfeC No.368747 Reply
> there's only one consciousness
bingo and that's what makes the question absolete. All perspectives can only see things from the position of I kind of by definition.

Except that it doesn't really flip flop because it can simultaneously be all those things from infinite perspectives, it's paradoxical, but usually the paradoxical is the real truth because it kind of encompasses the fragmented truths. The ultimate truth is god because it leaves nothing out it is your truth and my truth also and so god is the sum of all the truths all the perspectives, is all that is.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 01:10:44 EST uSOyyfeC No.368748 Reply
> there's only one consciousness
bingo and that's what makes the question absolete. All perspectives can only see things from the position of I kind of by definition.

Except that it doesn't really flip flop because it can simultaneously be all those things from infinite perspectives, it's paradoxical, but usually the paradoxical is the real truth because it kind of encompasses the fragmented truths. The ultimate truth is god because it leaves nothing out it is your truth and my truth also and so god is the sum of all the truths all the perspectives, is all that is.

>Why would my soul or particle be my soul or particle and not another's?
The question only holds water if you DON'T believe that you are everything.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 01:13:42 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368749 Reply
I don't think that determinism necessarily equates with powerlessness. You still have your computational power and your own self-control. Just because they're built upon other things and there's ultimately one way you'll end up expressing them, it doesn't mean you shouldn't express them to the fullest and it doesn't mean that you won't have to make decisions (which imo is a competition of internal forces that reaches a causally predictable outcome) where a fuckton of things are unknown and what is perceived as risk is required to move forward.

Your last sentence is funny because to me it confirms determinism. People who are predisposed to or who have been exposed to free will ideologies are obviously going to believe in free will and believe that that belief was a spontaneous choice.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 01:20:52 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368750 Reply
So if there is only one consciousness, then why the hell is it here, right now (as me typing, not as you reading)? Does it follow its own chronology that's separate from spatial time, and if so, how or why?

Anecdotally this is also the explanation I'm most attracted to. Lots of trips where I was multiple people at once on different planets, or where I existed outside myself and this pattern. Obviously all of that could be hallucinatory but it was so out of my realm of conceivability that I kinda doubt it.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 02:01:45 EST uSOyyfeC No.368754 Reply
well, if you don't grab the bait whom am i gonna talk to, myself?

> You still have your your own self-control.
did anyone ever tell you you are a very self contradicting person?

>So if there is only one consciousness, then why the hell is it here, right now (as me typing, not as you reading)?
Um because all perspectives employ the same one consciousness maybe and all perspectives perceive from the point of I right here right now. You are still perplexed because you cannot grasp the simultaneity of existence. There is no time bro, it's an illusion, there is no separation that's what it means that it's all one and that the one is the all and therefore everything is everything.

>People who are predisposed to or who have been exposed to free will ideologies are obviously going to believe in free will and believe that that belief was a spontaneous choice.
Says the perspective of determinism which is self reinforcing, just like free will is self reinforcing, except that in spite of rejecting determinism, it at the same time validates it (it's just another choice), which means it's inclusive and also paradoxical and I've already said what that hints at for me, where as determinism is just another rabbit hole (as free will is), but in this case it's rigid and inflexible, it pulls you in and doesn't want to let go and it also flat out invalidates free will.

anyway, I'm spun dude this really interesting
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 02:30:20 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368757 Reply
I don't see how that's a contradiction. Self-control can still be deterministic the same way that other-control is- you either have enough of whatever force is required to compete with whichever other internal force or you don't. You don't have to pretend like you don't because you're fatalistic. I know I've contradicted myself a few other times but I don't think this is one of them. I don't think it's a matter of which is preferred but which is true.

I understand the simultaneity of existence in that as of now, according to spatial time, we're all conscious. But if there's only one consciousness then it must follow its own chronology in order to explain why consciousness can be experientially isolated. Either that or because information is stored locally there's no apparent continuity between awareness in all of its states, but then I'd expect a less seamless awareness.

Or the idea of a single consciousness is wrong, which is possible.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 02:43:26 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368758 Reply
Also I think the relationship between determinism and free will is more symmetrical than how you describe it. Free will is invalidating determinism when it parses it as a choice, because it still holds that it's essence is delusional. Deteinism similarly does not mean that someone can't believe themselves to be free willed when they're not, like free will doesn't mean that someone can't believe themselves to not be free willed when they are. One is more optimistic to most than the other, but the basic effect is mirrored.
Von Metanaut - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 10:43:08 EST zL5EYkyP No.368768 Reply
>>368741 This is a difficult thing, because yes you have free will but only within set laws or circumstances that you were born in, that were not your conscious choice. So like for example, Kid A: "Yeah I have free will, but my parents didn't put me through college or invest much into me, so I operate within the free will of my dynamic, and will have to make do and pay student loans etc."

Kid B: "My parents were dedicated and put me through Harvard, I have no self esteem issues and a full ride- so I operate within the free will of my Expanded dynamic."

And poor Kid "My dad left when I was 2 and my mom suffered from schizophrenia and hard drug use, I operate within the free will of my dynamic even though I'm suicidally depressed and life has fucked me."

3 different individuals, all having free will.... yet exercising that free will from radically different positions/dynamics that were set.

And I even find that the quality of my own mind (Free will of thinking) suffers from outside variables that I had no control over, the subconscious mind being effected by its surroundings as you develop in your life.

Yet, the one infinite creator is still you, and you are totally you. Since it is infinite, it can be and is all beings, people, situations etc.

You just have to find out why it's being you, and what the point of it is?

I'm really astounded from what looks like you guys going all night at this,


"infinite multidimensional crystal" infinite multidimensional crystal
infinite multidimensional crystal infinite multidimensional crystal infinite multidimensional crystal infinite multidimensional crystal
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 11:50:59 EST Wobbaklx No.368770 Reply
I don't concur, Free will says it's true because it's a choice to believe so and ultimately truth is a belief/opinion/choice (Giodel's incompleteness theorems point to this also) and so free will is true because you choose to go down that rabbithole, but that doesn't mean determinism isn't true fundamentally, it just means
>Free will is invalidating determinism when it parses it as a choice
which I alluded/said already before you repackaged into a clearer definition and used as a supposedly relevant counter point.
In the free will paradigm determinism is another just as valid choice except that as you choose it you soon get heavy and cannot even see freewill any more unless you make an illogical leap of faith to break out of that bondage. Which is why I said free will paradigm is paradoxical and is this AND that. From a freewill paradigm you may go both ways except that free will is quite intuitively a better choice because it feels lighter and freer. But who doesn't like a little bit of adversity, challenge, adventure and exploration...
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 12:38:04 EST Wobbaklx No.368772 Reply
Ok, I misinterpreted what you meant by self control, I think I get it, it's that you are still using choice except that you choose to believe that your choice was already predetermined by some forces or you actually have some weight behind the argument and therefor conclude it's the likely scenario or maybe you even deduce it somehow. Whatever floats your boat dude. I cannot deduce it and knowing which beliefs actually produce better results simply choose those, cause I believe beliefs determine outcomes. Beliefs/opinions/axioms. In fact Godel's incompleteness theorems which are widely accepted in logic, mathematics and philosophy and I don't know anyone debating the theorems themselves... They by my understanding pretty much establish that truth ultimately cannot be deduced because all truths are true only because of given axioms. You could argue that determinism is an axiom, but you cannot deduce that unless you know some other axioms, but none of the ones I can think of as likely universal axioms seem to be pointing to the idea of determinism... In fact deduction kinda contradicts itself by saying things are true because of reasons; because all logical orders spring from definitions given from out of the blue which is to say unreasonable... Anyhow, I'm not that interested in discussing determinism, cause it just seems uninteresting to me nor do I think you could surprise me with something I haven't considered on this subject before (I used to subscribe to determinism as well before psys and countless hours spent in my head trying to make sense of all these ideas). Anyway, thanks for the chat, I couldn't sleep last night and that really helped me out and I am genuinely grateful. Good hang, I have to ramble on now...
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:10:29 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368778 Reply
That's assuming that they are coming out of the blue and that that's not only how we perceive them. A causal/logical chain could be infinite, or finite but circular, in which case there is no spontaneous origin point, no free will, and the universe is deterministic (though irrationally so, because it ultimately either points to itself to justify itself or essential meaning is impossible to point to). If a causal chain has a distinct beginning, but no end, then determinism is fundamentally predicated on free will (an emergent property of it), because that beginning had to be a whim with no causal predecessor. If a causal chain has no distinct beginning, but a distinct end, then there is no free will because there never was a cosmic whim, although there is the opportunity for it, which would make free will an emergent property of determinism. The two are identical with the flow of time reversed, so that's up to how you perceive it.

Our universe does have a distinct beginning which suggests that everything is ultimately the result of whim, but that's only if it isn't cyclical. If it is, even there is a period of cosmic whim, it inevitably gets back on the causal train (from our perspective instantaneously) which would suggest that it is ruled by deterministic processes and not truly a whim at all. Free will would always be living in the shadow of its inevitable descent into causality and causal beings would always be living secure in knowing that a free will state is equally inevitable.

In all cases the universe is fundamentally irrational (no essential meaning, no answer to why).

The universe could very well be a blip and only a detour from free will, but similarly free will could also be a detour from causality.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:13:05 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368779 Reply
Nothing indicates free will to me in those examples. Sure the stable home kid has more freedom to express their drives but those drives are themselves causally determined.
Nathaniel Cibbersore - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 14:25:01 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368780 Reply
Also it's not about choosing to believe that your choices are predetermined, but that your choices are predetermined (including the choice to believe that your choices are or aren't) regardless of whether or not you think they are. What appears to be a choice is the subjective experience of a process before resolution.
Awe' !!Bwteoy2D - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 15:04:00 EST Wobbaklx No.368781 Reply
1568747040847.jpg -(139624B / 136.35KB, 648x688) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
axioms by definitions are arbitrarily given, you cannot prove an axiom, they are leaps of faith you base any logical system on. Just read it up yourself.

As for what follows read up on Incempleteness theorems.

There is no flow of time, it's purely a perceptual illusion created by short term memory. As I said errything simultanious.

>It's not about choosing to believe that your choices are predetermined, but that your choices are predetermined regardless of whether or not you think they are.
What makes you so sure of that? Or at least what makes you subscribe to that idea? There is obviously a choice, because we don't know and both alternatives are a possible subscription.

Dunno, man, let's just agree that this is pointless at this point, I think you are short circuiting left and right or I'm extremely incapable of deciphering what you actually mean and in both cases there doesn't seem to be much point of continuing this. Maybe you see it differently but our discussion is just a bunch of gibberish at this point. Either start fresh and do a better job at explaining ourselves or just call it a day. And even if we start fresh etc I don't know what else to discuss at this point apart from determinism on which we seem to have extremely little common ground in terms of how we understand it and beyond that I just don't really find the topic exciting. I'll let you ponder this on your own or others if someone wants to offer their perspective. Honestly, I'm quite surprised that we were able to achieve the level of coherency and common ground in the discussion that we did last night, I praise us for that and let that be the highlight of this interaction. Bravo, young men!
Nathaniel Gicklefield - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 19:03:06 EST KRBQNTrZ No.368788 Reply

In what farcical reality is conscious awareness a prerequisite to an object existing? Nothing would be aware that an object is existing, since there would be no awareness, but that doesn't stop any object from existing. Unless I'm not understanding what exactly is being discussed, this sounds like some fundamentalist faith-based surrealism going on.
Edward Ponderwell - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 19:30:26 EST U3sAWxD3 No.368789 Reply

Nothing can save the world. You can save your world though with some bottled Buddha corporation Insta cubeworld.

It does make my job at dunk in donuts more interesting. #Dextrodunkindonuts
Simon Pimmlegold - Tue, 17 Sep 2019 21:18:56 EST ZuQJFjhZ No.368791 Reply
If a universe existed with no form of consciousness to observe it, it is as good as nonexistent.
"If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, how do you know it even fell?"
Henry Burrynodge - Wed, 18 Sep 2019 02:45:12 EST JfM2rmJZ No.368794 Reply
>a tree in the woods making a sound but no ones around so they just said, "screw it"
Hamilton Drarrylitch - Wed, 18 Sep 2019 03:10:32 EST mUtzSGvU No.368795 Reply
I swear, DXM must be the drug of the absurdly hopeless. The regularly hopeless just descend into opioid addiction. But what is it about DXM that attracts mad poet style doom and gloom, fragile egos and battered psyches?
Simon Hecklewill - Wed, 18 Sep 2019 13:57:25 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368800 Reply
most people have stuff that they want from the world so dissociation is actually scary to them because it distances them from a source of comfort and sanity
like, not just drug dissociation, but even dissociation caused by endogenous psychological reactions
for others being "grounded" is uncomfortable instead
that's my guess idk it's how it be for me (although atm I'm caught between the two)
Hannah Feffingstone - Wed, 18 Sep 2019 14:22:14 EST 3jTm8tij No.368801 Reply
this is bs psychobabble, a successful happy well-adjusted person could like /dis/ just as much because it gives them a chance to see outside of themselves, thus growing as a person
Simon Hecklewill - Wed, 18 Sep 2019 15:46:45 EST Tw8O+9JO No.368805 Reply
(this wasn't sarcasm, I can see how dissociatives would probably be even more beneficial to a person who's together than someone who isn't. I was only trying to explain why people who aren't might be attracted to it.)
Hedda Trotman - Wed, 18 Sep 2019 16:30:20 EST +y5AJZLx No.368806 Reply
I think I like DXM so much because it both reminds me of the magical earlier trips while distracting me from my core life which is fairly bleak, mostly because I spend most of my life trying to chase nostalgia while not actively improving myself. I always rationalize the dosing like, "OK I'll dose but I'm also going to do ____ for myself." I'm pretty sure this kind of thinking paralyzed my innate will. I've thought myself into a place where I don't have intrinsic motivation unless I try to get high. Coming up on a decade of derping myself and wondering how long it'll be until I have something serious like organ failure happen. I've already degraded my countenance and the proverbial light in my eyes is essentially gone for good. I think if I start eating healthier, working out, staying hydrated and socializing I can regain my youthful energy. However I also worry that if I keep drinking syrup in combination with healthy food the benefit of the good stuff will be stolen or blocked out by the drug.

Any thoughts or similar situations?
Phoebe Nickleford - Sat, 21 Sep 2019 02:31:34 EST fg0gRQg3 No.368866 Reply
I guess you interpreted that as something negative or sarcasm? sorry, I shouldn't have been so vague. I meant that your discussion/debate or whatever you wanna call it was inspiring to me. and so I said thanks.
Phoebe Brookworth - Sat, 21 Sep 2019 13:32:30 EST 6A+vXK17 No.368872 Reply

just like every other drug addict, you are no longer capable of pushing your brain to do anything, and are instead dependent entirely on mind-altering substances to create these experiences for you.
Dextrolord - Sat, 21 Sep 2019 13:53:33 EST 1tpnrEB8 No.368874 Reply
Kinda a harsh way to put it but its still essentially correct...

If being high is that important to you, you should take a step back and look at why that is and try to work on that. The dxm isn't the problem, its you. . .
Awe' God !!Bwteoy2D - Sat, 21 Sep 2019 17:07:29 EST v7opGBmG No.368879 Reply
Actually, thank you for this, it made me realize it's indeed possible that this is the case, but it necessitates the belief that awareness and information are completely separate and autonomous "things"[as you can see this sentence already makes little sense], which in my opinion is unlikely and very counter intuitive. Cannot explain the reasons why more eloquently, but it just makes much more sense to think that awareness gives birth to structure/information/object of awareness and vice reversa and that makes them ultimately a one solid piece fused together which is to say that they are fundamentally the same thing which means that all information carries some kind of seed of consciousness however ghostly it may be.
Fanny Bablingkot - Sun, 22 Sep 2019 00:37:17 EST fg0gRQg3 No.368885 Reply
wait you're probably one of those hit and run type posters. any chance to put a nigga in his place. on
a drug abuse forum website calling out addicts, while you're on the shitter at work.

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.