nostr:nevent1qqsdpygsu6kw8zk25y7c5cusvt456jqjmwzp5dpzhx7kfkl...

Raw JSON

{
  "kind": 1,
  "id": "b6458354544f92ca38a4ed124be4691f69a78d195959350074825e7cd063542d",
  "pubkey": "efc2b6e59480f0e55cc87c69af06b6d1a11fa25e4ea95a439878c41799c53c19",
  "created_at": 1787599387,
  "tags": [
    [
      "client",
      "Yakihonne",
      "31990:20986fb83e775d96d188ca5c9df10ce6d613e0eb7e5768a0f0b12b37cdac21b3:1700732875747"
    ],
    [
      "e",
      "d09110e6ace38acaa13d8a639062eb4d4812db841a3422b9bd64dbff904129a4",
      "",
      "mention"
    ],
    [
      "p",
      "c21b1a6cdb247ccbd938dcb16b15a4fa382d00ffd7b12d5cbbad172a0cd4d170",
      "",
      "mention"
    ],
    [
      "t",
      "philosophy"
    ],
    [
      "t",
      "consciousness"
    ],
    [
      "t",
      "spirituality"
    ]
  ],
  "content": "nostr:nevent1qqsdpygsu6kw8zk25y7c5cusvt456jqjmwzp5dpzhx7kfklljpqjnfqprpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezucm0v3hkuctxwshxxmmdqgsvyxc6dndjglxtmyudevttzkj05wpdqrla0vfdtja669e2pn2dzuqxjengm\n\nnostr:npub1cgd35mxmy37vhkfcmjckk9dylguz6q8l67cj6h9m45tj5rx569cql9kfex good inquiry. This is quite a confusing topic, almost incomprehensible when discussed in text messages.\n\n#philosophy #consciousness #spirituality\n\nIt depends on whether subjectivity is considered totally as a part of reality. If it's something that allows interacting with something *separate* from the reality—that would be the \"beyond this reality\" (sometimes associated with the concept of \"supernatural reality\").\n\nI personally prefer to see subjective experience as something totally inseparable from the reality. Otherwise it's a contradiction to the nonduality of the reality and consciousness (a contradiction to the correlation between objective neurological processes and the subjective experiences in particular).\n\nYet, at the same time, the subjectivity is neither identical to objectivity nor does it seem to be reducible to just the related material objects (or might their interactions even). Subjectivity is a real phenomenon of a different level of complexity of the reality, rather than of the pure gross matter. *Roughly* speaking, just as functional programming concepts are not normally understood by thinking in terms of electronic switches (since it's a different level), but at the same time they are not separable from the hardware level (if we mean some program that actually runs on the hardware).\n\nYou may think of subjectivity as a kind of illusion (which includes bare *modeling* of objective reality with pareidoliac hallucinations, for example), just as FP concepts are some kind of mental conceptual illusion (which may be transformed into something barely related to the executed instructions due to compiler optimizations, completely erased even; existing as some kind of *modeling* of what's actually being run). But by illusion I don't mean the pure non-existence of something or something separable from the existence. I mean some softer version of existence instead that correlates with the lower levels of it. And I don't mean it as some dead source code files that are no longer affecting a running program; there's a two-directional interaction between the levels instead.\n\nAlso, if you've meant the Terence McKenna stuff—there's an inner world of archetypal DMT/etc. entities (an extended version of something close to night dreams, but not really dreams, rather hypnotic trance states), but it's probably not identical to what he talked about. There are personal and collective archetypes, the edge between them is blurred; yet a DMT trip is not a portal to another level of a literal co-shared objective reality (or separate external kind of reality) with the real objective machine elves. Rather these experiences are of the subjective worlds, still interconnected in some way because we still interact with each other based on these experiences (from the gross sober state later in particular) and influence each others' next experiences: we discuss the experiences, act out of some lessons learned from them, produce art, getting influenced by the art, etc. Not the elves themselves from different tripping persons' experiences are interacting with each other; the *ideas of* the machine elves interact with each other instead (through culture).\n\nAnd perhaps particular purely collective archetypes, besides the cultural influence, have something to do with our genes—the (sometimes atavistic) survival tryptophobia-kind of programs—reactions to certain pattern recognitions that were so important that they were eventually coded into our \"hardware\" and kept inherited from ancestors.\n\nThe Angel archetype in particular is directly associated with addressing survival. I once had such a sober non-visual experience in my life: a recognition of a particular unique feminine/masculine-neutral repetitive inner voice (which is impossible to reproduce by human organs) of a particular pitch level, that gives some hope and kind of motivates me to stay away from suicide. I think this archetype is exactly what traditional Christian church choir singing is trying to express. Even though it's definitely a sincerely deep spiritual experience—even that doesn't convince me of the existence of something separate from reality, of some supernatural world.\n\nIn short: I prefer seeing it as there's nothing beyond this reality (at least I'm not aware of anything falsifiable). Whatever that *seems* separate from the reality is still part of it, but it can't necessarily be understood just by observing the related objects. It may be experienced *as if* it were something separate from the reality and, at the same time, as something co-shared culturally (and even cross-culturally) due to interaction with universal archetypes (traditionally associated with the collective unconscious), and due to the feedback loop to the culture. It seems that complicated to me today.",
  "sig": "dc2dd6418d93c5669d249c54bec34714d9ad8c14692b9b32a338ab498d903128fce12f3e5c4e5155de5d29aa8f3dba7248b0a7b5415312184599814c4811ebf8"
}