-
Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).
fwaggles fractal dream
- Thread starter fwaggle
- Start date
I see nothing frightening in that consept - I go back from whence I came but not without having had the opportunity to transform the universe by my unique existence - and this, like a memory will remain with the universe, I like to think. But who knows. Perhaps only gravity rings will remain once the universe is recycled... but really it's all so marvellous to think about 
Death does not make everything meaningless or equal to me. It makes the moments we have here meaningful IMO because they are finite and cannot be repeated or edited. Neither can our existence it would seem. We are steeping stones of the universe towards something else. Everything we create or change will, like a domino-effect, affect the future. What makes that meaningless? Probably only your perspective.
Thanks fwaggle for this thread
Death does not make everything meaningless or equal to me. It makes the moments we have here meaningful IMO because they are finite and cannot be repeated or edited. Neither can our existence it would seem. We are steeping stones of the universe towards something else. Everything we create or change will, like a domino-effect, affect the future. What makes that meaningless? Probably only your perspective. Thanks fwaggle for this thread
@Enoon: Please understand, I am not claiming that everything is meaningless. To understand the difference is vital.
Do you really think my perspective is meaningless? That's disturbing as you have faithfully and patiently followed this thread. Why would you make such a remark?
You would have been totally correct to say my perspective is unimportant and that it doesn't matter. But that it's meaningless is a totally different thing.
Of course, without death there would be no meaning to anything. I think you are accurate in saying that death makes life meaningful. But it doesn't make life important, not the way I see it.
-f
Do you really think my perspective is meaningless? That's disturbing as you have faithfully and patiently followed this thread. Why would you make such a remark?
You would have been totally correct to say my perspective is unimportant and that it doesn't matter. But that it's meaningless is a totally different thing.
Of course, without death there would be no meaning to anything. I think you are accurate in saying that death makes life meaningful. But it doesn't make life important, not the way I see it.
-f
Semantics.fwaggle said:
Boring.
uhm now you're twisting the words in my mouth ... I never said I think your perspective is meaningless. I understood that you think nothing matters and was commenting on that.
I don't really see the difference between meaning and importance though. I have to admit it's quite difficult to have this kind of conversation without clearly defining what we mean by the words we are using such as awareness, perception, meaning, importance, etc. To me life is both meaningful because of what we subjectively make of it and important in the cosmic scale because - to quote Carl Sagan - *we are a way for the cosmos to know itself*
Much love
Enoon
I don't really see the difference between meaning and importance though. I have to admit it's quite difficult to have this kind of conversation without clearly defining what we mean by the words we are using such as awareness, perception, meaning, importance, etc. To me life is both meaningful because of what we subjectively make of it and important in the cosmic scale because - to quote Carl Sagan - *we are a way for the cosmos to know itself*
Much love
Enoon
Ljosalfar
Rising Star
fwaggle,
the title of this section of the forum is ... yet you ask very few. The ones you do serve as challenges or rhetorical devices which attempt to bolster how right you think you are. Enough of this, please. Or recuse yourself.
I still look forward to a response to my first contribution to this thread. Instead, you invoked "punishment", a non-sequitor, and neatly (albeit transparently) sidestepped the content of my request, my observations, and my sharing.
L
the title of this section of the forum is ... yet you ask very few. The ones you do serve as challenges or rhetorical devices which attempt to bolster how right you think you are. Enough of this, please. Or recuse yourself.
I still look forward to a response to my first contribution to this thread. Instead, you invoked "punishment", a non-sequitor, and neatly (albeit transparently) sidestepped the content of my request, my observations, and my sharing.
L
@Ljosalfar:
First off, I didn't start this thread. I didn't name this thread. The mods (gods?) created this thread and they chose where to place it. Still, this doesn't take away your right to put some kind of blame on me.
Since it is your wish that I respond to your previous post, I will:
I am still speaking in absolutes and no I have not taken time to consider doing otherwise.
Thanks for noticing that my English is fine.
I have no idea who Wilson is and I never quoted him.
"empower me, illuminate the world, and make me a better person." <-- This is great. But if you care to know my opinion I'm telling you that you need to start working on an all-encompassing description of the world derived from your own experience. Again my opinion is that we need to get rid of modern man's pathetic description of a world of objects which has man imprisoned in a fantasy world where he is enslaved as meat. Trust me, we aren't meat and we don't have to be slaves.
By expounding a few aspects of my mythology I am offering a model of what exactly a 'description of the world' is and what it can accomplish. This is by no means to say that I am offering my description to be accepted by all. Although, it isn't patented and there is no copy right so if anyone were to choose to use it that would be fine. But we each need our own thing which is derived from our own life and our own experiences and corresponds to our personality and life conditions.
In regards to DMT offering much to many I must say that if DMT is not opening you up to new views and new ideas then whatever you experience is no different than a dream or fantasy, in my opinion. But perhaps this is exactly why some people use it; To take a respite from "the real world" and their jobs and families by exploring fantasy worlds of bright and deep colours and distracting geometric patterns and whatnot. (I am not saying this is you, so don't take offense.)
I would like to know how you think people are integrating and responding to the DMT experience? Details please.
And as for your final statements: I have not used foul language. I haven't been mean to anyone. I've not ridiculed or humiliated anyone. And I haven't attacked anyone's person. And just to be on the safe side I even curtailed my sense of humor which is usually rampant. My only crime it seems is that I am absolutely assured of myself and hence my views are unchangeable. My views are my experience; my experience is the only thing that can change my views.
Thanks for taking part,
-f
First off, I didn't start this thread. I didn't name this thread. The mods (gods?) created this thread and they chose where to place it. Still, this doesn't take away your right to put some kind of blame on me.
Since it is your wish that I respond to your previous post, I will:
I am still speaking in absolutes and no I have not taken time to consider doing otherwise.
Thanks for noticing that my English is fine.
I have no idea who Wilson is and I never quoted him.
"empower me, illuminate the world, and make me a better person." <-- This is great. But if you care to know my opinion I'm telling you that you need to start working on an all-encompassing description of the world derived from your own experience. Again my opinion is that we need to get rid of modern man's pathetic description of a world of objects which has man imprisoned in a fantasy world where he is enslaved as meat. Trust me, we aren't meat and we don't have to be slaves.
By expounding a few aspects of my mythology I am offering a model of what exactly a 'description of the world' is and what it can accomplish. This is by no means to say that I am offering my description to be accepted by all. Although, it isn't patented and there is no copy right so if anyone were to choose to use it that would be fine. But we each need our own thing which is derived from our own life and our own experiences and corresponds to our personality and life conditions.
In regards to DMT offering much to many I must say that if DMT is not opening you up to new views and new ideas then whatever you experience is no different than a dream or fantasy, in my opinion. But perhaps this is exactly why some people use it; To take a respite from "the real world" and their jobs and families by exploring fantasy worlds of bright and deep colours and distracting geometric patterns and whatnot. (I am not saying this is you, so don't take offense.)
I would like to know how you think people are integrating and responding to the DMT experience? Details please.
And as for your final statements: I have not used foul language. I haven't been mean to anyone. I've not ridiculed or humiliated anyone. And I haven't attacked anyone's person. And just to be on the safe side I even curtailed my sense of humor which is usually rampant. My only crime it seems is that I am absolutely assured of myself and hence my views are unchangeable. My views are my experience; my experience is the only thing that can change my views.
Thanks for taking part,
-f
My belief is that we are in hyperspace at any given moment of our lives. We just aren't aware of it because perceiving reality takes up all of our available awareness. What DMT does is to simply disrupt the mechanisms upholding reality and our awareness becomes free and we realize where we really are or what we really are. We perceive the unknown.
So the question here is how to perceive the unknown without using disruptive means? How can one become aware of hyperspace? How is awareness generally gained? Is it gained or is it enlarged? Or does it move around?
It is my belief that the reason modern man is locked out of the unknown is simply a matter of his description of the world which he embodies.
If the description is altered so that less energy is spent upholding (constantly renewing) the awareness of reality, or in other words if attention can be diverted from it's fixation on the known, the unknown will simply surface. Just like that.
-f
P.S. I felt the conversation was lagging so I thought I'd bring something new to the table.
So the question here is how to perceive the unknown without using disruptive means? How can one become aware of hyperspace? How is awareness generally gained? Is it gained or is it enlarged? Or does it move around?
It is my belief that the reason modern man is locked out of the unknown is simply a matter of his description of the world which he embodies.
If the description is altered so that less energy is spent upholding (constantly renewing) the awareness of reality, or in other words if attention can be diverted from it's fixation on the known, the unknown will simply surface. Just like that.
-f
P.S. I felt the conversation was lagging so I thought I'd bring something new to the table.
Ayawasqero
Esteemed member
Have You ever read Freud´s ,Analysis of dreams´? Not a qoute about DMT...
Eden
Rising Star
Are not dreams or fantasy just another window of experience?fwaggle said:
You make the claim yourself: DMT offers an experience. Forget any narrow minded conceptions of the characteristics of said experience and realize simply that it is.
You put forth the idea that hyperspace is always there, always accessible. Would you even be aware of hyperspace if not for your experiences with DMT or other psychoactives? How can you even begin to propose that DMT opens you up to no new ideas?
You have some interesting theories...the problem is they often conflict and you give absolutely no room for even the possibility that you could be wrong. It's no surprise you have gotten the reception seen in this thread.
@Eden: How much have you really changed because of your DMT experiences?
This is not a question, even though it looks like one.
-f
P.S. The fact that you are putting your energy towards finding flaws with my theory is proof for me that you are not interested in understanding anything. The feat is to be able to understand everything; to become pure understanding.
P.P.S. You really won't know if there is conflict in my theory unless you are able to embody it. The problem with rigidly fixed perception is that it does not allow us the opportunity to flow into ideas and moods willfully.
P.P.P.S. It is also apparent to me that you are taking my theories as something pertaining to the mind. They are not. They are meant for the energetic being not the physical body. Trying to make heads and tails of this matter rationally will never result in anything.
This is not a question, even though it looks like one.
-f
P.S. The fact that you are putting your energy towards finding flaws with my theory is proof for me that you are not interested in understanding anything. The feat is to be able to understand everything; to become pure understanding.
P.P.S. You really won't know if there is conflict in my theory unless you are able to embody it. The problem with rigidly fixed perception is that it does not allow us the opportunity to flow into ideas and moods willfully.
P.P.P.S. It is also apparent to me that you are taking my theories as something pertaining to the mind. They are not. They are meant for the energetic being not the physical body. Trying to make heads and tails of this matter rationally will never result in anything.
oh fwaggle, if what you say is true - that we can't make heads or tails out of it anyway, then I really don't see why we are debating this here. Also the question in me came up as to what it is you want. You seem to have all the answers for yourself, so is it that you want to convert us to your beliefs? I'm sorry I think you've come to the wrong place for that.
On the other hand if you wanted to partake in meaningful discussion you would have to allow at least a bit of flexibility to your own beliefs otherwise you are simply preaching. I mean you have to at least give what others bring to the table some consideration, but often it seems you don't.
Now there's more that I would want to have defined: the unkown. What do you mean by this? Does it become known once we perceive it? or does it remain unknown forever - intangible, ineffable... What is the benefit of perceiving it either way?
How much have you changed because of your DMT experiences? How much have you changed at all due to any ONE thing?
I'm a believer of the idea *mono-causalities don't exist*. The myriad of interconnections and interactions I think are what change us day to day, minute to minute. DMT is only feeding the system (yourself) a form of energy. You can imagine it like a swing or a driven harmonic oscillator (for simplicity's sake). You feed the system energy at the wrong moment and you will dampen the oscillations. But fed in at the right moment and you will have resonance and your oscillations will get stronger and stronger... Maybe enough to jump into the next quantum state? who knows. But the timing has to be right - and this depends on so many other things. Plus there are tons of other factors that my model of the harmonic oscillator can't fit. And I can't grasp them all either.
As for defining the terms I was talking about earlier, I'm afraid I can't do it in one little post. These terms are vast and it would require the definition of many other things first, and even then I'm not sure we would be on the same page, because we would have to agree on certain things and I doubt that we would. You see I don't believe one can separate the energetic being and the physical body from one another or treat them separately. One does not exist without the other; they are both manifestations of each other in a way IMO. Just like gravity does not exist without matter, or charge without matter... One cannot interact with charge without also interacting with matter. If anyone has a better analogy, please let me know, I'm always grateful for better models.
But perhaps I can start with what I define perspective as, since this is simple. Perspective to me is translation of coordinates. If I'm looking at point A from point B I have the perspective BA. If I'm looking from point C to point A my perspective is CA. Basically you could think of it as a vector. This is abstract but can loosely be fit over general ideas as well. Like looking at certain topics from a specific viewpoint e.g. the topic family from the viewpoint of christianity. Psychedelics from the viewpoint of shamanism... etc. This to me is perspective and it seems to dictate perception, i.e. the information that we take in and consciously process and work with.
Following this logic, if you change your perspective often either deliberately or otherwise, you will have more information and hence a higher perception-input. Let's think of it like this: If you were looking in on a three dimensional space every perspective would give you a kind of light-cone, illuminating the amorphous space inside. The more views you'd have, the more you would see the space in there and perhaps be able to guess at what it is... If you could shift freely from one perspective to the other you'd have flowing-vision of raw reality... What would you see?
Maybe it's all smoke and mirrors
light tricks
but there is some essence there...
I'll leave you with a quote for now:
"If you stare into the Abyss long enough the Abyss stares back at you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
On the other hand if you wanted to partake in meaningful discussion you would have to allow at least a bit of flexibility to your own beliefs otherwise you are simply preaching. I mean you have to at least give what others bring to the table some consideration, but often it seems you don't.
Now there's more that I would want to have defined: the unkown. What do you mean by this? Does it become known once we perceive it? or does it remain unknown forever - intangible, ineffable... What is the benefit of perceiving it either way?
How much have you changed because of your DMT experiences? How much have you changed at all due to any ONE thing?
I'm a believer of the idea *mono-causalities don't exist*. The myriad of interconnections and interactions I think are what change us day to day, minute to minute. DMT is only feeding the system (yourself) a form of energy. You can imagine it like a swing or a driven harmonic oscillator (for simplicity's sake). You feed the system energy at the wrong moment and you will dampen the oscillations. But fed in at the right moment and you will have resonance and your oscillations will get stronger and stronger... Maybe enough to jump into the next quantum state? who knows. But the timing has to be right - and this depends on so many other things. Plus there are tons of other factors that my model of the harmonic oscillator can't fit. And I can't grasp them all either.
As for defining the terms I was talking about earlier, I'm afraid I can't do it in one little post. These terms are vast and it would require the definition of many other things first, and even then I'm not sure we would be on the same page, because we would have to agree on certain things and I doubt that we would. You see I don't believe one can separate the energetic being and the physical body from one another or treat them separately. One does not exist without the other; they are both manifestations of each other in a way IMO. Just like gravity does not exist without matter, or charge without matter... One cannot interact with charge without also interacting with matter. If anyone has a better analogy, please let me know, I'm always grateful for better models.
But perhaps I can start with what I define perspective as, since this is simple. Perspective to me is translation of coordinates. If I'm looking at point A from point B I have the perspective BA. If I'm looking from point C to point A my perspective is CA. Basically you could think of it as a vector. This is abstract but can loosely be fit over general ideas as well. Like looking at certain topics from a specific viewpoint e.g. the topic family from the viewpoint of christianity. Psychedelics from the viewpoint of shamanism... etc. This to me is perspective and it seems to dictate perception, i.e. the information that we take in and consciously process and work with.
Following this logic, if you change your perspective often either deliberately or otherwise, you will have more information and hence a higher perception-input. Let's think of it like this: If you were looking in on a three dimensional space every perspective would give you a kind of light-cone, illuminating the amorphous space inside. The more views you'd have, the more you would see the space in there and perhaps be able to guess at what it is... If you could shift freely from one perspective to the other you'd have flowing-vision of raw reality... What would you see?
Maybe it's all smoke and mirrors
light tricks
but there is some essence there...
I'll leave you with a quote for now:
"If you stare into the Abyss long enough the Abyss stares back at you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
I'm putting all this out in the open with the hope that someone might make use of it. I don't expect anything from anyone, not verification nor confirmation. Although, I'm beginning to think that no one is going to find any of this useful and I might drop the whole show.
@Enoon: Just because something cannot be understood rationally doesn't mean it's inapplicable.
I'm practically fainting from exhaustion right now so I'm sorry this reply is so short and doesn't address your whole post.
-f
P.S. The unknown becomes the known once perceived. But for it to stay known it must be perceived repeatedly.
@Enoon: Just because something cannot be understood rationally doesn't mean it's inapplicable.
I'm practically fainting from exhaustion right now so I'm sorry this reply is so short and doesn't address your whole post.
-f
P.S. The unknown becomes the known once perceived. But for it to stay known it must be perceived repeatedly.
Yeah I never said I believed it was inapplicable, but I was wondering why we are trying to discuss it if it's not meant to be *thought* of but rather has to be felt. In that case making a song or a poem about it would be better, don't you think? Even a painting, or a video... to appeal to something other than the rational part.fwaggle said:
What happens once one has perceived the unknown repeatedly. Is there more unknown that one moves on to explore then?
rest well fwaggle, no need to rush replies.
:roll:fwaggle said:
This is precisely the arrogant tone people are calling you out on...how can you possibly claim that the DMT experience has not changed an individual you have never even met when he himself is telling you it has? Seriously man...where do you get off?
@Enoon: For a human being there exists certain limits to what can be perceived. Within these limits there exists two realms of awareness. Two modes of perceiving. Or two selves. Self number one is a talking, thinking man and he lives in reality. A reality which all men share (Although we have been doing a piss-poor job at sharing it lately.) Self number two is a being and a mode of perception that cannot be talked about. It can only be experienced. It is the quality of this realm, which is also called the unknown, to be silent. It is a language-less form of existence, of knowledge.
These two beings are two counter-parts. They are two different sides of man. One of them is the physical body and the other one is made of awareness.
At the moment of birth we are all raw awareness. Only later do we learn to become aware of our physical body and it's surrounding environment.
Please understand what we're doing here now, Enoon. These are perceptions I've made and I'm trying to make you see them. Just think of it as something fwaggle has seen in a dream or vision and he is describing the vision for you so you can picture it in your mind. That's all.
You are very mistaken to think I'm trying to force beliefs on you.
-f
These two beings are two counter-parts. They are two different sides of man. One of them is the physical body and the other one is made of awareness.
At the moment of birth we are all raw awareness. Only later do we learn to become aware of our physical body and it's surrounding environment.
Please understand what we're doing here now, Enoon. These are perceptions I've made and I'm trying to make you see them. Just think of it as something fwaggle has seen in a dream or vision and he is describing the vision for you so you can picture it in your mind. That's all.
You are very mistaken to think I'm trying to force beliefs on you.
-f
You have an interesting view on existence fwaggle; What boggles my mind though is that it seems as though you have never considered that you could be wrong about all of this. You seem to state things like they are well known facts of the ultimate reality you somehow have experienced. Well personally I don't believe things like that exist. You say there ARE two beings, two modes of perceiving... and I understand that this is your oppinion, but what I don't understand is how can one person be so sure about his opinion/beliefs after living in this world for at least 18 years? I mean have you never experienced being wrong? Or your mind tricking you? I'm fascinated by this mind set, and honestly I find it scary. In my opinion people that have no inclination to believe that they could be wrong are one of the reasons things are going so askew in our world - not just now a days but since the beginning of human society. But perhaps you just come over like that because you want to discuss this really important topic with us.
I don't believe in these two modes. I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I think one can fit almost any model onto something as complex as our reality if one just leaves out enough details... well if it's beneficial to you, I say go for it. For me this model doesn't work, at least it doesn't appeal to me. I like to see things more multifaceted than having just two modes.
and no, I never thought that you are trying to force beliefs onto anyone, I was just asking if this was your motivation or what was... But I do find it interesting that you should emphasise how I don't seem to understand what we are doing here and how mistaken I am in the same post. I mean really, if I'm so inferior to you in your mind, why do you bother talking with me? To show me the light? Well, I'm not sure who said it first, but I'm pretty sure I read it in Robert Anton Wilson's book first: "communication is only possible between equals". If you put yourself above others you will never be able to communicate to them. I find this holds true most of the time.
cheers
Enoon
@Eden: There is no way for what i'm describing to be wrong because right and wrong are impertinent. I have been saying all along that the world is merely a description and to each his own.
What I'm doing here is telling you about my description. Why should anyone find it so offensive that I share my visions here?
To me my description is final because I have managed to turn the description into my reality, in which I live. But this does not mean that mine is the only one or the best one, by no means.
-f
P.S. I'm actually a little frustrated with some of you because you could have been a little more open-minded, even kinder. If any of you were to ever share your DMT experiences with me I would never, under any circumstances, try to disprove the validity of your visions. (Unless I'm some nut psychiatrist). Maybe the reason I've been a little harsh is because I was hurt by people constantly trying to disprove and discredit me.
What I'm doing here is telling you about my description. Why should anyone find it so offensive that I share my visions here?
To me my description is final because I have managed to turn the description into my reality, in which I live. But this does not mean that mine is the only one or the best one, by no means.
-f
P.S. I'm actually a little frustrated with some of you because you could have been a little more open-minded, even kinder. If any of you were to ever share your DMT experiences with me I would never, under any circumstances, try to disprove the validity of your visions. (Unless I'm some nut psychiatrist). Maybe the reason I've been a little harsh is because I was hurt by people constantly trying to disprove and discredit me.