What are /r/Oneirosophy's favorite Products & Services?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

Yeah this is good. Like someone else posted, do you know about synchronicity? It is basically defined as "meaningful coincidences" but what many have found is that it is you, as the "othered" external world, communicating with yourself. An important thing, to me at least, about synchronicity is that the meaning, just as the happenings themselves, are created by you.

As a personal example, I once had a series of synchronice experiences that I at first believed was the universe telling me to kill myself: every song I heard had some lyric about suicide or moving on, people would say strange things made sense in this context, ect. I realized that this wasn't the universe directing me to suicide, this was my subconscious, my "othered" aspect of myself, telling me to move on in an ego death kind of way, and also made me aware of my own self hate from my past. This became an important moment and awakened me to how separated I had become from aspects of myself.

Also, I can recommend "The Psychonaut Field Manual" as a good introduction to meditation and visualization (here is a link to download the PDF).

Subjective idealism, or empirical idealism, is the monistic metaphysical doctrine that only minds and mental contents exist. George Berkeley affirmed this. Check it: http://www.britannica.com/topic/subjective-idealism

> There is a lot of non-subjective idealism out there.

That's true. There are objective idealists out there or transcendental idealists and so forth. I was just curious about subjective idealism is all.

> As for "best" arguments, I think it's nonsense. The purpose of an argument is to convince someone. In this case whatever is best is whatever convinces that someone.

Oh this is a rather uncharitable interpretation of what i said. It's quite clear that I'm asking someone what they feel is the strongest argument for subjective idealism. Some arguments are weaker than others and heck some arguments try to offer full blown deductive proofs, and I was seeing what you guys think are the best/strongest arguments for subjective idealism. You don't even have to agree with subjective idealism to offer what you think are the best/strongest arguments for subjective idealism.

Good response. Yes, "wanting" isn't what I meant really. By Will, I mean that we change the 'shape of ourselves', towards a desired shape, our 'Intent'. If we were to release ourselves fully, then our experience and actions would always correspond to the desired shape.

Any sense of 'resistance' against applied Will now, is due to your owns resistance, rather than the requirements for a "force". In effect, you are Willing in two directions at once, hence the tension when it is experienced.

On sensing awareness as it is, this post was interesting.

>That's why metaphysics (and by extension philosophy) are going to continue to be necessary endeavors for humans.

Indeed. There was a flurry of so-called scientists talking about the end of philosophy a while back. Fortunately, wiser heads wrote vocal articles pointing out the flaws in this.

Real science is very personal. Paul Feyerabend wrote a few excellent books on the philosophy of physics: random quotes. Science just is people, really. I was in the business, for a bit (as a student), and it's not really objective and detached at all, of course, as the movies would have you believe. Also: lots of boozing.

I'm glad I exist too! ;-) Thanks. It's kinda great, how stuff like this forms from nowhere, and becomes a thing, and likeminded folk find each other. We've had some really great and fulfilling discussions over the last year.

> some more basic level - ideally just awareness

As Einstein said:

>>It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience.

Awareness is only a reflective or beholding property of mind. I believe you're simplifying things too far by going for awareness as the common base. The simplest basis that still works adequately is mind, not awareness.

>In the end, it's just talk, and if people are willing to go the distance with direct experimentation or full commitment, they'll just have 'Conceptual Truth' (a coherent thought system) but no corresponding 'Direct Truth'.

I agree.

On the felt-sense? To experiment, literally place your attention roughly in the centre of your body, perhaps nearer your lower abdomen. And wait quietly, to feel what is there.

The feeling is what you might call the "global sense" of your whole situation. It's much easier to do than to describe! Give it a go and get back to me if you don't have any luck.

Eugene Gendlin's <em>Focusing</em> technique is based on something along these lines; you might find it interesting to look that up.