Paul, are you trying to say that war, rape, and charred-black toast aren’t actual?
Because it’s almost sounding like you’re saying that the actual world isn’t perfect.
@rick , no, I just wanted to share some thoughts on how to feel good in a world where terrible things can/do/will happen. It has been a practical challenge for me, and this is where I’ve landed.
I understand that you’re interested in how a perfect actual universe, if it’s all that actually exists, can ever produce anything that isn’t actual and perfect. I get it, and it’s interesting in a way.
I can’t resolve it in a philosophically airtight way. For me, it’s enough to stick with the practical truth that malice exists in/as ‘me’, sorrow exists in/as ‘me’, without ‘me’ (and others like ‘me’) there is no such thing, and ‘I’ am the only one who can do anything about it.
2 Likes
Hmm… my response will be to say that you can’t logic or philosophize your way into EEs, PCEs, and eventually, actual freedom.
In fact, rather than merely recommending against changing yourself into a person that enjoys domestic violence, child abuse, suicide, murder, etc. – which would be an abhorrent type of person – I’d further recommend the exact opposite.
Allow yourself to fully, without any amelioration or turning-away from it, appreciate just how terrible domestic violence, child abuse, suicide, murder, war, rape, torture, etc., all are. Allow that to sink in viscerally, until you cannot turn away from it anymore. Allow it to sink in just how absurd it is that these things are happening, given we are all fellow human being living in a literal paradise. Allow yourself to see what is the actual root cause of all that – ‘you’ at the core of ‘your’ being .
Then, perhaps, you will no longer be satisfied at the level you are at, where “if it[(i.e. your current level of energy, being, vitality, commitment, devotion, dedication, intention)]'s not enough to get the job done then the job just don’t get done is all.” [1], and you will find yourself already/automatically with more of that which you previously already thought was “always all-the-time 24/7/365 […] giving every last drop” [1:1].
And then “the odds” [2] that you succeed will be (potentially much) higher than before!
Cheers,
Claudiu
1 Like
You sidestepped the question.
Which is fine, you’re free to do as you wish. As I already know the answer, it was more for your edification than anything else.
I’m losing the inclination to continue pointing out the obvious.
Have a good day.
The way forward for you is contained in what I’ve written on the topic here.
You’ve built a self-limiting philosophy around this topic, that is not conducive to the aims of actualism.
Perhaps one day you shall come to your senses and see it — but alas it appears that day is not today.
Cheers,
Claudiu
Miguel, the purpose of this thread, which I indicated at the beginning, was to clear up a misunderstanding that had cropped up in a sibling thread. Initially, I had both the time and inclination to sort it out. Now I have less time and, moreover, no further inclination since observing that further explanation, no matter how meticulous, begets further misunderstanding; pointed queries beget equivocations; and dialogue shatters into a fractal of nonsequiturs. Lastly, as I indicated in my last post, I’m done with pointing out the obvious.
Which, amusingly, brings us to your request. You’ve asked me if I could share the answer to the question of whether murder, child abuse, domestic violence, and suicide are actual. There lies, I take it, an unspoken motivation or purpose behind your petition. I do not guess as to what that purpose is, but I trust, coming from you, that it is neither illegitimate nor frivolous, and so will honor it. Therefore, in a few words, unless we deny the overwhelming evidence from photographs, video recordings, eyewitness accounts, news reports, historical records, criminal trial transcripts, and our own experiences, then, yes, murder, child abuse, domestic violence, and suicide are actual.
A gripping account of actual murder and child abuse:
I have no more to say on this matter.
Thanks for the answer
I know this is hard to understand but this did not happen in the actual world. This was in the world of the psyche (real world).
@henryyyyyyyyyy If you have experienced the actual world you see that nothing like that exists there. I think this is what Richard means when he says “nothing dirty can get in.” There is only purity in the actual world. The distinction is that the actual world is pure and all else is in the world of the psyche (real world),
I have edited psyche to real world for better clarification.
I think the resolution is that the bodies involved are actual (perfect) but the identities directing the action of the bodies are not actual (depraved, diabolical, pathetic, etc).
Of course this state of affairs is not preferred, but one has limited capacity to prevent it.
I can’t force or coerce anyone else into becoming free. What I can do is experience that perfection myself.
1 Like
I could have said it better by saying that the incident occured in the real world as opposed to the actual world.
I find this odd to say as (presuming the narrator is reliable) the result of the incident was the actual flesh and blood body that gave birth to him actually getting stabbed and actually dying.
His experience of it was not actual.
I’m not sure what would be worse: telling him he should’ve liked and enjoyed watching his progenitor getting stabbed to death or telling him it didn’t actually happen.
1 Like
I vaguely remember Richard saying that he no longer enjoyed and appreciated after becoming actually free. I could be wrong. If so then this would just be another passing event.
No it’s quite the opposite! For one example only:
Note: asking how one is experiencing this moment of being alive is not the actualism method; consistently enjoying and appreciating this moment of being alive is what the actualism method is. And this is because the actualism method is all about consciously and knowingly imitating life in the actual world. Also, by virtue of proceeding in this manner the means to the end – an ongoing enjoyment and appreciation – are no different to the end itself.
You probably are thinking of this (emphasis added):
RESPONDENT: For you, it [happiness] definitely is not [a feeling]. So what is it? Can it be sensed by physical senses? Do you see, smell, hear or touch happiness?
RICHARD: I have not felt happy for years and years … here lies perfection. Living here in this actual world there is a seeing, smelling, touching, tasting and hearing of the purity of the infinitude of this material universe for the twenty four hours of the day. It is a sensate experiencing – apperceptive awareness – and cannot be felt affectively. If one minimises the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings (as explained above) and activates the felicitous/ innocuous feelings – happiness, delight, joie de vivre/ bonhomie, friendliness, amiability and so on – in conjunction with sensuousness, then the ensuing sense of amazement, marvel and wonder can result in apperceptiveness. If it does not … then one is way ahead of normal human expectations anyway as the aim is to enjoy and appreciate being here now for as much as is possible.
It is a win/win situation.
If it’s just another passing event, that would mean that the incident had to have happened, non?
Yes the incident happened, I was not questioning that. This all started by me trying to convey to @rick how an actually free person would experience this incident in the actual world. I can only imagine how Richard would experience it.
Richard has replied to this post, his response is available here: Ricard replies to Rick's "Burnt Toast" Posts .