Is it now? Yes. Am I having fun? Not as much as I could be. The reminder is useful though.
Yes, I have. The memory is sometimes stronger than at other times, though.
A useful question… I do want to live the PCE full-time, at least I can see that in ‘big picture.’ I can see that it gets more subtle the closer I get to whatever I’m experiencing right now. There’s this or that objection. That makes the question even more useful.
What do you experience when you challenge yourself with that question? Why not now?
So you’re saying that you can simultaneously experience yourself as being alive at this moment and yet feel bad. That’s an issue. I’ve never realized the time is now yet felt bad.
You can simulateously experience yourself to be alive here at this place in the vastness of space and now at this time in eternity yet feel less than perfect due to social problems. I’m wondering how do those social problems compare to the experience of living in a space that has no center and a time that had no beginning and will have no end?
I’m not obsessed with emotions. I’m obsessed with being alive, with life itself, with this universe itself, with whatever is happening in this moment. And, as a human being, often what is happening in front of me (whether it is in ‘me’ or in some human that I’m interacting with), is emotion. Which means, my attention/interest/fascination is seeing emotion in that moment. It is not ‘pointed,’ it is unidirectional.
But, there are many emotions happening on the earth, right now.
edit From a reply I crossed out and pasted to this one for chronology sake. Since Henry quotes it later in the thread, I want to keep most of the original intact…Wow. What timing. I just read your response to Andrew. You quoted me using the phrase HAEITMOBA. And here I get to that in the last paragraph of this reply. Before I even read your reply to my quote, I was intentionally using that acronym instead of talking about experiencing how it is always now. I think the latter is clumsier and the former is familiar with people. So best to use that one.
That does seem logical to me Which would be a downer if it is logical, because, I’m a big advocate of logic. Fortunately, I think you got it wrong about being not-perfect. How can someone study something that is pure, experience something pure and yet not feel perfect? I don’t think it’s possible.
You can experience a fact so pure it makes you feel perfect. You can do this at any time by asking yourself HAIETMOBA. It can become second nature. So much so that anytime you find yourself painfully invested in the time clock of the marketplace or the social calendar of your peers HAIETMOBA is automatically asked.
I think you may be trying to use logic still as well… you talk about how it is always now, and draw conclusions, but what is your experiencing moment-to-moment? What is your emotional baseline at this time in life? At this moment? Are you experiencing a PCE? Do you know how to remove yourself? If so, why haven’t you, yet?
I’m a big supporter of logic. My issue wasn’t the logic.
On a moment to moment basis, I experience the spikes and dips of any other feeling-being.
I think the baseline is probably good. Maybe great. Kind of artificial Inexact distinctions. Something above neutral *(*edit:and below excellent).
I feel good. Maybe great. probably great. But I’m doing something validating: answering positively to questions about myself. So I would expect most people to be feeling pretty good.*edit:*Since feelings of validation are good feelings as opposed to felicitous feelings - the most accurate response would be: I am having good feelings.
No
Do you know how to remove yourself?
Not exactly. Definitely not totally
As in self-immolation? I get to what feels like a threshold or precipice. But the altruism doesn’t finish the job.
Or as in a PCE? Same thing, I get pretty darn close but whenever I look to see if there’s still ‘me’ there, there always is.
Is it fair to substitute ‘rational’ (based on or in accordance with reason or logic.) for ‘logic’ (reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.)? If so, that may be worth questioning: rationality & logic cannot reveal the actual because the processes of logic & rationality are dependent on the suppositions & beliefs of the one doing the logic/rationality.
Peter: The major problem with rational thinking is that it is more often than not applied to beliefs rather than facts. Thus in philosophy, religion, spirituality, theoretical science, ethics and the likes, vast and complex extenuated webs of thinking and argument have been based on initial premises that are usually some spurious form of Ancient Wisdom or demented, passionate imagination. Just because someone is rational does not necessary make the person sensible. Just because an argument or train of thought is rational does not necessarily make it sensible or factual in conclusion. As the definition points out, rational thinking and reasoning is a cerebral exercise – existing (only) in the mind, not real – and has nothing to do with what is actual and sensately experienced. Only an intelligence freed of ‘self’-ishness and the chemical influence of instinctual passions can operate with sagacity and sensibility.
Wow. What timing. I just read your response to Andrew. You quoted me. And I was talking about HAIETMOBA. Before I even read that, I was writing about HAIETMOBA. Intentionally using that acronym instead of talking about experiencing how it is always now by asking yourself ‘what time is it’. Because the latter is clumsier and the former is more familiar with people.
Yes and as you pointed out elsewhere (I can’t remember where), they are saying the same thing, it just depends on which aspect is being emphasized.
Any aspect of the question can be emphasized & useful things will be / can be uncovered, because it is always now / here, it is always perfect, etc etc
A rational argument based on a belief rather than a fact is called begging the question. It is one of many common logical fallacies. So reason is not the issue, it’s the arguer using a logical fallacy.
And yet we have actually free people operating under premises that cannot be empirically verified and using logic that can be mathematically proven to be fallacious i.e. using logical fallacies. note: it would take an extensive open-ended discussion to prove this as I have no textual examples on hand. As such, I may be wrong. I support logic and reason because it’s a methodical way to get to what is accurate sensible. A logical fallacy can be proven using mathematics or simply pointed out using the known definitions of common logical fallacies. A factual inaccuracy can be pointed out using empirical data. Otoh, human beings (seemingly those both free of malice/sorrow/the entire human condition and the horribly corrupt alike) disregard empirical data and ignore their own logical fallacies.
That could certainly happen. Perhaps less often than with a feeling-being though.
This is interesting. I think that logic/rationality can be useful to a point when it comes to becoming free. It is useful to think things through. But, I think that it has a point where it is no longer useful as a point of emphasis / as a guide, because one can’t arrive at the actual via a cerebrally-based process. It results in forever remaining inside of ‘me,’ because it is me using the logic. That’s where the connection to pure intent, and the eventual ‘handing of the reins’ to pure intent, is really what gets things over the finish line.
No longer am I doing ‘x’ (including, ‘becoming free’) because it is logical, or because of my process of reasoning, or because of rational conclusions, but because of the direct seeing of the actual facts. It’s a fundamentally different process.
It pleases me that nothing in the PCE and nothing gleaned from asking HAIETMOBA (when asking with naïve or pure intent) is irrational. I don’t have to reevaluate my strong support of logic and reason. Nor do I have to question anything in the PCE or my answers to HAIETMOBA. Iow, the actualism method is logical and an infinite and eternal universe is logical but only the experience of actuality will truly convince anyone.
Which would be a downer if it is logical, because, I’m a big advocate of logic. Fortunately, I think you got it wrong about being not-perfect. 
How can someone study something that is pure, experience something pure and yet not feel perfect? I don’t think it’s possible.