This moment has no duration

Journals
107

Yet the impact of what you wrote is to convey to the reader that actuality is “a fantastical place that isn’t real”, a “completely unreal world of pixie dust and theory-less music and plotless pomp” such that the word actual “didn’t seem to convey how unreal it was”, while reality is the place where your “very real friends and real family” are, which is “at least, real”.

Yet the point conveyed to the reader is not that you are questioning whether the above is factual or have found that it isn’t, which is the proper focus of attention, but rather whether you want to make the choice to live in the unreal unreality rather than the real reality, which question is built on a false premise and thus is invalid in the first place.

This is a false dichotomy that conveys to the reader that one can either write factually and be “boring” and “sound like a manual”, or if one “want[s] it to be fun” then one has no choice but to be imprecise and inaccurate where it will be “par for the course” that some will “take it the wrong way”.

It is patently false when considering the obvious example of Richard’s writing, for example, “A Rather Quaint Clay-Pit Tale”, which is both fun and fantastical and nowhere near “sound[s] like a manual”, yet is completely factual and accurate, to boot.

In other words it sounds like you didn’t put the requisite effort into what you wrote to have it be both fun and factual, at the expense of possibly misleading your fellow human beings, which you accepted as a possible consequence.

Upon further reflection, is that really a sensible approach?

There’s just no way you could know that. Someone who doesn’t yet know that actuality is actual (and not unreal) and reality is ephemeral (and not substantial), will certainly be misled by your report into thinking they have to sacrifice something that is ultimately of value in order to succeed, rather than the factual framing which is that reality is ultimately illusory and there is nothing of value in it, it is only imagined to be so.

There’s not only the current readership, but anybody who may come across your words at any point in the future.

Personally I find it more sensible - and satisfying - to write in a way that stands the test of time.

This sentence contains two parts, and only one of them is true.

Good! Just to re-iterate, the advice is that the process will be far more fruitful if you cease telling yourself from the outgo that you already know the belief or objection you currently hold is "irrational and factually inaccurate".

If you did indeed already know that, you would no longer hold that belief or have that objection. The fact that you do, means you don’t yet know that.

The “rather than assuring yourself” refers to you, from the outset, telling yourself that “the objection [you’re] currently exploring” is one that you actually already “knew to be irrational and factually inaccurate”, not the writing out of your reply to me.

If you already knew it was irrational and factually inaccurate, the objection would cease at that moment in time already and there would be nothing left to explore about it.

In order for somebody to miss something, it does indeed have to be present such that the reader can overlook it. If it’s not there in the first place, there is nothing that can be missed, it is simply absent from the source material.

Again, to re-iterate, the issue is that your message presents actuality as being “a fantastical place that isn’t real”, a “completely unreal world of pixie dust and theory-less music and plotless pomp” such that the word actual “didn’t seem to convey how unreal it was”, while reality is the place where your “very real friends and real family” are, which is “at least, real”, with the question conveyed to the reader being not whether this is factual but rather whether you want to make the choice to live in the unreal unreality rather than the real reality, which question is built on a faulty premise and is thus invalid and rendered irrelevant once the faulty premise is seen.

To forestall possible criticisms, there are three reasons such detail was gone into in this message:

  1. To establish the facts of what actually happened in the correspondence such that there are no nails to hang any criticisms on and everyone involved is clear about what the situation is.

  2. To convey with precise detail the suggested advice, applicable to not only the correspondents involved but all readers as well, that it is of benefit to not, from the outset, tell oneself that they already know their belief or objection is “irrational and factually inaccurate”, and to set the high standard for oneself that one will only know for sure that that is true once that belief or objection is actually fully dissipated.

  3. To cover all the bases with regards to there being a possible continued missing that the very premise of the question is what is faulty in the first place and that the way to actually resolve the question is to see the faultiness of the premise.

With cheers, best regards, and an unyielding consideration and appreciation,
Claudiu

108

@JonnyPitt I enjoyed your depiction of the fairytale like quality, which seems so unreal as to be fantastic.

I had never experienced it fully , and have but vague memories of anything at all.

However, It was indeed something I hadn’t read before.

The solid feeling of real, vs the fantastic realm of the actual.

Thanks.

109

Hi Andrew,

Do you see how, although reality feels very solid and real – once one is experiencing that wondrously amazing and unparalleled perfection intrinsic to actuality, one sees that the real world is not actually “very solid” at all, and in fact is just an illusion, with actuality being that which substantially and intrinsically exists?

And further, that all those personas and personages you experience as your friends and family, though felt to be real at the time, are seen to also be nothing but illusory personas parasitically inhabiting their host bodies, which actual flesh and blood bodies actually exist as your fellow human beings, each of which has a peerless and impeccable capacity to be wondrously intimate with you and for you to be wondrously intimate with them, in cohesive delectable harmony?

Cheers,
Claudiu

1 Like
110

Hi Jon,

Let’s start with some facts.

@JonnyPitt: Maybe the primary objection to self immolation is not being sure whether one wants to be by oneself in a fantastical place that isn’t real vs being among others in a place that is real.
The words depersonalization and derealization come to mind. I just experienced actual not as something that is more real than real or Real2.0 or super real but as something that is unreal. So unreal that the word Actual seemed counter-intuitive. Actual and real being synonyms in normal conversation, I found it at odds with the world I just experienced. A synonym for real didn’t seem to convey how unreal it was. Any word at all could be used to describe it as the place has no parallels. Something conveying a magic like quality well known to be fantastical fiction might convey how unreal it is: Genie land, pixie world, fairy land, a spontaneous song and dance with no choreography and no duration where the stage itself is singing and dancing and there is no audience… ([This moment has no duration - #98 by JonnyPitt])

This is clearly not a description of a PCE but of an altered state of consciousness. When you have a genuine PCE, it is never experienced as unreal the way you described it, i.e. foreign. It is more in line with the purity and perfection of the actual world become suddenly apparent –

*“it was so easy and simple to just be there” ([Mushrooms PCE]),
“The light was golden, every little swaying movement of the trees just emphasised the stillness. There was an utterly brilliant clarity and peace” ([Various Descriptions of PCE's]),
“I had a micro-pce a couple nights ago watching my fingers make a paper plane, just doing it on their own”. ([Everything happens of its own accord])
*“And then in a PCE I am that very pure intent.” ([Claudiu's Journal - #36 by claudiu])

You say you had experienced PCEs in the past ([This moment has no duration - #41 by JonnyPitt]), so with a bit of honest discernment you could have seen the difference for yourself.

But that was not the intention of your strange tale – the intention was –

JonnyPitt to Claudiu: I did choose impact over thoroughness. I wanted my prose to have some style. I didn’t want it to sound like a manual. I wanted it to be fun, not boring. How can I leave the reader surprised while still understanding my point was the unverbalized question I asked myself. […] So I just chose to combine flair with brevity.” [emphasis added] ([This moment has no duration - #106 by JonnyPitt])

You also knew it was “irrational and factually inaccurate” whilst not disclosing the “unverbalized question”, i.e. “looking for my own personal objections” –

JonnyPitt to Claudiu: “I was looking for my own personal objections, which I knew to be irrational and factually inaccurate.” ([This moment has no duration - #104 by JonnyPitt])

So on several levels you have led your fellow human beings astray. You can call this lying (presently a political incorrect word) or bluffing i.e. not showing your cards for the “impact” you wanted to achieve (the course for more effective bluffing seems to have crept into real life after all :blush:).

JonnyPitt to Vineeto: I just took a course on how to bluff more effectively. But that’s poker not anywhere else.
Vineeto: […] because in reality he is afraid to leave his seemingly safe cage when the doors are wide open, and he could instead enjoy and appreciate this moment of being alive.
JonnyPitt to Vineeto: That is exactly what I was trying to convey! I was looking for objections to staying as near to the actual world as I was. My focus then and there was on my objections. I am absolutely afraid of leaving my “seemingly safe cage”. That’s exactly what I wanted to convey. ([This moment has no duration - #104 by JonnyPitt])

So after clarifying that there is a marked difference between a PCE and an ASC, and pointing out your present lack of honesty, especially self-honesty, we can get to the meat of the matter – your objections to leave the cage “when the doors are wide open”.

  1. “Whether one wants to be by oneself in a fantastical place that isn’t real”
  2. “The words depersonalization and derealization come to mind”
  3. “I am absolutely afraid of leaving my seemingly safe cage”

No. 1 is easy – who wants to live in an ASC – you would certainly be in a world of your own, with so many different types of ASCs to choose from.

I am not alone in the actual world – I only meet flesh-and-blood human beings and there is an actual intimacy happening with every body and every thing and every event because there is no separation (no separative self whatsoever). (see [Mailing List 'D' Respondent No. 6]).

No. 2 – Richard has written about the 4 psychiatric symptoms he has been diagnosed with –

• [Richard]: ‘… I have not been reticent about having been closely examined, over a three-year period by both an accredited psychiatrist and psychologist, and found to be having the following symptoms: 1. Depersonalisation (no sense of identity) as in no ‘self’ by whatever name. 2. Derealisation (lost touch with reality) as in reality has vanished completely. 3. Alexithymia (inability to feel the affections) as in no affective feelings whatsoever. 4. Anhedonia (inability to feel pleasure/pain) as in no affective pleasure/pain facility. (Mailing List 'AF' Respondent No. 46)

Incidentally, according to these psychiatrically defined terms, myself and everyone else free from the instinctual passions could be diagnosed with the same symptoms. It only means that psychiatry is as yet unaware about the Third Alternative. Hence I think your objection that comes to your mind is rather the fear of going mad, not “depersonalization and derealization” per se. I won’t be guessing any further, you did say you “did choose impact over thoroughness”. I am happy to talk about the precise objection when you have pinpointed it more informedly and accurately.

No. 3 – this is perfectly understandable. After all, this cage of yours is decorated with posters like “which, […] is, at least, real”, you can’t change human nature, you become derealized when you leave this cage, you will loose all your friends and family and be totally alone in the world – and similar scare stories. And in front the open doors of your cage there are images of AI fiction stories and snapshots of sci-fi films :wink:.

Now tell me Jon, when you have read this post so far, which of your fears has been resolved and which objections remain? It will make the discussion about your objections so much more concise when you are scrupulously honest with yourself, and with your correspondents, honest with yourself with the aim of being sincere (=at root)(*).

(*)[Richard]: The word ‘sincere’ can be traced back to the Latin sincerus, meaning ‘whole’ or ‘pure’ or ‘sound’, and which is arguably derived from the roots ‘sin-’ (one) and ‘crescere’ (to grow) in that the Latin ‘sincerus’ originally referred to a plant which was of pure stock – not a mixture or hybrid – and thus came to mean anything which was genuine (as in ‘true’ or ‘correct’) and not falsified, adulterated, contaminated.
Sincerity is to be in accord with the fact/being aligned with factuality/ staying true to facticity (as in being authentic/ guileless, genuine/ artless, straightforward/ ingenuous). (Richard, Abditorium, sincere)

Btw, it’s more fruitful to examine those fears and objections from a more dispassionate perspective, i.e. after you get back to feeling good first.

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like
111

Yes thank you @Vineeto it seems you stopped me right in the tracks of a habit of mine - of hanging back in the ‘normal’ and from there trying to throw some kind of a Hail Mary towards actual freedom. It never works because the distance is too great and from that ‘normal’ place ‘I’ am not advised by the perfection and purity, instead ‘I’ resort to theories. It’s like ‘I’ am hanging out in the cage (with the doors wide open) whilst coming up with the next ‘great escape plan’ :laughing:.

It is becoming clear to me that going out-from-control is the next step, in fact I have been hanging out on the edge of this decision for a long time. Now is a great time to do it, with @claudiu having already gone ahead and done it anyways, which I am full of admiration for.

What I have been doing is setting the intent to continue allowing the perfection and purity each moment again come what may, committing to having that golden clew active at all times, with each instance of the connection being severed being treated as a flashing red light in the same way I would with a diminution into feeling bad.

It is exhilarating to commit in such a way, this is going further than I would usually allow myself to, and some more, the rewards are certainly worth the effort though.
Last night I was watching a random YouTube video which was showing the latest high resolution pictures of mars and comparing it with earth. Usually watching astronomy videos ‘I’ feel somewhat alien, alone, small, in danger etc. Essentially there is that backdrop of the existential angst of being a ‘self’.
This time it was different, I saw that there is no outside to this universe, that I as this body am not separate from it, and then looking at the pictures of the earth I was able to fully appreciate the wonder and magic of it all.
That this enormous and infinitely complex universe even exists in the first place, and further that it has arranged itself into the azure planet called earth, and further that this planet is teeming with life, and further that from all of this a thinking and reflective creature was born, and further that as this creature the universe is able to experience itself - WOW.
I realise that all of the above is this body’s and every body’s birthright, and this brings a depth to the words “fellow human being” which I can’t quite put into words.

3 Likes
112

Kuba: Yes thank you @Vineeto it seems you stopped me right in the tracks of a habit of mine - of hanging back in the ‘normal’ and from there trying to throw some kind of a Hail Mary towards actual freedom. It never works because the distance is too great and from that ‘normal’ place ‘I’ am not advised by the perfection and purity, instead ‘I’ resort to theories. It’s like ‘I’ am hanging out in the cage (with the doors wide open) whilst coming up with the next ‘great escape plan’

Dear @Kub933,

Ha, you have a delightful way with words. I had been wondering if it was ok to prod you a bit or if you’d rather proceed at your own pace. Now I am glad that I did. Habituation can sometimes be quite a procrastinating feature – and ‘Vineeto’ used to do that a lot.

Kuba: It is becoming clear to me that going out-from-control is the next step, in fact I have been hanging out on the edge of this decision for a long time. Now is a great time to do it, with @claudiu having already gone ahead and done it anyways, which I am full of admiration for.

Yes, Claudiu is boldly showing the way and giving detailed reports about how an out-from-control virtual freedom works wonders and also what the pitfalls can be which those after him can avoid. Pure intent is far more easily accessible once you made the conscious decision to let go of the controls and it’s a great, thrilling and delicious adventure.

What I have been doing is setting the intent to continue allowing the perfection and purity each moment again come what may, committing to having that golden clew active at all times, with each instance of the connection being severed being treated as a flashing red light in the same way I would with a diminution into feeling bad.
It is exhilarating to commit in such a way, this is going further than I would usually allow myself to, and some more, the rewards are certainly worth the effort though.

That’s it and it is indeed exhilarating, galvanizing, electrifying and thoroughly wonder-full.

Kuba: Last night I was watching a random YouTube video which was showing the latest high resolution pictures of mars and comparing it with earth. Usually watching astronomy videos ‘I’ feel somewhat alien, alone, small, in danger etc. Essentially there is that backdrop of the existential angst of being a ‘self’.
This time it was different, I saw that there is no outside to this universe, that I as this body am not separate from it, and then looking at the pictures of the earth I was able to fully appreciate the wonder and magic of it all.
That this enormous and infinitely complex universe even exists in the first place, and further that it has arranged itself into the azure planet called earth, and further that this planet is teeming with life, and further that from all of this a thinking and reflective creature was born, and further that as this creature the universe is able to experience itself – WOW.

This is so excellent to read, I had to interrupt because tears of appreciation were running down my face – it is just so mirificent that another fellow human being is about to come out of the cage and is able to marvel at and fully appreciate the magic of this amazing universe, of our verdant and azure planet hanging in space, of all the flora and fauna, and most of all of conscious human life with the ability of being apperceptively aware of being alive.

Actuality is utterly breathtaking.

Kuba: I realise that all of the above is this body’s and every body’s birthright, and this brings a depth to the words “fellow human being” which I can’t quite put into words.

Indeed – you will discover that the depth of intimacy with your fellow human beings increases exponentially the more you allow this marvellous beneficent infinite universe to live you. And your – and ever body’s – birthright is to be the universe experiencing itself as a flesh-and-blood sentient human being.

Life is truly wonderful.

With all my appreciation for your bold step.

Cheers Vineeto

2 Likes
113

Hi Vineeto.

It’s really hard to know where to start. I’d rather keep it informal. I’ll start by saying I’m really happy you’ve been participating here. There have been things you’ve written here that have really hit home. In particular, comments that point to seeing for yourself how silly it is to waste this moment feeling bad when this moment is the only moment happening. And how getting back to feeling good is the first step and a necessary step to seeing that aforementioned silliness and how this moment is the only moment happening. There is no other moment then this, right? I can’t think of one.

My experience of late has been rather wonderful. It may be an ASC. If I were to call a PCE foreign then that would be clue. Because that would be impossible. PCEs aren’t like that. Nor are EE’s or IEs. This I know from experience. But examining my objections while being temporarily free of my normal anxieties did lead me to a place that seemed both foreign and a lot closer to the actual world than I am normally. I thought that foreignness might be an objection a lot of us have. And I was keen on conversating about that if anyone was interested. And if not then I was happy just putting it out there.

Leading others astray didn’t occur to me. I didn’t think anyone would make any conclusions. When I think about that, a person sitting in a chair reading my words, I can’t imagine them taking what I wrote and ignoring their own PCE(s). And if they haven’t had one yet then I can’t imagine me saying “unreal” would cause damage. Maybe I’m wrong. But as of now I just don’t see how I can have that effect on anyone else.

The actual world is pretty foreign when you’re not in it. When you still have access to all your anxieties yet see a world where those anxieties don’t exist and it’s like well i can stay here or go back - i think some interesting thoughts occur, some conversations can take place where words like unreal and foreign are bandied about. But maybe this an ASC.

An objection must remain, right? Otherwise, I’d have immolated, no? I think living without fear is an objection I have. I think the danger of having no fear is the objection. However, the foreigness I described has lessened. It feels more normal to have this level of reduced defensiveness, this level of reduced boredom, this level of assuredness that everything will be fine, this level of reduced responsibility and neediness. It’s still not totally normal though. I’m not used to thinking that everything will work out and I really don’t need to worry. That other people are their own people. Like they are over there living full lives without me and my projections over them aren’t actual. Those projections are real but not actual. (I’ve been contemplating that distinction quite a lot lately and I can talk bundles about it) I’m used to thinking that I have a role to play in other peoples lives and I really should play that role as well as I can. I’m not used to feeling that such roles are unnecessary and that me being me will work out just fine. I’m not used to thinking that money won’t be an issue. If I need a new source of funds sometime in the future, if this current source drys up, I’ll go and find a new source. And if there are no jobs or I’m disabled well shit, no master plan I start executing now will make that situation markedly better. And such a situation is pretty unlikely anyway. It’s just different thinking like that. And I think that’s still an objection. Maybe I should worry more. Ya know. If I don’t worry then christ shit might hit the fan and I won’t be prepared.

1 Like
114

I agree that when you aren’t in or near the actual world, it can seem foreign — because it’s impossible to imagine or think one’s way into what it’s like. But actually experiencing it is quite the opposite — I’ve often had a sense of utter familiarity like “oh yeah I know this from a while ago, I even forgot how wonderful it was”. And together with that the experience of actuality is that it’s safe, nothing can go wrong, and all the rest that comes with it.

As you wrote it’s not like other PCEs you had, so you know yourself it wasn’t a PCE — it seems you’ve conflated the current non-PCE state you’re in with a PCE? Or maybe you know it’s not a PCE but you think you’re gaining accurate information about what actuality is like? It seems this may be misinforming you as to the nature of actuality.

Well, in response to your post Andrew wrote this:

Now it seems Andrew’s take-away, not having experienced it fully himself, is that a quality of actuality is this unreality that you wrote about.

It’s telling that he wrote it is something he hadn’t read before — because that feeling of actuality being unreal is indeed not a quality of a PCE.

So there’s no need to imagine what you wrote causing damage, it has already misinformed at least one person!

I say this not as a moral judgment but just to show you that your words do have an effect on people and so it is indeed sensible to put one’s best foot forward when writing about these topics, not only for the benefit of whoever may read it but also for yourself, as I find writing in a contemplative and reflective manner, with care and consideration taken to write only that which I know to be factual and explicit pointing out of that which I’m not sure of, to be a helpful way for me to learn and understand more about my own experience.

Cheers,
Claudiu

1 Like
115

lack of reality. The real world - very dangerous. So many threats. Actual world - where are they? They don’t exist. Even just approaching the actual world, you can see that those threats don’t exist there. How can the actual world be real if those threats don’t exist? And it’s not real. It’s actual.

1 Like
116

Hmm… you are being cunning or tricky here, but it’s not possible to tell if it’s intentionally/consciously so or not. Maybe if I re-phrase such that no ambiguity is possible.

Vineeto wrote:

You agreed with this:

Now, my rephrased question:

CLAUDIU: Now it seems Andrew’s take-away, not having experienced it fully himself, is that actuality is experienced as “unreal” like you initially described in your report, whereas as Vineeto pointed out a PCE “is never experienced as unreal the way you described it” and it is actually experienced as described in the reports she quoted afterwards.

Let me know if that makes sense now.

Cheers,
Claudiu

117

I’m sorry. What’s your question? Oh. Wait. If I can see that I could be misleading someone. So yea. Someone could be misled. But I doubt it. You say Andrew was misled but was he? He just said my description conveyed to him that “the actual seeming unreal as to be fantastical”. So yea. That not exactly what I met. Was he misled into thinking the actual seems unreal? Maybe he was. Maybe the word unreal just should never have been written. I’m still having trouble understanding why exactly it was a foopah. I don’t think Andrew would have been caused any harm had he read my post without any further clarifications and/or critiques. But what do i hell do i know.

118

Yes I am glad too, I took a couple of days to reply to your suggestion because I wanted to come to the answer experientially, as opposed to just intellectually answering from that ‘normal’ place.
I am very appreciative of you writing on here and I have been keen to make the most of it, as in actually doing something in light of each topic being discussed before hitting reply.

119

And this is excellent to read too because that experience (of actuality being human kind’s birthright) although temporary for me, was of something so very precious, to have confirmation that what I glimpsed is your ongoing experience and furthermore that it is the correct target, is great.

120

Here again is what you initially wrote (bold emphases added):

Your report is unambiguous – it reports an experience of the actual world as something unreal, so unreal that the word “actual” does not fit to describe it. So if Andrew was “misled into thinking the actual seems unreal”, it would only be because you literally said that it is unreal, that it is experienced as such.

Look it’s very simple:

  • You wrote an inaccurate report which, if someone were to take your words sincerely and accept them as accurate, would mislead them as to what a PCE is.
  • When this was pointed out, you deflected saying you knew it was irrational and inaccurate at the time but you just made a stylistic choice.
  • When pointed out that there was no way for a reader to know that, you stated that you don’t see how it could lead anybody astray.
  • When pointed out a specific example – that Andrew appears to have taken your initial report at face value and thus may be left with an inaccurate picture of what a PCE is like – you repeated again that you don’t think it misled him or could mislead anyone, but threw in a “what do i hell do i know”.

But there’s no question here. You wrote an inaccurate report, which was written as if it was believed to be accurate at the time. This is an irrefutable fact. A reader can either accept the report as accurate, which would necessarily lead them astray, or they can be skeptical or reject it outright, in which case they wouldn’t be led astray.

The only way a reader wouldn’t be misled is if they are reject or ignore your report. As you’re saying you don’t see how what you write can mislead anyone, you’re essentially making the case that nobody should take what you write as being sincere. The continued demurrals and deflections don’t improve the case, either.

It’s up to you, ultimately – do you want to write in a way that people can take it at face value, appreciate it and use it to further your own and their own journeys, or do you want to write in a way that everybody essentially ignores it because it’s a wild card whether you are even writing what you genuinely think at the time?

Well, you could have just written it at the outset like you wrote about it later:

Here there is nothing to mislead anyone. You report still experiencing emotions, having access to all your anxieties, and that when you reflect upon what a world without those anxieties might look like, it seems unreal and foreign to you. This is perfectly normal and of course worthwhile to bring up and discuss, which can lead to, for example, sharing of experiences of actuality where it is experienced that in a PCE, actuality is actually what is familiar and safe, and the ‘real’ world is seen to be what is actually “unreal” from that vantage point.

We all make mistakes, it’s certainly possible to have an experience and you think it’s something so you write about it on the journal, and then others can comment. And if it turns out you were mistaken about it, so be it, then you learn something. But I find the saying you knew it was wrong the whole time and the constant deflection and demurrals to be contrary to having a sincere, fruitful, and mutually beneficial conversation. I’m not actually even sure at this point if when you had that experience and wrote about it, that you really thought it was a PCE at that time or not. Such is how things go when conversations aren’t clear and straightforward.

Cheers,
Claudiu

121

The meaning of the title to this post just hit me: ‘This moment has no duration.’ This is no beginning and no end to this moment. It just is.

1 Like
122

Sorry Claudiu, I’m not seeing it. Looks to me like a tiny little nothing burger.

123

Hi Jon,

Ok, as it appears you don’t have any interest in writing sincere and accurate reports, and writing insincere and inaccurate reports is “a tiny little nothing burger” to you, I will take that under consideration when reading what you wrote in the past and what you have to write in the future.

Cheers,
Claudiu

124

Hi Jon,

Thank you for the welcome.

@JonnyPitt: My experience of late has been rather wonderful. It may be an ASC. If I were to call a PCE foreign then that would be clue. Because that would be impossible. PCEs aren’t like that. Nor are EE’s or IEs. This I know from experience. But examining my objections while being temporarily free of my normal anxieties did lead me to a place that seemed both foreign and a lot closer to the actual world than I am normally. I thought that foreignness might be an objection a lot of us have. And I was keen on conversating about that if anyone was interested. And if not then I was happy just putting it out there. [link]

Lately there is a new kind of ASC amongst people who come across Richard’s writings which could be called actualism-mimicking-ASC.

However, experiences of unreality have been quite common within the human condition. Here is one Richard’s described and another one from Peter –

[Richard]: I have written before (on my portion of The Actual Freedom Trust website) about personally experiencing a major dissociative state, of an extended duration during a period of my life in a war-zone as a youth, which was not unlike being in the centre of a cyclone – all about raged fear and hatred, anger and aggression – and in that unreality all was calm, peaceful (and ‘fearless’). (link) (List D 12)

Peter: Another doubt that emerged about this time was that if I was to throw out spirituality could it be that I would just end up back where I had started, but without love, trust, faith and hope: the very things that made life at least bearable? Would I find myself in some bleak awfulness, some grey world, empty of everything? One day I had a flash of stark barrenness, a glimpse of stark reality – but I knew from my peak experiences that this was simply fear and, sure enough, being only fear, it did not last. (link)

Besides, your very description of the experience is rather revealing:

JonnyPitt: I just experienced actual not as something that is more real than real or Real2.0 or super real but as something that is unreal. So unreal that the word Actual seemed counter-intuitive. Actual and real being synonyms in normal conversation, I found it at odds with the world I just experienced. A synonym for real didn’t seem to convey how unreal it was […] (link)

You can’t have it both ways – either your is ‘actual’ is used synonymous with real or it is “so unreal that the word Actual seemed counter-intuitive”. Neither of these two descriptions reflect anything of the actual world. As such your very claim that this is why you have objections to an actual freedom are simply a red herring, a “nothing burger” (link).

I also look askance at your statement that “lead me to a place that seemed both foreign and a lot closer to the actual world”. It may be your subjective impression but the way you write shows no indication that you are “a lot closer to the actual world”.

JonnyPitt: Leading others astray didn’t occur to me.

You also said:

JonnyPitt: I simply lack the leverage to do that. [link]

Who are you kidding – have you forgotten the Cause of Bias thread which generated 219 posts, caused a stir and a rift in the halls of the Discuss Actualism Forum and was merely based on a strawman and a red-herring carelessly introduced but fervently defended by you?(*)

(*)[Richard]: JonnyPitt’s “Cause of Bias” thread is flawed from the get-go inasmuch his basic premiss regarding bias not being a product of ‘self’(1) is a premiss based upon calumny thence traducement (i.e., upon a strawman and a red-herring thence flat-out lies about “bad arguments” and “cognitive limitations” similar to “tone deafness” or “dyslexia” plus further lies, built upon those flat-out lies, about Richard and Vineeto being “stubbornly irrational”, and (allegedly) on the record with some “verifiably bat-shit crazy” opinions). [link](tool-tip after “flawed-from-the-get-go”).
(1)Footnote:
Cause of Bias? Message № 01; JonnyPitt; 6 Feb 2023.
What causes bias? I don’t think it’s self. What else can it be? [link].

[Richard]: Incidentally, and just in case it has escaped any casual reader’s notice, the entire “Cause of Bias” thread at the Discuss Actualism Online forum is rendered null and void by the marked absence of examples of bias from those in whom identity in toto is extinct [link]

And now you have started another red herring/nothing burger with this “unreality”=PCE. Can you comprehend that with such a history your claim of “lack of leverage” is rather unconvincing and that therefore your assertion that your “inaccurate” information would cause no harm to anyone is equally erroneous?

JonnyPitt: The actual world is pretty foreign when you’re not in it. When you still have access to all your anxieties yet see a world where those anxieties don’t exist and it’s like well i can stay here or go back – I think some interesting thoughts occur, some conversations can take place where words like unreal and foreign are bandied about. But maybe this an ASC.

Those statements are very clearly not made while in a PCE, in an EE or even when feeling good. They are made when in the grips of the ‘self’, which is “a lost, lonely, frightened and very, very cunning” identity –

[Richard]: Wherever there be no underestimating the extent to which a lost, lonely, frightened and very, very cunning feeling-being will go in order to remain affectively-psychically in existence – millions upon millions of years of blind nature’s successful perpetuation of the species via its rough-and-ready instinctual survival passions blindly dictates no other course of action can ever instinctually come about – is where there be far less likelihood of ascribing to nescience that which quite properly has its roots in the visceral wiliness of the wild which has so successfully proliferated the species thus far.
It is no-one’s fault if they be more cunning – more instinctively wily – than the norm as it is genetic inheritance which determines the degree to which instinctual drives, urges, impulses, appetites, and all the rest, are operating. [link, Footnote [1]]

Hence my previous suggestion that “it’s more fruitful to examine those fears and objections from a more dispassionate perspective, i.e. after you get back to feeling good first.” [link] and I add a suggestion to only write on the forum when you are feeling good.

JonnyPitt: An objection must remain, right? Otherwise, I’d have immolated, no?

Ha I think you fallen for James’ simplistic formula – What I had said was –

Vineeto to Claudiu: Become more and more friends with ‘me’ in that ‘I’ agree on more and more points that ‘I’ am indeed redundant to the stage where ‘I’ joyously acquiesce to lay down ‘my’ burden (it is indeed experienced as a burden) and fulfil ‘my’ deep-down yearning to finally go into oblivion.
When there is no objection left there is only joyous anticipation and no fear at all. [link]

This is when one is out-from-control, in a different way of being, in an ongoing excellence experience. Your next step is to recognize that fear is a burden, not a necessity for survival.

JonnyPitt: I think living without fear is an objection I have. I think the danger of having no fear is the objection. However, the foreignness I described has lessened. It feels more normal to have this level of reduced defensiveness, this level of reduced boredom, this level of assuredness that everything will be fine, this level of reduced responsibility and neediness. It’s still not totally normal though.

Ok, now you are getting closer to the real cause of why you introduced this thread but you are still defending the feeling that you feel. You are defending your ‘self’, the human condition. You haven’t decided yet that you want to live life without this feeling hampering you.

The way the actualism method works is to get back to feeling good before investigating any aspect of the trigger that made you feel bad.

Once you are feeling good – which may take some time to accomplish – look at the trigger (if it was an intense feeling which in your case it is) in a dispassionate way. Don’t embrace it, don’t defend it, don’t object to it, be as honest as you can, in other words, don’t feed it. When you stop feeding it, it will automatically shrink to at least half its intensity, if not more. Feelings can’t sustain themselves unless ‘I’ continue to feed it.

Then you can begin to contemplate in a rational manner, perhaps gather some information, for instance [link]. See what the fear is about – ask yourself some questions. Can you really not live /survive without it? How come other actually free people can and you think you cannot? Is fear attractive for you, does it have any endearing features (apart from being real)? Can you perhaps see that fear is there in order to keep you trapped within the human condition so that you stay as you are, that you do not have to change? Is it perhaps the fear to change? Do you want to change despite the fear? Do you want to perhaps be able to enjoy and appreciate being alive?

Btw, enjoyment and appreciation is not the same as you termed it – “wonder and satisfaction” [link]

JonnyPitt: I’m not used to thinking that everything will work out and I really don’t need to worry.

That is not what an actual freedom is about, even though it’s true that without instinctual passion is it much easier to meet the challenges that being alive presents. (See how you water down the magnificence of experiencing being pure intent personified as a flesh-and-blood human being, even the possibility to living peace-on-earth, by defining it from the myopic ‘self’-centred perspective of ‘what do ‘I’ get out of it?)

JonnyPitt” […] It’s just different thinking like that. And I think that’s still an objection. Maybe I should worry more. Ya know. If I don’t worry then christ shit might hit the fan and I won’t be prepared.

Ha, do you really think, if you worry enough those things won’t happen, and if they are happening, you will be prepared for everything? I guess you do think that, but you do so because you are not yet feeling good – life looks a lot different when you allow yourself to stop feeding the present feeling and allow a bit more naiveté to flourish. It will not automatically pay your electricity bill but you have been able to pay so far whether you worried about it or not.

Look at it this way – the universe has kept you alive and well so far, given you your skills and talents to accomplish staying alive, whether you additionally worried or not. Your ‘self’ and your feelings have not contributed, on the contrary, they have stuffed up a lot and caused a lot of unnecessary problems. ‘You’ are not needed, ‘you’ are redundant.

RICHARD: Yet all sentient beings are a product of nature. Nature endows all sentient beings with the instinctual passions of fear and aggression and nurture and desire, right? You are suggesting that this nature might be better of scrapping human beings for some other ‘less aggressive’ being. Yet it was nature that made human beings aggressive in the first place. Do you see the circular nature of what you are saying?
RESPONDENT: I am not so sure. Fright is the intelligent response to danger.
RICHARD: Not so … fright is the instinctual reaction to danger [and a lot of imagined danger at that]. You are still believing that instincts are intelligent. Instincts are killing people. [link]

Cheers Vineeto

1 Like
125

I’m glad this topic has been brought up. @JonnyPitt I think the dichotomy you are falling for is something that I have been contemplating recently in myself.

Essentially it goes that ‘I’ either worry about things so that “I can get shit done” OR I adopt some kind of ‘don’t worry, be happy’ mentality.

The mistake is confusing the ‘don’t worry, be happy’ mentality with what actualism and actual freedom is all about.

The thing is that both options within this dichotomy are two sides of the same coin, as in whether ‘I’ choose to ‘worry and be productive’ or ‘don’t worry, be happy’, ‘I’ am still trapped in a worldview where emotion is primary, as in ‘I’ never get to see the actual situation for what it is.
‘I’ end up confusing worry with caring and happiness with lack of care. I guess this is a fundamental feature of being a ‘self’, that the actual situation is never seen and instead everything is enmeshed with emotion.

I notice in myself that once I am caught in this dichotomy I will end up coming up with all sorts of weird ‘actualist rules’ for myself, for example “I should be happy instead of thinking about X” but then again since when is feeling happy and harmless at odds with thoughtful consideration of whatever topic?

The point I am trying to get at is that once care and consideration is disentangled from both emotion and belief then it is absolutely sensible (as it always has been) to apply ones mind to whatever situation is at hand.

This is what I notice (with delight) whenever I have an EE or PCE, that I don’t stop being me, in the sense that all of a sudden the bills don’t get paid or I don’t turn up at work or I don’t go to train BJJ. It’s not as if ‘I’ go into abeyance and some alien is dropped in ‘my’ place. And the same with feeling good, I still care about the same things, I am still the same individual, it is just that now a burden has been lifted.

So when ‘I’ disappear there is no void, instead the genuine me as-I-am is discovered, of course he does not stop caring, he actually cares, whereas ‘my’ care is forever tangled up with emotion.

2 Likes
126

Just some notes I want to write down before I go about my day. Disclaimer: At the most this is merely a conversation starter for anyone who wants to chat. At the least, it’s just the place and time I chose to jot a thing down so I don’t have to worry about remembering them.

When a particular bad feeling arises the mechanisms of dealing with it:

  1. Validate it: Normal
  2. Dwell in it: Abnormal
  3. Reason or distract yourself out of it: Suppression
  4. Notice it and allow it to go away to be replaced by a felicitous feeling. Actualist?
  5. Think of it as something separate from you: Detachment/dissociation
  6. Repression: What’s the action of repression? I can’t think of one rn. If I do I’ll come back and edit.

10 minutes later: One of the most persistent bad feelings I get is boredom. Here I am sitting in front of my computer trying to learn a thing or two that will help me with my finances and I feel boredom. Okay. No problem. Been here before. I pause from my work. Allow the boredom to pass and it’s replaced by something very good. I marvel for quite some time. And then I get back to work and by golly two minutes later boredom and repeat the whole damn thing. And now it’s time for me to get up and make some actual money but before I do that I come on here and write this…So there’s a few less minutes working/learning. lol- coming on here probably fits #3 in this case, suppression - distracting myself out of it. Oh well.

I suspect the boredom is a resentment and maybe I should proactively cultivate some felicitous whenever I sit down to work. Hopefully not in a #3 type of way reasoning myself out of it. Hopefully within felicitousness before boredom arises, I can just kind of acknowledge how good it feels to sit down and how amazing it is to type with two hands and see the words come across or how cool the thing is that I’m learning. Maybe. Not a recommendation or anything. Just something I’m gonna play with in the coming days.

1 Like