The problem with all theories to me is this: I cannot completely prove to you or anyone else that I exist or that you exist or that anyone or anything exists. So, how can someone successfully prove that we live in the past of a parallel universe?
I might be true "if you and I actually exist and aren't both or either a product of one of our imaginations or someone else's like God"
New Theory Suggests That We Live In The Past Of A Parallel Universe
The
universe is expanding, not contracting. For more than a century, the
standard explanation for “time’s arrow,” as the astrophysicist Arthur
Eddington first called it in 1927, has been that it is an emergent
property of thermodynamics, as first laid out in the work of the
19th-century Austrian…
Business Insider
I can't seem to quote more than this so if you want to read this please click on it.
my point is that nothing can really be proved including each of our existence beyond a shadow of a doubt.
So, literally EVERY proof is based upon the assumption that you and I actually exist in physical bodies on earth as well. Think about this the next time you are "In' a video game on your computer or other device.
Which is real? You playing the game or you "In" the game? If you aren't sure then you know what I'm talking about.
For example, my most real feeling experiences of my life have often been visions and dreams.
The Chinese have a saying about this: "A Chinese man was asleep and dreamed he was a butterfly. Then he woke up and wondered whether he actually was a butterfly dreaming he was a man."
There are three basic philosophical and religious views about this (THERE MAY BE MANY MORE BUT I'M SIMPLIFYING IT HERE).
The first view is the atheistic or agnostic materialist. He or she believes the only thing that is real is what you can see or feel or hear or touch physically. However, they then are really confused when they talk about love because you can't see, feel, here or touch love you can only touch sex. So, a materialist can only be in sex not in love ever if you follow my logic.
The second view is the opposite of the first which is shared for thousands of years by Australian Aborigines which is: "Your Dreams are real and the physical experience is like your dream."
Then there is the Tibetan Buddhist and also the Tibetan Shamans view and Tibetan Cultural view which is: "Your dreams and the physical world are all equally real and unreal simultaneously."
When I think like this when people die I can handle it better. Because even if people or pets die they still reside in my thoughts and dreams during the night and during the day. So, if people are dead they are not really dead in my experience because they never existed and simultaneously always existed in my physical world and the dream worlds.
It seems to me the easiest way to go into shock in life and die from it would be to be an atheist or agnostic materialist. Because psychologically your world view is so very small you are very likely to just die of shock the first time a friend or relative dies or you or a loved one gets sick.
But then you might say, "what is real?" The answer to this is there is no definitive unequivocal answer to the question "What is real" that everyone can agree on and likely never will be either.
There are three basic philosophical and religious views about this (THERE MAY BE MANY MORE BUT I'M SIMPLIFYING IT HERE).
The first view is the atheistic or agnostic materialist. He or she believes the only thing that is real is what you can see or feel or hear or touch physically. However, they then are really confused when they talk about love because you can't see, feel, here or touch love you can only touch sex. So, a materialist can only be in sex not in love ever if you follow my logic.
The second view is the opposite of the first which is shared for thousands of years by Australian Aborigines which is: "Your Dreams are real and the physical experience is like your dream."
Then there is the Tibetan Buddhist and also the Tibetan Shamans view and Tibetan Cultural view which is: "Your dreams and the physical world are all equally real and unreal simultaneously."
When I think like this when people die I can handle it better. Because even if people or pets die they still reside in my thoughts and dreams during the night and during the day. So, if people are dead they are not really dead in my experience because they never existed and simultaneously always existed in my physical world and the dream worlds.
It seems to me the easiest way to go into shock in life and die from it would be to be an atheist or agnostic materialist. Because psychologically your world view is so very small you are very likely to just die of shock the first time a friend or relative dies or you or a loved one gets sick.
But then you might say, "what is real?" The answer to this is there is no definitive unequivocal answer to the question "What is real" that everyone can agree on and likely never will be either.
No comments:
Post a Comment