You are on page 1of 6

Darien, oh Darien. Why must life be so hard?

It sucks.

Why couldn't we have been born in the seat of a king

Or Queen, I do not care

Because we're men, Aakash.

Those who hold throne of authority do not value it.
Their cavalcades of public interest and their happy facades mask that they're on
ly as happy as any of us, verily.
To that point, I sometimes wonder if there are beaten souls in slums by africa's
standards that somehow live more contently than I ever will.

Then why, I ask, do we not exist as gods. Living in our heads, through selective
solipsism, and bending the world and its whims with our wills?
As for the African soul, they say you cannot miss, what you never had. Their lif
estyle leaves them content at the end of the day, perhaps.

Quite; one can't miss what one never had. If I knew not the burden of desire for
that which I could have, I'd be content with naught more than what could sustai
n me as living on the most basic level.
Human evolution fills us with emotions.
In truth, we're spoiled to the very core, and the fact that we still ask for mor
e is the prime example of the greatest of human sins.
Lust. Greed.
We should really write together, Aakash.
Two minds like ours could create something...

Yet how are we to forgo such primitive roots of ours. Leave lust and greed, and
end up on the streets as naught even a beggar. We die in the end, yet the proces
s of life itself cannot be sustained in a pure way. We are, in all sense of the
matter, hypcrites
And yes, I agree with you

More than the current inoculations of ridiculous banter seeping into the flat ve
ins of an already dying world, anyway.
And that couldn't be said more truly.
But by the same token, I feel as though the way I live is restricted.

How so?

As is the way of any American, or nearly anyone in general.

I'll explain.
In America, we call what we have "freedom".
But freedom does not exist.
No matter what the governments say, we will always be restricted, by ties to obj
ects, personal desires, vows, promises.
The only way a man can truly walk free and do whatever he wishes whenever he wis
hes is to maintain a grasp on nothing.

Ignorance is bliss.

Not even that.

It could be the smartest man on Earth, who knew absolutely everything.
Yet, if he let everything go, he could be free.

If man grasps nothing, he cannot do anything. So one must approach as close as p

ossible to that ignorance of leaving all fact, all morale, all rules.

And in turn, there is no such thing as true freedom.

Until death.
Death is true freedom.
Death is the ultimate release of everything that you're tied to, even your body.
Perhaps heaven, or whatever it is, is freedom?
And perhaps, the freedom is the ability to will what you wish and bend your desi
res into reality.

Because at death, all freedom is granted, the freedom to do whatever to an exten

t so far that you create your own universe in the last seconds of your death. As
your body loses control of all rules and grasps freedom

Death could well be godship, my friend.

Russian Roulette
We should play it sometime

On a quantum physics platform.

And it is then, we will be Gods

The imagination alone, Aakash.

Doesn't it seem like a tool?
It's a toolbox, for building.
Why do we have it?

So you say there is no objective reality?

Nothing can be true, it is a coincidence we all percieve certain truths, certain

Yes, indeed.
Perception, objective. That's what makes humanity interesting.
Different points of view.
The utter horror that none of us are sure if we're right, if any are at all.

We exist because collectively the human imagination perceives us as existent in

this universe
What if everyone believed we didn't exist, literarly
Would we not exist? I think we wouldn't

Who's to say that my imagination is not the only existent force that shapes real
ity? Perhaps the world is rendered around me, you're simply a pawn of my mind, a
nd you only exist when I interact with you.
Who's to say that's not true for every person?
Assuming they all truly exist.

That is defined as "Selective Solipsism"

But I don't agree with it
I think there is a collective imagination rendering us all
God's mind, if you will
Look at ants, they have a collective concious
Ours isn't quite as defined

Although it's a game I find this example extremely relative; the geth.
A collective of thousands of minds on one platform, to create a reality and a co
Perhaps this world-render is passed between all of us?

Yet we never realize our link with the platform?

Who's to say we haven't been telekinetic all along?

Maybe saints really do achieve consensus with this platform?
Observation, why does it change the workings of the universe?
A game engine only renders what you observe
Just like our collective concious?

Maybe saints really do achieve consensus with this platform?

Observation, why does it change the workings of the universe?
A game engine only renders what you observe
Just like our collective concious?

Nobody can say, my friend.

Oh collective conscious, why do you make us two puppets of your imagination talk
of you?

It's a psychological joke if it's true, making its pawns argue over its existenc
Perhaps these religious wars.

Perhaps it is tired of being followed? And causes these fractions to amuse itsel

Dear God, what could it all mean, Aakash?

I find it hard to believe that a truly collective God would have such a singular
human thought.

Look at insects
They build wonders in their world
Yet no language, it is all directed as if by a master, but their queen is really
just a slave
It happens without thought
We work the same way, our millions of years of existence has created a conscienc
e of all our minds, playing with us to think of it as god. Perhaps it wants to s
hape humanity its own way, yet we have lost connection

I'd still however like to hold onto some hope that we are singularized, independ
ent individuals.
But, I can't tell myself it's impossible that emotion wasn't planted in me to st
op me from believing the subjects we've discussed.
What makes reality real?
And there's no such thing as time.
That frustrates me.
The past doesn't exist. Everything that's here in the present has always been he
re. It's just changed.
George Washington's carbon atoms are still here. We drink the same liquid water
that dinosaurs partook of.

I didn't think if that

Everything that's ever happened, and the potential of everything that will ever
happen, is crammed into this very second,
Nothing will ever exist that does not already exist.
It will only move.

Matter is never created or destroyed


It will continue, within 'now'

So we make no difference what so ever
We could all die, yet nothing would change

The future does not exist, the future is only potential that can happen during t
his stagnant, frozen point in time.
If the past and future were real, we would be able to visit them.
Simply through willpower.

And we cannot
We live in the past, literaly
And are living in the future

Because when you think about it, there should be no difference between space and
Yet we cannot traverse time like we can space.
It's absurd to think that as humans, we're capable of discussing this topic.
The level of abstract thinking that we're applying here is only further evidence
of my previous point, that the imagination is a tool.

A tool to create reality?

Used by whom?
I don't know.
That's the ultimatum of reality.
We don't know. Anything.
We don't know why we have what we have.
The fact that we can see things in our head yet they do not visually manifest in
front of our eyes.
Yet we do still literally see them.
It's as though we have two sets of vision.

So we all our a disorder

This applies to all other senses.

We can hear things in our head.
We can create exact replications of some of the most intricate things in the uni
verse in our mind.

But we need to base it off something

Close your eyes and imagine a dog.

We cannot abstractly create

We need to have seen a dog
To imagine one
Who saw the entire universe to manifest it within one's mind
In all our minds

You know, when I learn, I don't feel as though new information is put into my mi
Only that the vision of the knowledge is less blurry.
As though someone opened the blinds.
The view was always on the other side of the window, it was just a matter of see
ing it.

Just like how someone who loses memory still remembers knowledge
Forgets personal details, remembers the rest

Memories are those extrasenses.

But facts are facts.
Language, names of objects.
An amnesiac does not run in terror when they see a dog.
They know that it is a dog, they know what they sound like.
They recognize, but do not familiarize.
I would give much to spend a day with an amnesiac.
Now to think about it, I would as well.

This is the greatest example of our intelligence.
Take for instance the difference between the americas and eurasia.


When America was first visited, two vastly different people who had evolved diff
erently for tens of thousands of years were still vaguely compatible.
They developed a different way of doing the exact same thing;
Expressing thought through vocalisms.
You're right

They were also both still simply humans.

The same medical practices applied exactly the same to both peoples.
There was no real difference between them aside from their objective, perception
, and language.
Those are some powerful forces, man.

Yet that would explain objective reality

If our perceptions were different, they were still found the same
Just viewed differently
Or do you mean something else?
Rather that while the two branches of humanity developed differently socially, t
hey were still the same exact people. Really, why they were so vastly different
in perspective and objective might be the best-known example of quantum physics.
Why did southamerican societies never use the wheel in more than toys?
No one thought to.
Because a synapse in one human's brain didn't consider it.
Whereas in Europe, a synapse in one human's brain did.