Tuesday, March 9, 2010

To Be Real

The other day I got into an entertaining, but ultimately unresolved debate with my partner about whether or not other people are real. (What can I say; it's the sort of thing that can happen when you cancel your TV.) A constellation of synchronous, symbolic themes had brought me to the point where I found myself seriously asking that question. They might seem unconnected at first glance. Here's the list.
1. Zombies
My partner and my son have been playing "Call of Duty; World at War". For some weeks now, they've been playing in a bonus mode of the game, in which all the enemy soldiers are zombies. Zombies are a disturbingly apt metaphor for the deeply unconscious mass of humanity. The consensus on zombies is that there is no cure, or if there is, it in no way depends on the zombies themselves.
2. A recent visit from Psychegram
Psychegram is like the polar opposite of a zombie. People like him are so extremely rare that I had forgotten what proximity to such a high-frequency auric field felt like. I am very sensitive to energy fields, which is why I need copious amounts of solitude. I've learned from experience that when opposite poles (ie. themes 1 and 2) show up in maximum contrast like this, it's something I should pay attention to.
3. The concept of the Omega_point
The "Omega point" is Teilhard de Chardin's name for the transcendent object to which humanity is drawn through the process called evolution. He develops this idea in "The Phenomenon of Man". In it, he identifies the 5 attributes of the Omega point. He posits that the Omega point must be both preexistent and inevitable. In order for this to be the case, the future must already be fixed. Which brings us to...
4. Backward causation in time
According to this theory, the characteristics of the past and present are determined by the requirements of the future. The Omega point would operate like a tractor beam, pulling us toward it. If this were the case, we'd expect randomness to decrease rapidly as the Omega point drew closer. Synchronicities would increase. Free will and the hand of fate would eventually converge and become indistinguishable from one another. The number of possible time-lines that could lead to the Omega point from any node of consciousness would ultimately be reduced to one. This process is evident in my own experience and that of many others. On the other hand, no such development is perceptible in the population at large. If anything, the reverse is occurring.

So what about the zombie hoards, or sheeple? The approaching Omega point doesn't seem to have much, if any, effect on them. Attempts to engage their awareness are almost always futile. In fact, they behave exactly like dream characters. When you dream, most of the "others" who occupy your dreamscape have no independent reality. They are purely reflections of the dreamer's psyche. I say most, because it occasionally happens that a "real" person or unincarnate being makes an appearance within the dream. It's pretty rare, but when it happens, you notice. Meeting Psychegram was like that.

What if there are actually far fewer "real" people than there seem to be? When I suggested the possibility to my partner, he rejected it right away on the grounds that it reflected separation. I don't think it does, since there is still only one Infinite Awareness taking an indeterminate number of "points of view". It's just that there are also a large number of imaginary characters who exist as reflections for the much smaller number with the potential to become Self-aware.

After all, we are not bodies or personalities. Those are vehicles for what we really are, which is nodes of condensed awareness. Ideally, human beings have the potential to become Self-aware, but it doesn't automatically follow that all of them will. Take the analogy of a very advanced video game in which any character whatsoever could be played. The game might include zombies, right? The zombies might enhance the game play, but the entertainment value in playing a zombie character would be nearly zero. They are just too limited. All they can do is stumble around in packs trying to eat the non-zombies. They can't even get better at it. So no one would bother playing a zombie even though they could. Since sheeple essentially behave like zombies, why would an awareness with an evolutionary agenda want to play those characters? Maybe they exist to enhance the game play, by serving as our reflections. I'm not saying that their well-being doesn't matter. If our reflections are in conflict or suffering, then we must also be so. When we heal ourselves, our reflections will automatically move toward wholeness. They may even become worth playing.

What difference does it make, whether other people are "real" or not? As far as how we treat them, it doesn't matter at all. But in the matter of evolutionary strategy, it does. If every human being on earth had to awaken to Omega point through their own choice and intention, then no effort should be spared to help them. But let's face it. If that's the case, we're screwed. If they wanted help in that regard, they wouldn't need it so badly. And if they don't want help, they won't accept it. A strategy that can't succeed is not worth pursuing.
If the sheeple are more like dream characters, then all our energy should go towards awakening ourselves and one another. As we do, the dream characters will necessarily reflect that. I know this might sound elitist but it isn't, because "real" people are self-chosen, just as in "The Matrix", Neo was not "the One" until he decided to be. We are close enough to Omega point now, that all (or almost all) of those who will awaken already know who they are. I consider myself infinitely blessed to know so many of you. You have been a great help and comfort to me. I love you dearly. Whatever I can give you is my joy and honour. I'm done with trying to awaken the deeply unconscious ones, though. I intend to put my brain to a better use than zombie food.


  1. P.S.
    I,ve just remembered that Teapotshappen recently recalled the movie "The Nines" to my attention. That would constitute a 5th link in this synchronous/symbolic chain.

  2. Interesting.

    In my own life, I encounter many people whom I consider "real," but who are still more or less "asleep" from my perspective. The ones who I would consider "zombies" have become pretty much nonexistent to me. I seldom engage such people anymore. I just don't feel the need, and happen to have the luxury of choice to a great extent.

    Of course, as you say, the distinction between real people and zombies is irrelevant insofar as how we would want to treat them. There's no point in trying to draw some kind of definite line between them. The extremes speak for themselves and all are here for a purpose.

    I like the idea of "self-chosen" ones. It seems about right. As for this "Omega Point," it's a concept I've danced with in perhaps slightly different terms, but that appears to be essentially true as well. I still have no idea what awaits me personally on the other side of it, or this planet collectively, but my trust is in the Infinite to guide everything along the best possible path. My job is only to align myself with it.

    It'll be interesting to see how this meshes with the idea of timelines as presented by tone3jaguar... since Truth does not contradict itself but has many faces nonetheless...

  3. LOL, I just read a bit about this "Omega Point" from the link you provided. I immediately thought we must already be on the "other side" of it. We're in a Time Loop, after all, aren't we? (grin)

  4. Hi BCth.
    Certainly, on the plane of manifestation, we're all as real and unreal as each other. By "real" I meant a type of consciousness that approaches the Omega point as a first priority and with intention. That's the only context in which it could matter.
    It's just that I've been known to get in a funk, worrying about the sleepers, and I know other people who do as well. That was a waste of energy. If they can't wake up on their own, then they must not need to. Right?

    "my trust is in the Infinite to guide everything along the best possible path. My job is only to align myself with it."

    Absolutely! I couldn't have put it better.

    On the other side...
    I guess in a sense we are (at least the aspect of us that is real is), since it already exists.

  5. It has been a while since I have chimed in, but I would like to throw my two cents in the mix. I wouldn't mind getting a nickel back.

    Reading this post made me think of my mother. She is not "awake" by any means. This can be frustrating at times as far as communication and connection are concerned, but generally it is not a huge deal. We "awakened" ones who consider ourselves to be real, tend to have a better understanding of the injustices of the world as it currently operates and are outraged and frustrated by them. Perhaps we are able to better understand what is happening or perhaps we are more inclined to believe what are eyes see than what someone has told us.

    At any rate, my mother generally does not like to think about all the B.S. going on, and she just goes about her business the best she knows how. Because the thing that I think she knows is that all the B.S. is not real. Literally. The current crisis (not necessarily economic although that is a part or symptom of it), is the current game that we are playing, and it seems so real, but it is just a game with certain rules that we made up and abide by generally. We could collectively choose to play another game if we wished because we made this one up and could make another one up if that was our choice.

    But what is real is my mothers capacity to love. Her heart, empathy, compassion, etc... That is the most real thing that I have seen.
    So even though she would not be considered awake, she is no doubt real, solely based on her capacity to love.

    I get the concept of the post, and have pondered it in the past, but I think what constitutes real needs to be further defined taking all the current bullshit out the equation, because the bullshit and our understanding of it isn't real. It's like understanding finance. Sure it can be helpful in the current system, but there is nothing written in stone that says things must function as they do currently. So that understanding could become obsolete in the blink of an eye if the rules were changed.

    I don't know about you, but my ego would love to believe that I am one of the few on earth that are chosen or have chosen to be real or awake.

    Five years ago when I was asleep, I would not have considered myself to be. I'm not quite sure I know why I think I am now awake aside from realizing how many things I was dramatically wrong about in the past. Perhaps I feel awake now because I feel so much more comfortable in my own skin. Not really sure.

    Hope that made sense.

    Keep it real,

  6. Hi D.
    Nice to hear from you. The oppressive tyranny of words over thought can be so frustrating. I wish I had been able to come up with a better word than "real". It's one of the most difficult words to manage at the best of times. What the hell was I thinking? lol.
    Maybe you, or someone else, can help me out if I explain exactly what I meant by it in this context.
    By "real", I mean:
    Consciously and intentionally participating in the evolutionary transformation of the human species.

    I ended up choosing "real" to indicate this condition because (as I understand it)Infinite Awareness is the one thing that is truly real. We, ourselves are only real to the extent that we can serve as IT's vehicles. The entirety of manifestation is it's Self-generated reflection. IA does this in order to know itself. Within spacetime, this operates as a process, known as evolution. Through evolution, IA generates increasingly advanced vehicles for IT's own Self-awareness. All signs indicate that our species has reached a crisis in it's development, and must evolve into a more advanced version of itself or else cease to be. The transformation required is one of consciousness.
    This entire post is meaningless or worse unless all the above is assumed.

    Love is real. Of course it is. IA is in the process of knowing itself and love is IT's most fundamental quality. Love has permeated the universe from the beginning. Electromagnetism is an expression of love. Duality itself is an expression of love. The evolution of consciousness is also the evolution of love. The evolution of love is a progression towards universality.
    I've got a mother as well. She loves me and I love her. But her experience of love is neither universal, nor moving in that direction. She is not "awake" in any sense, and doesn't care to be. If her conscious, volitional participation were required for humanity as a species to evolve, then it just couldn't happen. The great majority of people are just the same in that regard. That would be a problem if we were actually separate. But we're not. There is only One IA taking simultaneous, multiple "points of view". This understanding is vital. Otherwise, as you suggest, he false ego would happily run with it, thinking itself better and more important because of it's specialised function. But the function is only worthwhile in the service of the whole. An analogy could be that of the heart within the body. The heart's function is essential and specialised. But it has no purpose and can't survive, without the rest of the body. Heart cells make up a small minority of the body's total cells, and yet they are sufficient. There is no need for, or advantage in, cells of other types attempting to fulfill heart functions.
    So it's similar with humans. Only a minority exist to transform human consciousness. They are sufficient. And they could not accomplish their function without all their other human reflections.
    I hope that clarifies things a bit. I had no intention of devaluing anyone's contribution, not even that of the "Illuminati" whose reflection is as important as any other.
    In Lak'ech (I am another you.)

  7. Nice read, I must say it is rather profound and original, a clever way to perceive our interaction with the un awakened. When Reading this I once again realise I not alone out there. This is exactly the way I feel in general public quote a bit of the time, an alienating feeling yet conforting all the same.

    5IK Maikeru

  8. The analogy of the heart cells is very apt and explains very well the way I've felt about awakening vs. unawakening individuals. I sometimes see awakening people who are frustrated with the stubbornly asleep majority and I find that I don't share that frustration at all.

    Thank you for clarifying your underlying assumptions, that was very helpful.

  9. Sorry for the two-parter ... what can I say? This was such an interesting post I had to think about it all day and ... yeah. So.

    There's a couple of ideas you could bring to the table here, to throw all of this in another light.

    The first I'll mention (because the next one's really long) is the notion of Organic Portals the Cassiopaeans talked about, which Laura K-J put together with Gurdjieff's (or was it Mouraviev's? (sp?) Hmm...) notion of anthropoids, as supposed to men: basically, that since the time of Adam, there had been a race of true men (with a soul) along with a race outwardly indistinguishable but lacking a soul. Anthropoids were not inherently evil, neither were they inherently good: they could be and were used for either. Organic Portals or OPs as the Cassiopaeans called them were essentially the same thing, with the additional notion that (much like the Agents in the Matrix) their control could be usurped at any moment by 4th or higher density entities.

    Now for the second idea, from a completely other direction:

    Several years ago Nick Bostrom, a (very prominent, to those in the community) transhumanist philosopher came up with the Simulation Argument. Essentially the postulation was based (as most transhumanist arguments are) on the essentially infinitely perfectible nature of information technology, keeping in mind of course that this perfectibility is itself based in physics. At some point in the future, Bostrom argued, given the rate of technological advancement it would be possible to create a simulated world that would be perceived by its inhabitants (native or visiting) to be entirely real. Not only would it be possible, it would be cheap, desktop computer stuff in fact.

    Such a society might well be imagined to produce an endless profusion of simulations about its own past, both for fun and for education, as well as increased self-knowledge. This would be how such a culture would engage in what we think of as history.

    Of course, such a culture might also be expected to run simulations of all sorts of other things, a myriad of fantasies and games and experiments, but we'll leave that inevitable profusion of the creative impulse aside for a moment since, obviously, our reality has no such thing.

    We, Bostrom argued, must in fact be an historical simulation on the part of such a supercivilization. It lies in our future, after all, but while there can be only one 'actual' past leading to such a future, there can be an infinite number of simulations and to each it will appear entirely real. The odds against our> particular timeline being the One that leads to the supercivilization are infinitesimally small. Keep in mind that not only can this supercivilization simultaneously simulate perhaps billions ... and as it converts ever more of the universe to computronium, trillions and trust me, we're not even out of the solar system yet. Frank Tipler pointed to this thing going cosmic and thereby derived God, but we don't even need to talk about this conscious boundary condition to the universe to 'get' that we are almost certainly a simulation.


  10. ...

    It gets better: who says the timeline that leads to the supercivilization even has to be one involving humans? Perhaps it happened on an alien world on the other side of universe, which is simulating us as a science fiction video game?

    Before long you start to realize that it scarcely makes a difference. Any given timeline is faced with the vast improbability that it is the One that leads to the Omega Point and pretty soon they ALL have to grapple with the notion that they are a dream in the Mind of God and that's that. Which is the One is scarcely a meaningful question to ask anymore ... perhaps, in the end, collectively, all are.

    The reason I went through all this was that Bostrom, too, predicted the possibility that some people might be more 'real' than others: that there might be zombies populating much of the world, with only a relative few being consciously driven or operated by beings from the supercivilization (which, since their brains are made of the kinds of computers on which they run their little universe-games, are some Heavy Shit indeed.)

    Bostrom naturally asked the question, Well who are they then? And came to the answer that it would be people who lead generally interesting lives: the rich, famous, and talented, in other words. There is no doubt some truth to this - highly activated people are often magnets for both interesting experience, attention, and material prosperity - but I think he was missing something I'll get to in a moment (for all I know he might have gone where I'm about to go and I just didn't read him deeply enough.) At any rate, Bostrom's advice, if you weren't such a person (and who is?) was, if I remember correctly, to seek such people out, become interesting by association, and thus hopefully to get 'picked up' by a conscious player from 'real' reality.

    Now ... what I think he might have missed is that just as you'd naturally populate the landscape with a profusion of sims that are ultimately just programmed machines, and just as the 'players' would be the heroes of the world, you also want challenges. Level Bosses, in other words. Bosses aren't played by people, either; they're just bigger, harder versions of the sims that form the background scenery/cannon fodder of the game world.

    My bet would be that the majority of superconscious players - or those who have gotten in touch with their higher self, if you want to think of it that way - would not be found in prominent positions. The quintessential player-character archetype, after all, is not the comfortably enthroned king but the wandering, footloose adventurer: the outsider, the tourist, the explorer, and of course the crusading hero.

    The key thing isn't status, it's fun! So long as deep down inside, whatever the 'character' is doing is fun the player will want to play. You can imagine nothing forces the player to play, so if it stops being fun ... perhaps the player will leave, and try out a different character. The abandoned character, deprived of the player's consciously creative edge, will then drift off into the horde of zombies.

  11. ....

    Three parter it seems :P

    Think of all the people you've no doubt known, bright promising souls that, encountered years later, had become broken shadows of their former selves: talents, dreams and hopes sacrificed on the alter of material expedience. The one common thread? Their lives have ceased to be fun, and so have lost all meaning.

    My bet would be that far more are born 'ensouled' in this fashion than make it to adulthood in that state. Still fewer last beyond their twenties and by the time true adulthood has been reached the ranks have thinned out fast.

    And lets not forget that there are many who never had a player to begin with. Might they get one? YES, I'd argue, but also: not easily. For a character to become interesting enough for a superconscious self to wish to play it, would require enormous work. Much easier to keep it if one has it. Those born with a soul are the fortunate ones; those who lose it, the truly tragic.

    The catch: to keep it, life must be continually, in some way, an adventure. It cannot become too comfortable.

    Is that what life feels like?


    Well then. Let's play, shall we?

  12. Hi Psychegram.
    Oh my goodness! There's never a dull moment with you. I was about to start a new blog but that's just going to have to wait now. There's so much to think about here.
    I'll have to respond in parts as well. For starters:

    I went and googled "organic portals", and found this link. In the article was this:

    "Have you ever had this “nightmarish fantasy” that the world is populated by zombies?"

    Pretty funny, no? I suppose once you start looking at the world through novelty glasses, some themes are bound to come up. It seems a bit too cut-and-dried, somehow. I have a hard time with the idea that the un-souled can evolve themselves by feeding off the souled, and that the souled can't evolve while they permit this:

    "Q: Do the "centers" as described by Mouravieff relate at all to the idea of "chakras."
    A: Quite closely. In an individual of the organic variety, the so-called higher chakras are "produced in effect" by stealing that energy from souled beings. This is what gives them the ability to emulate souled beings. The souled being is, in effect, perceiving a mirror of their own soul when they ascribe "soul qualities" to such beings.
    It occurred to me that this might be the way that an OP comes into contact with soul energy and is thus able to grow...
    ...The OP, not having any experiential clue that a soul exists, learns about it through "stealing that energy from souled beings."

    This would make this process of "stealing energy" a natural part of the plan of growth,..."

    How paranoid would that make you, if you were to take it literally? Yikes! Then again, truth and literal-mindedness are always incompatible. In the metaphorical sense, it's quite an interesting variation. I'll admit it's piqued my curiosity re J.Z. Knight and the "C"s.

  13. Look up the RedIceRadio interview with Joe Slate....

  14. Surprised no-one's mentioned the 'monkeysphere', the idea that the brain naturally creates the illusion of a world containing only 150 'real' people, by virtue of its size.

    As for wakefulness I like to reserve judgement. Sometimes I meet people who seem to be asleep. Sometimes I meet people who seem to be more awake than me, or awake in different ways.

    But you're right that criticism rarely achieves anything. I think this in itself is a fascinating object of study.

  15. Hi again.
    Oops, that's Laura Knight-Jadczyk who communicates with the "C"s, not J.Z. Knight. They're two different people. The J and the Knight confused me. Hmm, interesting.

    The transhumanist view of our future is satisfyingly weird, but the assumptions it rests on are derived from a materialist paradigm. (Exposure of assumptions is part of the value in this "novelty glasses" approach to models of reality.) I don't think technology is infinitely perfectible from within that paradigm. Overall, the transhumanist philosophy takes a purely left-brain perspective. It assumes that reality has a material basis and functions like a machine. It assumes random chance, rather than intentionality, gives rise to it. It assumes that statistical probability is a law, when it could just as easily be a flaw of perception or a "default setting" in the absence of engaged awareness. It assumes that a super-evolved humanity would be satisfied with information for it's own sake.
    This is probably why Bostrum assumes that the real people playing in the simulation would choose lives of ease. That would be rational. It's what the left-brain would choose. It doesn't compute things like fun and play and especially meaning.
    You know, the more I think about this, the more Bostrum sounds like an OP. lol.
    It's also an assumption that only one "past" could lead to his imagined future. If the universe is intentional, then the coming evolutionary transformation may be fixed and inevitable, and if so, all pasts must end in it. I'd guess that the beginning and end points in time are probably both fixed, and alternate time-lines, if any, occur in between them.
    Of course, none of the above rules out the possibility that we are in a simulation reality. Nor does it exclude the existence within the simulation of "extra" characters. We know it's a hologram. And regardless whether it was created by super-advanced ETs or future humans, or by the mind of God, it's purpose seems to be the development of consciousness toward maximum freedom of expression. That's what I call entertainment!
    According to de Chardin, this development involves individual centres or points of awareness becoming more and more concentrated (or magnetic) until they achieve universality. At that point they become identical to the centre that gave rise to them.
    It stands to reason that the process occurs in stages with a number of fulcrums along the way. In the game metaphor, these would be like levels. The development of what we call a soul (one that could maintain it's integrity after the death of the body) might be one of these. It may be that the existence of an individual soul is an stage in a process and not a given. Until this level is reached, one would be part of the group soul of the species. That would certainly account for the herd behavior of most humans. It seems like the group soul plays a great part in maintaining the inertia of our collective reality. Members of the group soul would not have enough concentrated awareness to change it's nature. Those who had achieved the most advanced levels would. So even though their numbers were much smaller, they could evolve the group soul without the direct, conscious participation of it's members.

  16. Thanks for the link to the Red Ice interview. That was very interesting. I liked Joe Slate's very broad and non-judgmental treatment of vampirism. Competition for energy is pervasive within our current reality. It would even have to include food consumption. So it may be necessary up to a certain point. I think that once we gain access the zero-point field, we don't need to compete in this way anymore. I also think that the heart chakra provides us with our point of access.
    I suppose, once you had a strong enough connection to that energy source, you could feed a host of vampires without diminishing your own energy level. Whether or not you would want to is another matter.
    I found his reference to a hereditary factor interesting as well. Many of the women in my family age slowly and live to be very old. Not the men though. If anything, they seem to be handicapped in that regard. My younger brother looks much older than I do, in spite of the fact that he takes better care of himself. He gets lot more exercise and doesn't smoke. Then again, he's almost totally unconscious.

  17. Hi Speedbird. I looked up "monkeysphere" and according to wiki, it refers to the estimated limit to the size of the social group that any one person could personally relate to. It doesn't seem to an indicator of the relative level of awareness of the group's members, though.
    Still, it's interesting to consider how few people anyone can say exist from direct experience. There's no way we can know if anyone we haven't personally met has any reality at all. Take the "level bosses" for example. Almost everyone knows of them, but how often does anyone (besides other level bosses) actually meet them? They go out of their way to avoid such contact.

  18. The weirdness gets weirder still. Yesterday my partner was searching through youtube on an unrelated subject and found this:
    Introfinity: The awakening
    This is the sort of thing that prevents me from taking reality literally.

  19. "Introfinity" was some good shit! =D I kept getting double-number sightings every time I thought about it or looked at your link. Now I just watched the whole thing. Had to click on the channel link to find the final video, and as it started playing, I noticed the time was 4:33 AM, the video had 33 views, was uploaded on October 13th, and was at 0:13 the second I looked up at the time bar. Had a good middle-of-the-night LOL at that.

    Also was recently prompted to watch "Ghost in the Shell." Excellent movie as well, very pertinent.