I don't accept that we can use both. The whole point of understanding where we are and why we're there is to simplify our lives to the point that we empower oursleves to create and live better. OR means you're a human being and consciousness is generated from that human being. All the human beings are alive and living as is everything else is even when you're not there to observe it.
SR is the opposite. You are consciousness and the whole thing (but only what is ever in your consciousness awareness) is happeing inside your consciousness, which includes your own body and mind. Nothing truly exists until you bring it into conscious awareness,
your conscious awareness.
I don't consider that you can have it both ways unless you are unsure of which way you want to view reality. I accept it's one or the other. Technically there is no right or wrong, but as the point (I consider) of PD is to simplify the understanding of reality to aid in the empowerment of yourself, it seems to be confusing when a person who shares information, states openly they believe in one POV and then say they adopt other beliefs also.
It seems to contradict itself when you adopt one POV and then change it to the other. So one minute you're the only concious being and everything is happening within you and the next minute you're a human being with a consciousness steming from that human being and everyone else has a portion or a separate consciousness. If you listen to Steve's 'The True Nature of Reality' then one would consider he is of the SR POV and now he's changed his mind and accepted both SR and OR, but the basic premise of each one actually excludes the other. While it's great Steve is sharing his opinions with us all about different POV's I consider the problem is arising from Steve's own admissions that he believed or had at least adopted SR and now has adopted OR as well.
To say these are lens to view reality is fine, but how can our reality be trustable and usable if we're constantly changing the POV. One day we believe in a religious god, then the next day we don't, then we believe in SR and then we don't I suppose that the real problem is placing too much faith in our gurus and teachers. How does Steve know what's right? How do I know what's right? How do any of the gurus and teachers who share their knowledge know the truth?
They don't, they're just sharing information. If we're going to say......"this is how I believe it is".......that's fine, but I think it undermines the value of the information when the person sharing, seems to change their mind. People put much faith and trust in authoritive figures and when the message starts to get really confusing, then people get frustrated.
This may seem like I'm criticizing Steve, but I'm not. There are inherent problems with presenting an idea to a large audience and then adapting or changing that idea to something else.
You can see why people are confused and frustrated.
Max
It doesn't really affect me, because
I know I'm God
