Are other people "real"?

[tondeaf]

I think Steve's post about objective reality (which I cannot agree with the way I understand it now) seems to indicate that others are not "real". Only projects from consciousness. Your consciousness. They do what you manifest.

If others are not "real", then it doesn't matter how you treat them, i.e., you aren't hurting a "real" person with insults or assaults. Nor helping a real person with love and caring.

I don't know about you, but the last thing that I want to do is spend time and energy loving someone who doesn't exist.

In the furthest sense, what he proposes, I believe, is that all of human history and that everything that happens comes only from me.

I don't agree with that. It seems kind of too big, for one thing. The universe could be as big as Truman's on "The Truman Show" and that would be good enough.

Jesus, for example, radiated love and received hate and death. Can't happen according to steve's theory. Of course, according to Steve's theory, I created Jesus, all the stories about him, etc. Then it gets really convoluted.

So, are people "real"? Why or why not? What evidence do we have either way?

[Katrina]

I think this might come from associating your current self as the projector of this subjective reality.

This is how I've understood it Imagine that you aren't just who you are right now living your life, but part of you is also part of the grand divine that creates and observes the entire universe. You have no limits, no boundaries, you are One with everything.

Subjective reality is hard to accept when you think of the you that is living your day-to-day life with a name, a job, a family... Because you think you have a hand in creating the world, that puts you on a different level than everyone else. But if you seperate yourself from your ego, it's easier to understand because you understand that you are part of that huge divine aspect of the universe. Even your "avatar" (the you that lives your life, has your name, your job, etc) is a part of reality you had a hand in creating.

I'm kind of curious though, how other people have understood it

[Adam]

The way that I interpret many of Steve's posts on the subject, is that you're just as unreal as everybody else. Your ego, or sense of self, is just as imaginary as everyone else is. The only purpose that your sense of identity serves, is to identify one person among all of your other avatars scattered across the whole of creation.

[tondeaf]

Imagine that you aren't just who you are right now living your life, but part of you is also part of the grand divine that creates and observes the entire universe.

Both the Father and the Son in other words.

But if you seperate yourself from your ego, it's easier to understand because you understand that you are part of that huge divine aspect of the universe.

So, I am god and god is me and so is everybody else. So, actually, god is experiencing and getting to know itself through me? Waste of time, no? Or what is going on in your opinion? I don't understand.

Because you think you have a hand in creating the world, that puts you on a different level than everyone else.

Well, who created the world, then? Are there 6 billion people who all created universes? Is there One Source that created it and parts of Itself are experiencing it?

Or did 6 billion + people create one universe together?

Thanks for your reply and your help.

[JJH]

Hi tondeaf,

your posts indicate that you're still thinking in a dualistic/materialistic way. I think that the subjective reality model works great for people that have come to the realisation that the universe is an infinite system that includes everything, indivisible from one's self.

If you identify yourself with your ego/mind, the subjective reality model will not really work for you.

In trying to understand the SR model, you think that other people aren't real because "you" created them. People won't be "real" if they are a product of your ego, sure --- but this is NOT what subjective reality is all about. Your ego is NOT who you really are, you are not your thoughts either (something I didn't discover until I was 23). You are a deeper BEing than that. This deeper consciousness is the connection with the infinite -- indeed it _is_ the infinite.

For me, since adopting the subjective reality model, I've become _more_ engaged in my life and _more_ compassionate towards others (because I feel more connected). The SR model makes you more aware of the consequences of your actions, because you empathise more with others.

I hope this makes sense!

[Jaben]

Steve has stated pretty clearly in his podcast about subjective reality that it was most meaningful to him see reality as having only one experiencer and only one avatar being experienced. If I take on this belief, that would mean that although you are just as unreal as my avatar, the only experiences I recall ever having are of my avatar. Since there is only one experiencer, Jaben must be the only Avatar being experienced. In that case, why not change this site's name to Steve Pavlina's Personal Development for Jaben, the only avatar through which the one and only experiencer experiences.

This paradigm implies that either there is my experience of writing this post or there is your experience of you reading this post that you manifested, but not both. I cannot except this. Some would say that's why I experience that this site is still Personal Development for Smart People.

There is no real way to prove this paradigm one way or the other. But, we can decide what makes more sense to us. I prefer a multi avatar subjective reality. Here is an example definition I posted a few weeks ago:

I am that which is prior to manifestation, the container of awareness, not the awareness itself or that which experiences. All experience arises from it and is made up of it, but separation is a necessary part of the manifestation of experience. Every manifestation of existence is conscious and separately aware yet made up of the one. Every experience and experiencer is impermanent yet eternal at its core. All consciousness is here to be aware, to experience and at least the human form is here to participate in creation and enjoy life. Everything in time comes and it goes. The purpose can only be found in the present moment. Compassion and morality can only be found in how you feel.

Compassion and congruency of reality make more sense to me using the above paradigm. If there is no other experiencer, then you can only relate to others as a part of you, such as a body part, rather than an equal other experiencer. I prefer seeing others as equal experiencers and I don't think that a multi avatar reality is any less consistent with LOA than a single avatar reality. In fact it might make more sense - does LOA take longer to manifest intentions because of your own competing intentions and feelings about your intentions alone or because it takes longer for the universe to find a match between all avatar's intentions?

[DoAnyOfYouExist]

You are talking to me buddy, been thinking and posting the same thing. I am currently living in fear and it sucks. How do you rid yourself of the fear of the unknown?

[Markus74]

Subjective Reality is a total delusion. It's also illogical and flawed. And there's no evidence at all that supports that loony theory. But hey, if it makes you happier then by all means, believe in it!

You could get crazy though too.

[JJH]

LOL, now you're starting to get it... objective reality is simply a delusion too!

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by JJH

LOL, now you're starting to get it... objective reality is simply a delusion too!

But at least it's consisted and can be analyzed

The Subjective Reality people have nothing to support their theory. Or have you?

[Light]

What do you have to support your own theory of an objective universe?

Really, it's not important that we all accept the same theory, but that each person accepts the theory that is most congruent with themselves.

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by Light

What do you have to support your own theory of an objective universe?

Really, it's not important that we all accept the same theory, but that each person accepts the theory that is most congruent with themselves.

Physical laws exist. Whether you believe them or not. You cannot transform them at will. You cannot levitate. You cannot read minds. You cannot teleport.

But if the theory of Subjective Reality was true then all this should be doable. Then why isn't anyone able to do any of this?

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Markus74

Physical laws exist. Whether you believe them or not. You cannot transform them at will. You cannot levitate. You cannot read minds. You cannot teleport.

That's a firmly stated assertion, but can you back it up with proof?

Can you prove that my inability to levitate or teleport is not the result of my own limiting beliefs rather than any external laws?

Ultimately neither subjective nor objective reality can be proven. Steve's position is that he finds the subjective reality belief more empowering, so he goes with that.

If it's working for him, who are we to nay-say?

P.S. Even if there is a fixed external reality, we can each only perceive it as filtered through our own senses and beliefs. So even if there is a fixed external reality, our personal reality is largely subjective. Robert Anton Wilson wrote some great stuff on this.

P.P.S. shouldn't this be in the Intention Manifestation forum?

[stephencp]

Often "real" is a poor choice of words when explaining Buddhist philosophy acccording to which you indeed real but only like a reflection is "real".

Stephen
Power-Book Library: Free personal development, success, inspiration and motivational classics

[Frans]

Originally Posted by Markus74

Physical laws exist. Whether you believe them or not. You cannot transform them at will. You cannot levitate. You cannot read minds. You cannot teleport.

But if the theory of Subjective Reality was true then all this should be doable.

What has subjective reality to do with levitation or other psychic things?
Or, to put it more generally: what has subjective reality to do with Intention-Manifestation?

Though in Steve's model of subjective reality Intention-Manifestation plays a huge role, I have another model of subjective reality where there is no need for Intention-Manifestation to get what I need.

[Dharma]

Originally Posted by tondeaf

Jesus, for example, radiated love and received hate and death. Can't happen according to steve's theory. Of course, according to Steve's theory, I created Jesus, all the stories about him, etc. Then it gets really convoluted.

Is the Jesus story true?

One can create great acts of love and also receive hatred and death from others? Sure.

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by Keith

Can you prove that my inability to levitate or teleport is not the result of my own limiting beliefs rather than any external laws?

Negatives cannot be proven. I cannot prove either that invisible unicorns don't exist on Mars.

Ultimately neither subjective nor objective reality can be proven. Steve's position is that he finds the subjective reality belief more empowering, so he goes with that.

If it's working for him, who are we to nay-say?

Fair enough. I just don't buy the magical claims. But hey, whatever makes you happy ...

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by Frans

What has subjective reality to do with levitation or other psychic things?
Or, to put it more generally: what has subjective reality to do with Intention-Manifestation?

Though in Steve's model of subjective reality Intention-Manifestation plays a huge role, I have another model of subjective reality where there is no need for Intention-Manifestation to get what I need.

Isn't Subjective Reality about that you can do everything you want? Since you're the creator of your Reality? Or even the 'only real being' in it? etc

If that's the case, well then you should able to bend everything at will.

[starseed]

Originally Posted by Markus74

Isn't Subjective Reality about that you can do everything you want? Since you're the creator of your Reality? Or even the 'only real being' in it? etc

If that's the case, well then you should able to bend everything at will.

If those who believed in subjective reality, could uproot their subconscious thoughts on the laws of the universe and rewrite them then they could choose to do anything. The problem is when we are born we are taught and experience these laws every moment of existence, how easy can it be to truly uproot beliefs that you and most everyone else has held? Althought not impossible, Jesus did it when he walked on water, it takes a very high being to be able to undo subconscious programming.

[Frans]

Originally Posted by Markus74

Isn't Subjective Reality about that you can do everything you want? Since you're the creator of your Reality? Or even the 'only real being' in it? etc

If that's the case, well then you should able to bend everything at will.

Even in a subjective reality you cannot do what you want, because there is a difference between the "I" that experiences this reality and the "I" that created this reality.

Let us compare reality with a role-playing game.

You can only participate in such a game if you choose an avatar, a character.
While you're playing, all your actions are performed through your chosen avatar.
Needless to say that if Darth Vader is your avatar, it's best for you to identify yourself with Darth Vader only within that game, and not in your "real" life...

Every game has rules, so your avatar is always limited by the rules of the game.
This reality has also some rules (laws of nature).
Like in a RPG, all people in this reality are avatars.

Only the person who created this reality can break the rules of the game, not avatar "Markus74", or avatar "Frans".

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by starseed

If those who believed in subjective reality, could uproot their subconscious thoughts on the laws of the universe and rewrite them then they could choose to do anything. The problem is when we are born we are taught and experience these laws every moment of existence, how easy can it be to truly uproot beliefs that you and most everyone else has held? Althought not impossible, Jesus did it when he walked on water, it takes a very high being to be able to undo subconscious programming.

Uh, you're judging that from an ancient text written by archaic, superstitious people 2000 years ago ... I wouldn't consider that really good evidence for the point you're trying to make!

So what you're saying is that if you could believe that a human could fly by himself then he could do it? What's the evidence that would support your claim?

[Markus74]

Originally Posted by Frans

Only the person who created this reality can break the rules of the game, not avatar "Markus74", or avatar "Frans".

Who would that person be then?

And if we cannot break the rules of the game then that would invalidate the SR theory of some people in here.