Posts by Sandra Wilson68

Don't act surprised that amberviper keeps denying animals have any real virtues, let alone consciousness. It fits his worldview perfectly—he’s one of those guys who thinks God and humans are the only things that matter in the universe. In his eyes, only people get to have a soul or true awareness because it's "divine," while everything else, including animals, is stuck with just "instinct." ("Instinct" is basically just a religious buzzword for anything that isn't human.) It’s a total trip when you realize that back in the day, during the era of slavery in the US, people were having these exact same "high-minded" religious debates about whether enslaved Black people had souls or if they were just living on "instinct," just like amberviper is doing now with animals.

See, if animals actually possessed consciousness—or a soul—it would totally wreck the Christian dogma about God, and according to religious standards, that’s a huge problem. Especially if we follow Sandra Wilson68's logic where even a "towel" could have a soul; that would completely dismantle the whole concept of God and, by extension, Christianity and every other religion too. And we can't have that happening, right? Because how would we survive without priests and organized religion? Who else would be there to cloud our judgment like amberviper is doing right now? According to religious doctrine, reason is basically the work of the devil and something people aren't supposed to have. You're only supposed to have faith, since that's the only thing that saves you. If you do happen to have a brain, it’s strictly meant to serve your faith. Which is exactly what's happening with amberviper's intellect—it exists solely to serve his faith.

Later.

Aganor,

What kind of consciousness does a bacterium actually have?

Bacteria don't have any consciousness, just like humans don't. Neither bacteria nor people have the capacity to strive, move, perceive, feel, remember, think, or understand. It's just energy and matter building up the bacterium, the human, or anything else. If matter/energy didn't possess those physical and mental capabilities, a bacterium, a human, or anything at all could never exist. What we call "human consciousness" isn't something a human owns; it's the very matter and energy that makes a human up. Who a person truly is isn't what they see when they look in a mirror—it's the stuff that makes up the thing looking back in that mirror.

.

Besides, consciousness would need to possess all physical structures, just like our friend _Sandra Wilson68_ tells us in those unforgettable mantras of hers. That's not a serious scientific stance.

Consciousness doesn't own physical structures; it's the other way around. Physical structures possess consciousness—meaning they hold the ability to perceive, feel, remember, think, and understand. Even physicality itself is a capability—the ability of matter to strive and move. So, you end up with this idea that matter is simultaneously energy and consciousness. That’s the only thing that qualifies as science because it's empirically verifiable, logically sound, and actually makes sense.

And what exactly are your "mantras" about the "soul" and "God" based on? Science? "Grammar"? Some "solid" foundation and "strong" science??? You're just talking in circles and wasting your breath.

ironmarlin1,

Nah, absolutely not. Contrary to what Sandra Wilson68 naively thinks, not every physical structure needs to possess some magical substance of consciousness.

Aganor pushes this idea (not sure about you) that consciousness should be some "magical, special substance"—a "soul"—that’s separate and distinct from energy or matter. For me, consciousness isn't some "special substance" detached from energy/matter; it's just a capacity. It's the capacity of matter (energy/matter, which we already know exists) to exert force, move, perceive, feel, remember, think, and understand. We don't even need science or philosophy to realize that energy/matter possesses these abilities, because it's obvious in everything energetic and material surrounding us. But hey, if we want to lie to ourselves for religious reasons, then we need apologetics and theology—basically, we need Aganor to suggest it and "explain" it nicely to us, hiding behind science and philosophy, which also have zero clue and are just lying to us out of ignorance.

Just like you don't need "health substances" inside you to be healthy, you just need your body to function properly. It's the same thing with consciousness.

No organism could exist, let alone function, if the matter (energy/matter) making up that organism didn't possess the physical and mental capacities to act, move, perceive, feel, remember, think, and understand.

If consciousness were some separate "soul" sitting apart from the energy/matter that builds the body, that body wouldn't just be non-functional—it wouldn't even exist. It would be completely lifeless. Dead. And when someone's dead, they aren't doing anything. Nothing can exist, be alive, conscious, or functional based on some external consciousness; it only happens through its own inherent physical and mental capabilities. You don't need to prove this; it's obvious, logical, and common sense. The existence of a "God" or a "soul" separate from energy/matter isn't evident, logical, possible, or understandable. Eventually, even the most simple-minded people will see this, and world religions can start packing up their little "mantras" about "souls" and "God."

David,

Quinn:

So you're saying there's no "person," just matter? And that this matter is the same in a human as it is in a fox? If we're made of the exact same stuff, how do you even tell us apart?

Look, I never said humans and foxes are identical. I said the building blocks are the same, and that both species have access to the same fundamental physical and mental capabilities. The difference is simply the purpose. Humans are built for one reason, foxes for another. The distinction isn't about their capacity for episodic memory; it’s just about their specific shape and function within the larger organism of nature. Think about it: when a seed turns into a plant, that transformation happens in stages. That gradual process means its "knowledge" of what it’s becoming—and the memory of that progression—is also incremental and episodic. If this were some freak one-time occurrence, sure, we could sit around guessing. But this happens billions of times over millions of years, everywhere, all the time. That’s a much more reliable experiment than anything you'd find in a lab.

But hey, if we’ve been raised to believe everything is just the hand of God at work, then we're playing a different game. In that case, people go hunting for scientific proof specifically because they know it isn't there, mostly just to protect their faith.

Quinn:

No, you're assuming humans and foxes are built from the same stuff and jumping to the conclusion that our memories are equal. The problem is, that whole premise is totally made up.

The baseline knowledge a fox has versus a human doesn't have to be the same, which means consciousness doesn't have to be either—since consciousness relies on that knowledge base. That base depends on perception, and perception is always tuned to the specific role the creature plays in nature. But the *ability* to acquire knowledge—to remember—is the same. The mechanism for learning is episodic, regardless of whether your senses are highly developed or pretty basic. Take a dog: it can't see color like we can. Its sensory input is more limited, so its total knowledge is more restricted, but the way it perceives things is still episodic. Without that, a dog couldn't learn a single trick or remember its owner. If the matter making up nature wasn't capable of episodic memory—learning and retaining info—material life wouldn't even be possible. Everything in existence, the entire natural world, repeats itself cyclically and episodically based on previous experience and information that must also be episodic.

That's just my take on it. You're free to disagree.

Later.

David,

Quinn:

...there's zero proof for your positive claim that animals have episodic memory. I'm not saying they don't, I'm just saying there's no evidence..

You don't "prove" that, it's just common sense.

For nature to exist as its own entity—as a "thing in itself"—it has to possess both physical capabilities for movement and exertion, and mental capacities for perception, feeling, memory, thought, and understanding. If even one of those physical or mental traits were missing, the evolution of that matter wouldn't happen, and without it, neither life nor nature could exist. Mental abilities and actions fall outside the scope of scientific methods, which is why scientists can't determine what that matter is like as a "thing in itself." But that doesn't mean they *can't* know. They can, because they're made of that exact same stuff. Scientists, like everyone else, can know this through direct, internal experience. When it comes to things like this, it's pointless to hide behind science and demand empirical evidence. It would be just as ridiculous to claim a fisherman weaving his net to catch fish is acting consciously, while arguing that a spider—made of the same fundamental matter as the fisherman—isn't conscious when it weaves its web to catch bugs, and then demanding scientific proof for its awareness.

These are all facts rooted in experience and logic. If we just toss them aside, we’re left with nothing but explaining everything away with God. And using God as an explanation is the same as having no explanation at all.

Later.

ironmarlin1,

Could be, but you gotta prove there's actually a "thing-in-itself." You didn't give me a single reason to believe that such a thing even exists.

It’s not about belief. It’s pure logic—self-evident truth. Nothing comes from nothing. Period. That means if something exists, it’s always existed, existing just as itself, because it couldn't have been conjured out of thin air. Therefore, it is a “thing-in-itself.”

This is the fundamental matter everything is made of, since it’s the only thing that truly exists. Every person knows what that substance is as a “thing-in-itself.” It’s the exact same stuff that makes up a human being, because there is no "human"—there is only the matter that builds one. It’s the same stuff in us, in a fox, or anything else. And that means if the matter building a human has the capacity for episodic memory, then the matter building a fox, a seed, or a rock has that same capacity too.

Later.

ironmarlin1,

Quinn:

That’s not memory, that's just coding. DNA carries the instructions to build all kinds of proteins. It’s basically the whole sequence: DNA -> RNA -> ribosomes -> proteins.

From a purely scientific standpoint, maybe that answer works for you, but philosophically? Not even close. A scientist looks at things from the outside, tracks what's happening, and slaps a label on it. But describing and naming something isn't the same as actually explaining it. It doesn't mean you know its essence—what that thing truly is in and of itself. How is a scientist supposed to know what DNA, RNA, ribosomes, proteins, information, or coding actually *mean* on their own, or how or why any of it is even possible?

Quinn:

Nobody remembers what a plant looks like. Just like nobody remembers being born before they were actually born. If we did, it'd be a miracle, considering how crappy our memories are to begin with.

What a bold, borderline dogmatic claim to say that nobody remembers the structure of a plant, or a chick, or a human being before they develop—as if the only way to explain that is through terms like DNA, RNA, ribosomes, and coding. Those are just names scientists gave to phenomena they don't even truly understand. You can't explain this without accounting for the mental capacities—the perception, feeling, memory, thought, and understanding—of the very matter that is transforming itself into a physical form, whether organic or inorganic. That's the only rational answer here, and there isn't another one. Who besides a believer would dare claim that the ability to perceive, feel, remember, think, and understand belongs solely to "humans" rather than to the very matter that makes up the human body?

Later.

ironmarlin1,

Quinn:

There’s a massive difference between semantic and episodic memory. A dog remembers where its bone is buried, but that doesn't mean it's reliving the whole "episode" of burying it back in the day.

Look, could you maybe walk me through what "semantic memory" actually means using a real-world example?

And if you're up for it, explain how a seed "knows" what kind of plant it's supposed to become—is that considered "episodic" too?

Later!

I just caught up on this thread, watched the video, and read through all the posts carefully.

Honestly, I've been obsessed for years with this whole "us vs. them" phenomenon—how the world splits itself up by countries, ideologies, political parties, religions, and nations. It's the root of almost every major evil on Earth. You don't have to be a genius to see that these divisions are just a facade used by specific individuals hungry for global power, fame, and material wealth. The only philosophy that matters here is realizing TO. Once regular people finally grasp TO, the world might actually be saved. When ordinary people TO, it'll mean they've realized how pointless it is to argue over the value of any global ideology, politics, religion, or nation. They'll see that clinging to any of those labels is useless because it doesn't benefit humanity, nor does it serve God; it only serves those bloated global elites at the top of these divides. They view their followers as nothing more than a flock of sheep meant to be sheared and slaughtered.

Seriously, what's the point of the Bible, or spreading any religion to rule the world in the name of some higher power? Get real, people! It's just inviting the devil to your doorstep and nothing else. If you've joined a "philosophy" forum, show at least a little bit of philosophical depth—meaning, learn to distance yourself from all this nonsense and think for yourself, instead of acting manipulated and playing ”interpreter by trying to defend one side or another. Just look at what David says:

DAVID,
P.S. A translation of the Bible isn't enough to understand the message of a specific verse. You need interpretation. A translation isn't an interpretation. God interprets the verses for chosen leaders. (These could even be ordinary people who have reached high spiritual levels). Others who try to penetrate the meaning of a verse without divine inspiration end up falling into various traps. Some of those traps include the extremists the film refers to.

What kind of ”interpreters in high positions” are you talking about, David? Watch your mouth: “God interprets the verses for chosen leaders”. Which God? Where is this God, David? Show him to us or at least explain him. Explain how we're supposed to know which one God actually chose among the countless ”“interpreters in high positions” (of the Bible or other texts), since everyone interprets things their own way. It's obvious He didn't choose all of them, because if He had, they would all interpret things the exact same way, not differently. And I'm really curious if you and Shaun are among those ”chosen interpreters in high positions”, since I see you two interpreting religious texts and spreading faith online for years now?

Don't get mad at me and think I'm representing some global ideology, nation, or religion against any faith. This is my personal, philosophical conviction that applies equally to every group and division in the world. That said, when it comes to Islamic culture, I've studied it for a long time and appreciate its ethics and worldview quite a bit. I'd love to see the Western world adopt some of that culture and ethics, provided that part of it is stripped of all religious dogma.

Just a heads-up: don't assume that because of everything I've said, I'm an ”unbeliever”, or an atheist, or one of those people that religion needs to ”settle scores with”. I know God exists, and I know who and what He is, but I don't belong to any religion. The God I know doesn't want any divisions or religions in this world. Even if we assume the Bible and other texts are from God—that Jesus and Muhammad were..."interpreters" of God's thoughts—and yeah, you're right, those interpretations weren't meant for Christians or Muslims either, because back during their "interpretation" phase, neither group even existed. These "interpretations" were intended for all humanity as a study of good and evil, or just pure philosophy. The fact that people later split apart over these "interpretations"—leading to freezing tensions and wars—that isn't from God, it's from the devil. The whole "divide and conquer" mantra doesn't come from God; it comes from the devil. Anyone keeping that division alive today through organized religion isn't serving God—they're serving the devil. Specifically, they're serving the West. That’s the main playbook and strategy for the West today. Using that tactic, the West uses its ideology called "democracy" to take over the world step by step. First, they pit naive, divided nations and religions against each other, provoking them until they fight, go to war, and bleed each other dry. Then, they can just stroll into the territory as "saviors and judges" and take total control.

It's all just a power grab, my friends. It's about global material wealth and treating people like fools. Every single political, national, and religious leader does this—some more successfully than others—and that is their only goal. Everyone else who takes their side, supports them, or defends their faith—meaning their "interpretations" or ideologies—is either incredibly naive and doesn't get what's actually happening, or they're part of the inner circle, acting like co-conspirators to reap some material profit. There is no third explanation.

As for the movie, any religion could make one just like it, filled with authentic footage like decapitations and other gore, and use it as propaganda against any other religion. Every single one of them has left behind a massive, filthy, and bloody criminal record throughout history.

Peace.

Receiving is just basic nature. It’s a necessity because there’s this one force called the "survival instinct," and its whole core is consciousness. You can't have consciousness without experience—which means knowledge—and you can't have knowledge without perceiving an object. So, right at the starting line of conscious existence, receiving is a prerequisite. Perception itself *is* receiving.

But here’s the catch: the survival instinct—consciousness—can't perceive anything without senses. That means for consciousness to actually perceive an object, it has to be an object itself. A sense doesn't function unless it's an object.

So what we have is a reality where everything in nature is simultaneously a subject perceiving objects through the act of receiving, and by doing that, they sustain themselves. At the same time, every subject is also an object being perceived by other subjects, which keeps them existing.

Basically, everything in nature is interdependent. Everything exists because of something else. It’s a constant loop of giving and receiving. Both are mandatory, which makes them natural phenomena. If it weren't like this, evolution wouldn't even be possible. You can't have evolution with just taking or just giving.

And this isn't just some thing from the dawn of time; it applies to every single stage of evolution. All the moving parts and systems in nature are essentially perfect systems of give-and-take. Take the human body, for example. It's a highly advanced system made of thousands of different parts. Each tiny part serves all the other parts (giving), while simultaneously relying on those other parts to function (receiving). Look at your legs: they spend their entire lives just carrying the rest of your body. But in return, the rest of the body takes care of them. The brain thinks for them, the eyes show them where to go, the stomach digests food for them, the lungs breathe for them, the hands work for them, and so on. Every single body part works under this same rule of give-and-take. When you get a system where there's only receiving or only giving, that's what we call a disease. When cells start living and multiplying solely to benefit themselves without giving anything back to the body, we call those "parasites" or, more specifically, "cancer."

So, think about this natural law of giving and receiving. Treat it like a fundamental rule of the universe. Compare it to how American society functions. Based on that, you can judge for yourself how developed or stunted our society is—whether it's healthy or sick. It should be pretty obvious.

If you still don't get it, here’s a little story about "Heaven and Hell" that paints a pretty clear picture of the difference between a society where everyone just wants to grab and take, versus one where giving and receiving are balanced and natural.


"A man dies and goes to the Pearly Gates, where St. Peter decides his destination. St. Peter asks him if he wants Heaven or Hell. Before deciding, the guy asks to see both. St. Peter opens the doors, and the man sees two tables, both perfectly set with incredible food. Seeing no difference, the man chooses Hell without a second thought. But as soon as he gets to the table, people start swarming. It turns into a total riot—people fighting, shoving, and grabbing. The table gets flipped, the food ends up on the floor, and everyone is left hungry, bruised, and pissed off. The man immediately regrets his choice. He begs St. Peter to move him to Heaven, and St. Peter agrees. He enters Heaven and heads straight for the table, but St. Peter stops him and ties his arms in splints so he can't bend his elbows. When the man tries to eat, he realizes that with his arms stuck straight out, he can't bring the food to his mouth. He looks around to ask St. Peter for help, only to see a crowd of people approaching the table. But unlike the people in Hell, everyone here has their arms tied in splints just like him. You can probably guess what happened next. People approached the table, but since nobody could feed themselves, they started carefully feeding one another. The meal went perfectly. Everyone ended up full, happy, and satisfied, and there was even food left over."

Hey there!

FILOZOF 28,

You’re looking at the world as one big picture, but let's be real: there's always that segment of people who couldn't care less about anyone else. They live purely for themselves, even when it's obvious their entire "lifestyle" is basically parasitic and destructive to everyone else. So, what's the move? Do we try to fix them—trying to turn these entitled jerks into decent human beings? Or do we just seize everything they built through lies, fraud, and theft and redistribute it for the greater good? You mentioned all those "social, religious, political, and economic systems," but those things aren't set in stone. They shift constantly. Some people use them to fight for their own selfish interests, while others actually try to work for the common good. So, give it to me straight: what's your actual, concrete plan to fix this mess?

If you're asking me how we actually fix this mess? Here’s my take.

I wouldn't even bother suggesting anything. Trying to change the world for the better? It’s a lost cause. "Suggestions," huh? Give me a break. That’s exactly what politicians and priests do at their conventions and councils—just cranking out more laws and rules for how we're supposed to live our lives. Survival instinct. That's all it is. Evolution is just a slow crawl through the dirt. Honestly, there’s no point even trying to wrap our heads around it as humans. "We're calling it." Whatever. The laws of nature don't give a damn about us or our little rules. "Suggestion." If our desires don't line up with those laws, they’re nothing more than failed experiments. We're just talking about wasting precious time and effort, and honestly, it usually ends in unnecessary human casualties. I'll just point out one thing: every single major shift in human history has been built on... "Suggestions." The popes and politicians—basically, the global power players and the ultra-wealthy—are all cut from the same cloth. If you’ve been sitting on the world's wealth and pulling the strings for centuries, you aren't just managing money; you're running the churches and the governments, too. They're one and the same. Suggestions? Give me something real. They always end up being nothing more than failed experiments. That’s exactly why, even after a thousand years and countless attempts, nothing ever changes. "Suggestion." Look, let’s be real: most of the world is still stuck in a state of modern slavery. It doesn't matter how much we pretend otherwise—exploitation, fraud, terrorism, and basic human cruelty driven by pure greed are still the engine running this planet. The only thing that actually changes is the toolkit. We just swap out old methods for new systems, constantly tweaking the models of exploitation to fit whatever new tech or mass production method becomes available. We’re just getting better at manufacturing goods for a captive population. And don't get it twisted—the fact that we live "better" than some slave from two thousand years ago isn't because of any moral evolution or social progress. It’s strictly thanks to scientific breakthroughs and mass production technology. That's it. Nothing else.

That’s exactly why I wouldn't even dream about doing that—and I definitely wouldn't let myself. I’m out here grinding. Look, I don't care what the topic is, I just want to point out the fundamental laws of existence—that raw survival instinct that governs everything in nature. My whole point is to highlight the actual purpose of life and the fastest ways to get there. If we could actually align ourselves with those realities, we might finally make some serious headway. We’ve been stuck in this same rut for thousands of years, spinning our wheels and going nowhere. It's time to stop stalling and start making some actual progress.

Look, let's cut to the chase. Life is basically just a survival instinct wrapped in a package. The whole goal? Avoid the bad stuff, dodge the misery, and hunt down whatever feels good. That’s it. There isn't some grander, hidden purpose floating around out there. In nature, evolution doesn't care about anything else. It's all about maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. Period.

You only hit that goal by grinding through life and actually learning the difference between what works and what’s trash. It’s all about filtering your experiences. You take everything that actually leads to something good and turn those lessons into your personal playbook—your rules for how you live and work, simply because they actually pay off. Anything else? If experience shows it just leads to misery and total failure, you stop doing it. Period.

Here’s the deal with survival and how life actually works: you can't chase happiness or true prosperity all by yourself. It’s impossible. One person on this planet can’t pull it off alone, and honestly, neither can a small group, a single nation, a specific religion, or even one country. We’re talking about everyone on Earth acting as one single unit—one global community, one shared faith, one unified state. Look at how cells function to build a human body. Inside that body, there aren't any religious wars, nationalistic divides, or political squabbles. There’s just an economy based on equal labor and an equal split of the results. That’s the only way it works.

Basically, any time nature splits up and everyone just does their own thing to chase their own little slice of happiness, you’re looking at chaos. And chaos always leads to misery and evil. On the flip side, when things integrate—when people actually work together, organize, and share the results fairly—that’s what you call harmony. Harmony equals satisfaction and good. Period.

So, look, there’s nothing to "propose" here regarding these issues. You don't "suggest" solutions to life; you learn the rules of nature and how it evolves. You figure out the goal and the fastest way to get there, then you follow those laws strictly. If you do that, success is a given. This means humanity needs to move under the UN umbrella toward total unification—economically and religiously.

Regarding religious unification: to make this happen, science and philosophy have to provide final answers to those old, unresolved questions about where life, matter, and nature actually came from and why they exist. Once we have those answers, we can tear down all the religious dogmas that serve as the foundation for today's various world religions, effectively dismantling them. Or, we could just filter them—keep the dogmas that actually align with scientific and philosophical reality and toss the rest. We wouldn't even have to kill off current religions; we'd just reform them. Everything would boil down to one single religion built on scientific explanations rather than blind dogma. Imagine if this global religious body wasn't "religious" at all, but more like a massive social and educational institution—like a global Academy of Sciences and Arts. Priests wouldn't be preachers anymore; they’d be researchers, educators, and professors. They would truly be "guardians of the human soul"—people who understand and protect the highest ethical and moral standards of nature. That’s what a religion should actually do. Plus, they’d probably oversee a unified global police force and judiciary.

But what happens to the politicians, the bureaucracies, the global militaries, the weapons, and all the world's criminals?

They’d all be scrapped as useless. Or better yet, gradually reorganized into a global economic and manufacturing powerhouse. Think about it: the global military industry currently hogs the smartest scientists, the toughest and healthiest people, and the vast majority of our natural resources. If we redirected all those brains, muscles, and materials toward the global economy and production, we could wipe out hunger, poverty, homelessness, and unemployment worldwide in just a few years.

Of course, after all that, the obvious question pops up: how do we actually pull this off?

Again, there’s no need to "propose" anything. Nature already provides the practical solutions; we already know how the gears turn.

First off, science and philosophy have to master "knowledge"—meaning, we need real answers to those eternal existential questions about "who we are, how we function, and why we exist". Specifically, "who we are, where we came from, and where we are going". Without knowledge, you can't do anything in nature. Without new knowledge, there is zero progress. Without scientific and philosophical answers to "who we are, how we function, and why we exist", we’ll never break down religious dogma or build a unified global faith.

Look, we already have this knowledge. I’m talking about the "SCIENCE OF RESTRAINT," something that hasn't existed until now, and something I've been pitching on this forum for ages. A lot of you know what I'm talking about, but I also know plenty of you don't get it or think I'm full of it. Well, I'm telling you, it IS the real deal. And I'll tell you right now: I can defend my stance in front of any top-tier scientific, philosophical, or religious authority on the planet.

So, what's the next move?

It's pretty obvious. We need to find a way to get this science in front of those global experts—the big names in science, philosophy, and religion—so they can give their final verdict. If they pass on it, I want the chance to prove them wrong, no matter what their reasoning is.

The thing is, I can't just walk up to these heavy hitters and demand they take me seriously. You can't just solo this, especially when you're trying to grab the attention of world-class institutions. Someone needs to step up and help facilitate this, and that would have to be an official organization or a recognized authority.

Or, there's another logical path: people who actually *get* this science and see its practical value could band together. They could start a movement or a scientific-philosophical society to promote and defend these ideas globally, across different languages and platforms, until that very group becomes an authority itself. This movement wouldn't just spread the science; it would advocate for massive global shifts—basically pushing for true world unity built on equality, stripping away all those nationalistic, religious, and political borders and divisions.

To some of you reading this, I probably sound insane or like I'm chasing ghosts, but this is IT.

Besides, this whole thread is titled "the world's greatest delusions and how to fix them," so everything I just said belongs right here. It's what I believe.

Later.

Dennis Rogers6

I know plenty of smart, educated people who are just plain greedy. Where's your sense of selflessness?

Knowledge is power, plain and simple. Everything we cram into our heads through school and upbringing—that’s what defines us. If you study how to grow flowers, you become a gardener. If you learn how to handle weapons and fight wars, you're a killer. Study medicine, and you're a doctor. Memorize the Bible or the Quran, and you'll be a Christian or a Muslim. And if someone raises you to be greedy? Well, then you're just going to be greedy. All these people—gardeners, soldiers, doctors, religious folks—can be incredibly smart and highly educated. But out of all of them, only the ones who were specifically taught that greed is okay will actually end up being greedy. See the point? Greed has absolutely nothing to do with intelligence. It’s all about how you're raised and what you're taught is "normal." If you're taught that being greedy is wrong, you won't be greedy. Period.

I don't see the connection between "ignorance and stupidity" and the hunger for power either.

Think about it for a second and you'll see where I'm coming from. Life is basically just one big force driven by the instinct to survive. It keeps itself going by learning through experience—distinguishing between what’s good and what’s evil. To stay alive, life constantly runs away from the bad stuff and chases the good. In this sense, "knowledge" is anything that serves the greater good, while ignorance is anything that leads to the greater evil. And look, humans are social animals. We don't survive as loners; we survive as a society. Now, people crave power because they’ve been taught that having control is the easiest way to stay afloat. But if all the evil in this world stems from the pursuit of power, then believing that seeking power is "knowledge" isn't smart—it's pure stupidity. It's ignorance. Why? Because power always results in evil, and since life is fueled by the drive to survive, it will always aim for the good, never the bad. Is it clear now? Ignorance, stupidity, and power are all part of the exact same cycle.

I gotta wonder—is selfishness and the hunger for power actually just hardwired into us? To me, wanting power is really just about wanting to control things and force your own views on everyone else. So, honestly, I’d say it all boils down to pure egoism. And let's be real: egoism is totally natural.

Yeah, you’re spot on. The hunger for power and that raw egoism? That’s just hardwired. It’s as natural as being clueless when you're born. When a human enters this world, they don't know a damn thing about anything—besides eating, breathing, peeing, and pooping. Basically, their entire "knowledge" base is just knowing they have to take from everyone else to stay alive. They haven't figured out yet that life isn't just a one-way street of taking; it's about giving back, too. And let's be real—we aren't counting those diapers as "giving." He can keep that to himself. Real giving is something else entirely, something you actually have to be taught as you grow up. If nobody steps up to teach a kid that, then yeah, living purely for themselves through power and selfishness becomes their version of "natural," while giving feels totally foreign. They'll end up loathing any kind of generosity. But for someone raised right—someone taught not to be selfish and to share what they have with the people around them—giving becomes second nature, and that greedy, grasping egoism? That’s what becomes unnatural.

That’s just how life works, Dennis Rogers6. Life is one hell of a ride!

Later.

swiftcobra15,

They’re constantly obsessed with that stuff—cars, TVs, even refrigerators—because they come from "developing" nations. They learned from us "advanced" folks that owning all this junk is a requirement and that true human happiness is found in consumerism.

Life is basically just one big drive for self-preservation—that constant hustle to dodge the bad stuff and grab the good. To do that, you have to move and you have to work. That movement and effort is how we stack up experience, which is really just learning how to avoid the suck and find the win. Eventually, that evolution leads to things like cars, TVs, and refrigerators. Those aren't just "stuff"; they’re the literal results of us evolving to make life better and easier. So, what kind of twisted logic are people using when they claim humans would be happier if we just gave up all our modern comforts? If you follow that line of reasoning to its natural conclusion, the happiest people would be the ones who rejected everything evolution gave us and crawled back to the Stone Age. Give me a break.

Of course they can't walk away from it—they don't even own it. But we can. I can, you can, and every single one of us lucky enough to have the privilege of posting online can definitely pull it off.

Look, swiftcobra15, giving up our cars, fridges, and TVs isn't the answer. The real move is helping the people who don't have those things get them. We achieve that by building a fair global social and economic system—one built on total worldwide disarmament and lasting peace. Once we hit that, everyone will have enough to own a car, a fridge, and a TV, and nobody will go hungry. In a world with total disarmament and peace, we won't be wasting time or precious resources on fighter jets, tanks, battleships, missiles, or nukes. Instead, we’ll be pouring everything into factories that churn out cars, fridges, and TVs. That way, we can flood those starving, impoverished parts of the world with actual goods instead of rockets and bombs. And if you want to reach that state of global disarmament and permanent peace, you don't need to ditch your car or your electronics. You need to ditch the real culprit that's been sabotaging peace for thousands of years: our stinking, worthless religious, nationalistic, and political divisions. Those are our main illusions—the dogmas that screw with our heads and spawn all kinds of global evil, having absolutely nothing to do with the truth of life and existence. That is what you, me, and every single human being needs to let go of so everyone can actually be happy. From what I can see, you aren't ready to let go of that stuff. You won't even mention it. Instead, you talk about giving up cars and TVs because you think that's easier. Funny! Go ahead, give up your car, your TV, and your fridge. Throw them out of your house if you want, but you won't accomplish a damn thing. Poverty, misery, wars, genocides, and mountains of corpses will keep ravaging the world every single day.

There’s just one tiny problem: this whole thing is ecologically unsustainable. We’d basically need several more planets just to pull this off physically. Like M. Gandhi said: There is enough for everyone's needs, but not for everyone's greed.

Luxury bungalows with pools, yachts, private jets, fancy cars, or even just a high-end TV and fridge—none of that matters. What actually matters is world peace. We need a world where nobody lives in fear of being murdered, massacred, tortured, raped, exiled, or thrown in a cell. No one should face starvation, and everyone deserves a little corner of their own to retreat to when they're tired, or just to hide from the rain, wind, and snow so they don't freeze to death. That’s something we can provide for every single human being on this planet. Once we nail that, then we move on. When we finally achieve peace and stability, getting those villas and jets will be easy. And hey, if this planet isn't big enough for all our luxury, we'll just move to other planets—thank God there are countless ones out there in our galaxy. Once we commit to world peace, even space colonization is a cakewalk because "impossible" doesn't exist. We can't stop our evolution. All we can do is destroy ourselves because we're acting as stupid as hell. Honestly, we’ve already hit that critical evolutionary breaking point defined by overpopulation, pollution, and a massive shortage of natural resources. We’re staring down two choices: either a third World War and collective suicide, or lasting global peace and collective salvation. To go for the second option, we only need to do one thing: drop the ideological, political, religious, philosophical, and scientific delusions. We need to ditch the dogmas and the nonsense about who we are, where we came from, and where we're going. We have to abandon all the divisions and tribalism built on those lies and focus entirely on building an equitable global economy and a fair distribution of labor and its rewards. Isn't that what a smart civilization strives for? Isn't the European Union basically an attempt at exactly that? If the people in the North America hadn't been such idiots, they would have been part of that union long ago. All the misery and chaos we saw wouldn't have happened if they hadn't let things like nationalism and religious divides—those absolute pathetic excuses for reasons to fight—tear everything apart.

That’s the real core issue, swiftcobra15, and it’s way more painful than worrying about some new car, a TV, or a fridge.

So you're just splitting people into good and bad now?

Well, if you really want to drag me into this, I'll be blunt. I only divide people into stupid and even stupider.

Nothing in human society is natural—especially not greed.

Every evil thing, including greed, is always the result of ignorance and stupidity. The only real question is: are ignorance and stupidity actually natural?

And that (a fair global social and economic order) can be achieved with a magic wand (with the right words).

It won't happen with a magic wand, swiftcobra15. Just like everything else, it takes knowledge, work, and actual effort. To build a truly equal global social and economic order, you need knowledge first. You need to understand life as a survival instinct, its rules, and the laws that drive evolution. You need the kind of knowledge that can tear down the religious, ideological, political, philosophical, and scientific delusions and dogmas that built this current, unequal, slave-like world system. We have that knowledge. Now, all that's missing is someone to start a movement—because that's how it always works—or maybe a scientific-philosophical society to spread this truth and advocate for a global order based on lasting peace. An order without armies, weapons, or political, religious, and national borders. I'm willing to put in the work to get a movement or society like this off the ground. So, I'm asking you and everyone else reading this, publicly: give it to me straight, are you ready to join me and help out? Or are you going to keep obsessing over cars, TVs, and fridges, thinking the solution is just throwing them in the trash?

Later!

swiftcobra15,

The stuff up there is just a total mess—nothing but smoke and mirrors.
What really keeps me up at night is the massive pile of global illusions most people are drowning in—and yeah, that includes you too.

Global illusions are just a collection of individual ones. A single illusion is when almost every human on this planet feels like they belong to some specific religion, nation, or ideology. A global illusion is nothing more than the sum of all those individual delusions.

It’s pretty obvious, and there isn't much point in overthinking it. An illusion is always just an illusion—it's all about how you look at it. Ignorance.Whether it’s a local issue or a global one, it’s always going to be a problem—either on a small scale or massive. And there's only ever one way to fix it, or rather, to cure it: Truth. Or rather, actual knowledge.

We’re talking about those core consumer addictions—you know, the car, the TV, even the fridge...
What exactly were we debating a few years back? And which ones don't you count as an addiction—or just a total illusion?
Look, as long as you keep convincing yourself that this stuff is actually a "need," nothing is ever going to change.

Let’s keep it real. For two-thirds of humanity, we aren't talking about upgrading to a new Ford or buying a massive 4K TV. It’s not even about having a fancy fridge. It's about finding enough food to actually survive the day and make it to tomorrow. People living like that don't give a damn about cars or electronics.

Just imagine if, by some miracle, every hungry person on this planet actually managed to fill their stomachs. What comes next? Seriously, ask yourself: what’s the next big crisis that would pop up to haunt them? Once they aren't starving, what kind of new, nagging problem is going to crawl out of the woodwork for them to scramble and fix?

Of course, the next thing on the list to go would be my car, the TV, and the fridge.

Just imagine if some miracle happened and everyone on Earth suddenly fixed all their problems with cars, TVs, and refrigerators. If we actually solved all that basic stuff, what would be next? What kind of new headache would pop up to take its place—something else that would drive people crazy and keep them scrambling for a solution?

What would actually get through their thick skulls? What do they actually need and couldn't live without? Maybe some luxury bungalows with private pools, yachts, private jets, or helicopters. Or hell, maybe even rockets so they can blast off to the Moon, Venus, Jupiter, or some other star system. Yeah, that kind of thing.

What am I even trying to say with all this?

Look, here's the deal: a human being wanting to live a good life isn't the issue. Wanting to avoid suffering and chasing comfort is just hardwired into us. It’s as natural as hunger. Whether it's needing food, a car, a fridge, or if you hit the jackpot, a bungalow with a pool, a yacht, and a private jet—that's just instinct. The real illusion, the massive screw-up, is how people try to get there. They want the whole package without actually doing the work. Instead, they try to grab it at everyone else's expense, leaning on the rest of society. They manipulate the system to gain power over everyone else using whatever tools are at hand—military, police, banking, taxes, religion, politics, you name it. The biggest delusion of all? The fact that most people just accept that these systems even exist. We let them happen. We watch as these tiny group of individuals run the show, pulling off the ultimate scam where they land the mansions, the yachts, and the jets without ever putting in real labor. And they do it while surrounded by a fleet of servants acting like slaves—people running around with lighters just to light their cigars, helping with coats, pulling out chairs, or serving up five-star meals. You've seen it: those guys in uniforms standing by the car or the helicopter all day, just waiting for the moment some powerful boss decides he wants a ride, making sure he doesn't have to wait even a single second.

Our biggest delusion is thinking this way is actually okay—that we should just grind away hoping that, by some miracle, we’ll finally hit the jackpot and climb the social ladder. It’s become this universal obsession where everyone is stuck on one single thought: how to outsmart the next guy to get more stuff with as little actual work as possible. And because of that mindset, two-thirds of people on this planet aren't even dreaming about a car, a fridge, or a TV; they’re just trying to find enough bread so they don't starve. Honestly, they’re partially to blame because they let themselves be played. They accept being conned by the global elite—acting as obedient cogs in an exploitation machine designed to benefit religious, political, and financial overlords rather than themselves. These power players hold all the cards, using lies and illusions fed through education, social norms, the threat of police or military force, or even the fear of divine punishment to stay in control. Eventually, people don't just get used to being stepped on; they start defending their miserable status quo as if it’s something sacred that shouldn't be touched. Take a look at the US today, for example. Who can actually speak openly about how certain nationalistic or religious ideologies are just nonsense without getting shut down? And it’s often not even the big leaders doing the silencing, but just random people on the street or in a bar. Most of those people don't gain anything from it; they're just following the script. The only ones winning are the few at the top of these organizations, fighting tooth and nail to stay in power. They aren't chasing cars or TVs—they already have those. They're chasing mansions with pools, yachts, and private jets.

When you step back and look at the big picture, wanting things isn't the issue. Wanting to own things is a basic human drive. The real problem is *how* everyone wants to get there: through shortcuts, avoiding honest, productive work, and instead seizing power to fleece society. They use laws or brute force to funnel wealth away from the public and straight into the pockets of scammers, criminals, and elites. This is our global illusion: believing that our social, political, and economic systems are actually "good" and worth preserving. In reality, they are just tools used to keep the whole Human race in a state of perpetual servitude.

So, here's the fix: we need a balanced social and economic order where we solve hunger first. We make sure every single person on Earth is fed. Once that's settled, then we move on to making sure everyone has access to the basics like cars and appliances. If we nail that, then maybe we talk about mansions and planes. There's nothing wrong with luxury, provided it's accessible to everyone equally and built on collective hard work—not a system where some sweat while others lounge in the shade waiting for a handout, or invent useless, soul-crushing jobs that serve zero purpose. There is a massive surplus of these "make-work" jobs that provide no value and satisfy no one. I'd bet half of all jobs today fall into that category. The world is still running on lies and deception more than truth, which means most people are working against their own best interests rather than for them.

Peace.

swiftcobra15,

You’ve got great ideas. They just have one flaw: they’re totally useless in the real world.

Of course they're applicable. It all comes down to us. The only question is whether we actually want to or not. Basically, we will—but only once we realize it's in our own best interest. Once we wake up to the fact that we aren't living by the truth, but by a lie, and that living a lie is a losing game. I mean, if bad ideas that hurt us are easy enough to pull off, why wouldn't good ones be just as doable?

If the whole world is an illusion and we're unhappy with it, then we should either

The world isn't an illusion; it's our perception of it—our explanation and understanding of reality. That's exactly what philosophy is for: tearing those illusions apart.

a) change the illusory world or

You aren't expressing yourself right. No, you don't "change the illusory world"; you change the illusion we have about the world to reflect the actual truth.

b) exit that world (free ourselves from it)

Wrong again. You don't "exit the world"—there's nowhere else to go—you exit the illusion of the world. Though, even saying "exit the illusion" is wrong, because we aren't inside the illusion; the illusion is inside us. It needs to leave us. For example, the idea that someone is American, or British, or Chinese, or that someone is a Christian, a Jew, or a Muslim... none of us actually live *inside* those labels. Those labels live inside us. So, we don't exit them; they have to exit us.

You aren't offering a path or a way to do either; you're just telling us to accept your "truth."

Again, you're missing the point. There is no my or your truth. There is only TRUTH, without all this mine vs. yours nonsense. That distinction only applies to illusions. You can say something is mine or yours, but not when it comes to reality.

For instance, if I claimed to be strictly defined by my nationality or religion, that would be my illusion. If you claimed the same for your background, that would be your illusion. But truth is something entirely different, and it applies to both of us equally. The truth is that you and I are simply conscious, living beings (substance) using our physical and mental abilities to build bodies that are fundamentally the same. A body isn't American, or British, or Christian, or anything else—it's just living, conscious matter.

And yeah, I am offering a solution to turn things around from bad to better. It's simple: everyone needs to break free from their own illusions.

Later.

People’s biggest delusion is thinking the material universe exists as something separate, just like they think a human being exists. The truth is way different. It's just that exists nothing but matter—one single substance that makes up everything from the cosmos to you.

That first massive lie is the root of every other mistake we make, including believing in the state as a political entity or needing religion as some kind of "spiritual" fix.

Look, if you realize that only matter exists—and that this matter is actually alive and conscious—everything changes. This stuff has its own physical and mental drive to move, perceive, feel, remember, and think. From its own particles, it built complex systems (material forms) to ensure its own survival. Basically, it creates ways to dodge evil and achieve good. It’s obvious that all these natural systems—atoms, stars, galaxies, cells, plants, animals, and humans—are strictly economic structures and communities. All those global political states and religious institutions? They are nothing more than parasites clinging to these human economic communities, sucking them dry. Their whole existence is just a byproduct of people being wrong about what really exists, how it exists, and why it exists. We see it everywhere: people still cling to the idea that, say, Americans, Germans, Brits, Chinese, (I’m keeping them lowercase because that crap doesn't deserve a capital letter) Protestants, Catholics, Muslims, etc., exist as distinct things. That’s a delusion so stupid it borders on insanity. And that insanity is what fuels the worst evils in the world, which are just physical manifestations of one massive madness called dogma, or delusion, or simply ignorance.

The only cure is knowledge regarding what truly exists, and how and why.

Nick can't wrap his head around reality until he actually figures himself out. And honestly, I don't get why you guys are so convinced that studying "objective reality" matters more than understanding yourself as the entity doing the perceiving. For any conscious being, their own existence is way more significant than some external thing outside of them. The real question is "Who am I? How do I function? Why am I here?" It’s not about some distant star in the sky or wondering if there’s another galaxy beyond that one which we can't see. It’s not even about whether that star looks the way we think it does or how a blind person might perceive it.

Real, absolute reality isn't what you pick up through your five senses. It’s the stuff that *makes up* the world we perceive—the foundation that our senses can't actually touch. That's something you can only find within yourself, stripped of sensory input. True reality is simply what we are at our core: CONSCIOUSNESS. If someone doesn't understand what consciousness is, they need to go deep and study themselves—who they are, what they are, how they exist, and why. Once they do that, they'll get it. They'll understand the what, the how, and the why of everything, because everything that exists is just consciousness.

You don't need a PhD or anyone else's help to understand yourself as consciousness. All the data you need is already right there, because every single one of us *is* consciousness. You just need to pay attention to those facts and make sense of them.

Hey, Chris!

Louis,

There are really just four psychological functions at play here: thinking and feeling, plus intuition and sensation—those are our perception tools. They complement each other. Everything else just falls under those umbrellas.

Memory isn't just some subset of thinking, feeling, or perceiving; it’s its own distinct mental faculty and action, which is why I’m calling it out specifically. I also see understanding as its own unique process, even though it relies entirely on everything else—perception, feeling, memory, and thought. We’re talking about understanding the past we’ve perceived, felt, remembered, and thought through so we can actually plan for the future. Basically, you have to grasp the good and bad experiences from your past to figure out what comes next. You use that insight to build the will to dodge the bad stuff and chase the good. This constant cycle of understanding right from wrong is what allows consciousness to evolve. Without the ability to make sense of the good and evil we've lived through, the universe would just stay stuck in a permanent state of chaos.

You can't talk about these mental processes without including physical movement and effort. Without them, there’s nothing to perceive or feel in the first place. And if there’s nothing to perceive or feel, there’s nothing to remember, think about, or understand. Physicality and psychology are inseparable. They’re locked together, constantly feeding into one another in real-time. They always come as a package deal.

Kobe Bryant

Based on your posts, I’d say your whole philosophical foundation is pretty blurry and arbitrary. It bleeds right into your epistemology because your words don't actually mean anything specific—you just make them up as you go. If "randomness" is the defining trait of your worldview, then it isn't even a real philosophy. It doesn't apply to everyone; it only works for people gullible enough to just take your word for it.

Look, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here. Maybe you aren't catching my drift because some of the slang I use carries a different weight with you. If we aren't using the same playbook for these words, then it's obvious why everything I'm trying to break down ends up sounding like gibberish to you.

The issue is I have no clue which specific words you think mean something different to you than they do to me. In my mind, the vocabulary I’m using is pretty much universal—words mean what they mean, so there shouldn't be any confusion. You brought up the word "chair" earlier and asked me to use it as an example to explain how I build my definitions. Look, "chair" is a single, straightforward concept. It doesn't need a deep dive. The same goes for words like "effort," "movement," "observation," "feeling," "memory," "opinion," or "understanding." I use those terms to tackle the three big existential questions: what, how, and why we exist. They're simple. They're direct. To me, they carry no more weight than how any regular person uses them in everyday conversation. Honestly, it trips me out that you can't follow my logic well enough to realize that my way of speaking isn't some kind of personal "belief system" or creed.

I’m not even mad at you. This isn't the first time people have completely missed my point and then tried to claim I’m pushing some kind of religious agenda. Honestly, it just blows my mind. How can people—without me even saying anything—fail to grasp the basic cause-and-effect relationship between physical and mental processes? It's the very foundation of how they exist and how reality itself works. People just make stuff up, turn those fabrications into global religions, and call it a day. There’s zero philosophy or "wisdom" in what I’m saying. There’s no belief system here. I’m just describing things. I'm trying to map out that cause-and-effect loop by using the human conscious "I" as an example—how it operates through a sort of "survival instinct"—and then applying that same logic to nature as a whole. My goal is to show that all of nature functions the exact same way to sustain itself. If someone actually understood how they exist, they wouldn't be stupid enough to claim that only humans and maybe a few animals have consciousness while rocks and everything else have nothing. That kind of thinking is just a baseless, nonsensical belief. You can't have consciousness in a vacuum because a human is a system made of elements. If you strip away every single component that makes up a person, there’s nothing left. And "nothing" can't be conscious. You're left with the elements that build the system. Those elements couldn't even form a human if they didn't possess the capacity for effort, movement, perception, feeling, memory, thought, and understanding. Those abilities are the fundamental actions that make consciousness possible. Since there is absolutely no difference between the elements that make up a human body and the elements that make up the entire universe, the rules are the same. Everything exists under the same laws and possibilities. These rules are baked into those seven physical and mental actions I keep bringing up: effort, movement, perception, feeling, memory, thought, and understanding. Without them, there is nothing. For reality to exist, the matter it's made of must possess these capabilities. That is the law of existence. Without these abilities, matter wouldn't just fail to evolve or transform; it wouldn't even be able to exist in the first place.

Look, it’s just like how a person doesn't "possess" consciousness—meaning they don't just own those physical and mental faculties that define awareness—in the same way you're right that a rock doesn't have consciousness or anything else. But the actual matter that makes up everything, even a stone, does. The matter within a rock has the inherent capacity to develop, through specific processes, into a human being. Just as the matter that forms a person can, under certain conditions, revert back into stone. Without those seven physical and mental capacities, none of this would be possible. That's why these abilities are essentially the LAW of all existence.

If you can't wrap your head around this right now, don't sweat it. Just start studying yourself—the rules and ways you actually exist—and eventually, things will click. I get that you can't grasp everything overnight, especially when someone is dead set on believing things work differently. If you're interested and actually have the time, you can check out my more detailed breakdowns at this link. I don't think the terms I use will trip you up if you read carefully; I try to keep my language straightforward. I do my best to avoid using overly complex jargon that feels unnatural. http://home.primus.ca/~milanpanic/

Later.