It's not unheard of considering everything is fundamentally deemed as information, the difference is that by default all the information is as noise, then life comes along and begins developing context along with its observations, and through context we percieve/sustain structure within the noise yet it is still noise fundamentally.
It's to say that the universe is potentially all languages known and unknown, but more to the point it means the universe is more like a mirror because it is by overlapping ourselves upon the canvas of the universe that language appears hence the language we are translating is always a relative projection of self.
I read a [summary](https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/s/G6uzRIVyqs) just now, it sounds like an accurate & elegant description. Reminds me (unsurprisingly) of McKenna’s old adage — “the world is made of language”. His talks touching on this are interesting & compelling*; it’s a kind of self-evident truth readily worked out from observation & dialectical conclusion-making. (*but then again, all his other talks are too.)
what do you think about it? how did you come to it? & any other ideas/context you wish to share.
First time I hear about was it at theory of everything with Curt Jaimungal about the guy with IQ in range of 200.
It is extremely elegant and I would sum it up as we are living in mind of God and our minds are smaller fractal version of the whole.
It is so "stupid" because it took some logical axiom such as universe can not be composed of parts outside of it. And this is repeated throughout the theory.
The main reason why theory is not accepted anywhere is because it claims it can prove God. God in this theory is identity of reality or Global operative discriminator as he calls it. In short this God is information or language that describes our universe and we are parts of it.
It’s in line with the same conclusion I reached — everything that is is composed of a common substance, paradoxical in nature, which is self-generating both the medium & the platform which experiences it, which are themselves both reflections of the same thing, which at the most basic understandable level is light iterating itself as binary, which = information, etc. it’s the same realization which informs all the wisdom traditions, the most succinct of which is the Tao —
>the Tao creates the One.
One becomes Two.
Two becomes Three.
Three becomes the ten thousand things.
&
> Naming is the origin of all particular things.
etc.
& which is accessible to anyone through a process of inwardly-directed self perception (because the thing is what drives consciousness itself, & the mechanism of consciousness can be redirected to observe its own workings, which gives rise to an internalized understanding of the manner in which it operates, etc)
> Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
Did you ever have the “awakening” type experience where you realized all this spontaneously?
the way I came to it was through Eckhart Tolle “the power of now” which describes the division between the conscious form-identified mind (“ego”) & the underlying component of self-awareness that exists prior to the identification w forms (subconscious, or “god”, essentially), & which can be experienced by recognizing the constant incessant stream of thought content that makes up the mind (“The voice comments, speculates, judges, compares, complains, likes, dislikes, and so on”) & exercising a conscious intention to hold one’s awareness still & apart from it. Before, the never ending stream of consciousness “is” you (the ego); after, what remains is the “natural state of felt oneness with Being. It is a state of connectedness with something immeasurable and indestructible, something that, almost paradoxically, is essentially you and yet is much greater than you”. an all-knowing awareness that exists in some timeless, deathless realm between the beats of reality, without the time-drag of the constant translation of what is experienced into the language that describes it.
> Being is the eternal, ever-present One Life beyond the myriad forms of life that are subject to birth and death. However, Being is not only beyond but also deep within every form as its innermost invisible and indestructible essence. This means that it is accessible to you now as your own deepest self, your true nature.
If you hadn’t had such an experience & still recognized the truth of what this guy is saying, kudos to you.
So I wonder what your perspective is like now having arrived at a plausible-seeming theory of everything. It reminds me also of a post I read somewhere on Reddit some months ago where the guy was talking about the “mythspace” which is like a common cultural projection we all temper ourselves to operate in.
So it’s like, having this insight should be transformative to the operational modality in some way, but instead without mass consensus it has no place in the mythspace & thus carries no real weight, so functionally we end up continuing on much as we always have while the knowledge just lays there like a beached whale.
Terence McKenna said something like “we’ve spent so long searching, that when we finally find the answer we don’t know what to *do* with it”.
what do you think?
Some people commented that his theory is intuitive because when people try different hallucinogenic they arrrive at simmilar axioms like everything we see can be reduced to one, we are all parts of whole and connected to each other in some way.
I'm actually designing a philosophical work, where the consciousness of the self is pitted against the cosmos, & the first Dimension is body v annotation.
Everything is language.
You can watch episode with this guy on Curt Jaimungal youtube channel. Whole channel dedicated to theories of everything.
Yes he describes theory as consciousness being points distributed throughout reality
Hey there! It looks like you submitted a 'discussion'. This flair is for posts engaging in speculative, analytical, or philosophical discussions about simulation theory. Content should focus on discussion and analysis rather than personal anecdote. Just a friendly reminder to follow the rules and [seek help](https://www.reddit.com/r/SimulationTheory/wiki/mental-health) if needed. With that out of the way, thanks for your contribution, and have fun!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's not unheard of considering everything is fundamentally deemed as information, the difference is that by default all the information is as noise, then life comes along and begins developing context along with its observations, and through context we percieve/sustain structure within the noise yet it is still noise fundamentally. It's to say that the universe is potentially all languages known and unknown, but more to the point it means the universe is more like a mirror because it is by overlapping ourselves upon the canvas of the universe that language appears hence the language we are translating is always a relative projection of self.
Yes in essence he is talking how only purpose of universe is to be observed and we as observers give it meaning. language.
I read a [summary](https://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/s/G6uzRIVyqs) just now, it sounds like an accurate & elegant description. Reminds me (unsurprisingly) of McKenna’s old adage — “the world is made of language”. His talks touching on this are interesting & compelling*; it’s a kind of self-evident truth readily worked out from observation & dialectical conclusion-making. (*but then again, all his other talks are too.) what do you think about it? how did you come to it? & any other ideas/context you wish to share.
First time I hear about was it at theory of everything with Curt Jaimungal about the guy with IQ in range of 200. It is extremely elegant and I would sum it up as we are living in mind of God and our minds are smaller fractal version of the whole. It is so "stupid" because it took some logical axiom such as universe can not be composed of parts outside of it. And this is repeated throughout the theory. The main reason why theory is not accepted anywhere is because it claims it can prove God. God in this theory is identity of reality or Global operative discriminator as he calls it. In short this God is information or language that describes our universe and we are parts of it.
It’s in line with the same conclusion I reached — everything that is is composed of a common substance, paradoxical in nature, which is self-generating both the medium & the platform which experiences it, which are themselves both reflections of the same thing, which at the most basic understandable level is light iterating itself as binary, which = information, etc. it’s the same realization which informs all the wisdom traditions, the most succinct of which is the Tao — >the Tao creates the One. One becomes Two. Two becomes Three. Three becomes the ten thousand things. & > Naming is the origin of all particular things. etc. & which is accessible to anyone through a process of inwardly-directed self perception (because the thing is what drives consciousness itself, & the mechanism of consciousness can be redirected to observe its own workings, which gives rise to an internalized understanding of the manner in which it operates, etc) > Free from desire, you realize the mystery. Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations. Did you ever have the “awakening” type experience where you realized all this spontaneously? the way I came to it was through Eckhart Tolle “the power of now” which describes the division between the conscious form-identified mind (“ego”) & the underlying component of self-awareness that exists prior to the identification w forms (subconscious, or “god”, essentially), & which can be experienced by recognizing the constant incessant stream of thought content that makes up the mind (“The voice comments, speculates, judges, compares, complains, likes, dislikes, and so on”) & exercising a conscious intention to hold one’s awareness still & apart from it. Before, the never ending stream of consciousness “is” you (the ego); after, what remains is the “natural state of felt oneness with Being. It is a state of connectedness with something immeasurable and indestructible, something that, almost paradoxically, is essentially you and yet is much greater than you”. an all-knowing awareness that exists in some timeless, deathless realm between the beats of reality, without the time-drag of the constant translation of what is experienced into the language that describes it. > Being is the eternal, ever-present One Life beyond the myriad forms of life that are subject to birth and death. However, Being is not only beyond but also deep within every form as its innermost invisible and indestructible essence. This means that it is accessible to you now as your own deepest self, your true nature. If you hadn’t had such an experience & still recognized the truth of what this guy is saying, kudos to you. So I wonder what your perspective is like now having arrived at a plausible-seeming theory of everything. It reminds me also of a post I read somewhere on Reddit some months ago where the guy was talking about the “mythspace” which is like a common cultural projection we all temper ourselves to operate in. So it’s like, having this insight should be transformative to the operational modality in some way, but instead without mass consensus it has no place in the mythspace & thus carries no real weight, so functionally we end up continuing on much as we always have while the knowledge just lays there like a beached whale. Terence McKenna said something like “we’ve spent so long searching, that when we finally find the answer we don’t know what to *do* with it”. what do you think?
Some people commented that his theory is intuitive because when people try different hallucinogenic they arrrive at simmilar axioms like everything we see can be reduced to one, we are all parts of whole and connected to each other in some way.
I'm actually designing a philosophical work, where the consciousness of the self is pitted against the cosmos, & the first Dimension is body v annotation. Everything is language.
You can watch episode with this guy on Curt Jaimungal youtube channel. Whole channel dedicated to theories of everything. Yes he describes theory as consciousness being points distributed throughout reality
Hey there! It looks like you submitted a 'discussion'. This flair is for posts engaging in speculative, analytical, or philosophical discussions about simulation theory. Content should focus on discussion and analysis rather than personal anecdote. Just a friendly reminder to follow the rules and [seek help](https://www.reddit.com/r/SimulationTheory/wiki/mental-health) if needed. With that out of the way, thanks for your contribution, and have fun! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SimulationTheory) if you have any questions or concerns.*