this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2023
1 points (66.7% liked)

weirdway

70 readers
1 users here now

weird (adj.)

c. 1400,

• "having power to control fate", from wierd (n.), from Old English wyrd "fate, chance, fortune; destiny; the Fates," literally "that which comes,"

• from Proto-Germanic wurthiz (cognates: Old Saxon wurd, Old High German wurt "fate," Old Norse urðr "fate, one of the three Norns"),

• from PIE wert- "to turn, to wind," (cognates: German werden, Old English weorðan "to become"),

• from root wer- (3) "to turn, bend" (see versus).

• For sense development from "turning" to "becoming," compare phrase turn into "become."

OVERVIEW

This is a community dedicated to discussing subjective idealism and its implications. For a more detailed explanation, please take a look at our vision statement.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Some people get uncomfortable when we discuss the topic of power. Why do you think they are uncomfortable? I will tell you. They're uncomfortable because they think if you gain power, it will be at their expense! In other words, if someone here gains power, then someone with less power will suffer for it. So, a zero sum game of power.

Of course preventing others from seeking power in order to retain more control over your own life is what? It's power-seeking just the same. Who are we foolin'? Right? Nobody is fooled. We all understand.

People with the biggest egos get upset when someone next to them has a big ego. Why so? Because if Bob's ego is so huge, there will be less of a spotlight for my own little but cute ego which needs some love. Would a selfless person mind someone else who had a huge ego? Of course not. What would be the point of minding if you have no personal needs or desires? Why would you comment on someone's ego or power if you had no similar needs yourself?

Unlike in the (illusory) material world, where by convention things often are a zero sum game, in the mental world things are not a zero sum game. In the mental world it's possible for 10,000 all-controlling Gods to meet and chat with each other, and not to step on each others' toes. If you don't think it's possible, I challenge you to consider that yes, it is possible, and unless you understand why and how it is possible, you have no business seeking more personal power.

So I understand very well the fears and insecurities around this topic. For some people just the theme of "all is mind" is a cause for intestinal hatred. Why so? Because it's a short distance from that to solipsism, and solipsism makes people afraid. And yet, solipsism is a very powerful and useful view to master.

Subjective idealism is not restricted to solipsism and indeed I act as though I respect (not to be confused with politeness) everyone, even though I know people are just dream emanations. Nonetheless, some of the most interesting and powerful experiences are only possible within a unified point of view, and this unified POV is basically solipsism, which is what many of you fear. It's fine if you don't want to benefit from unifying your POV. It's fine to hold it off. But don't knock it because one day when you get tired of convention, you may want to leave convention using the escape hatch of solipsism, and what will you do then, if you've built up layers and layers of fear and hatred around that idea? You'll be in trouble. You have to use the hatch, but it's overgrown with thorns. You don't want to be in that position, do ya? So you don't have to like solipsism, but be mindful not to bash it, for one day you may need to use it yourself.

top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] syncretik 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Let's all stop pretending we don't want infinite power."

Originally posted by u/mindseal on 2016-05-02 10:19:51 (4hcsaa).