bsit

Or does it just make you want to dismiss me as some tiresome armchair shrink who clearly needs better creative outlets than Lemmy.

At least I think it’s nice to see people here give thoughtful replies every now and again. I see way too many people on Lemmy who fancy themselves smart but really they have just memorized the latest trending science news without actually thinking about how any of it connects to anything.

Edit: there does seem to be a larger percentage of thoughtful people here than certain other platforms though. Or maybe the smaller community allows for more visibility at least.

There was a good podcast on the political activism part recently: https://shows.acast.com/tantra-illuminated-with-dr-christopher-wallis/episodes/finding-freedom-in-troubled-times-with-tina-rasmussen

Welcome. I recommend you check out this book: https://adyashanti.opengatesangha.org/store/publications/books/falling-into-grace-535 (don’t let the title get in the way, it’s more Zen Buddhist). I imagine you can find it from a library.

It was helpful for me during some really rough times.

Of course, ‘everyone can be artist’. But wouldn’t the lack of the dramatic lead to a lesser chance of ‘making it big’?

Depends, because you’re not going to be conveying your experience perfectly anyway. It first goes through your own interpretative lens to the art, and then the art goes through the viewer’s lens. Big and dramatic emotions are easier… yes and as such may be more predictably marketable. But it’s a fickle business. Of course this is a concern only if marketability is how you measure “making it big”. We have a lot of art these days that’s easy to get into… and easy to drop. If you want world to remember you (Gogh wasn’t appreciated until after his death), you can try to convey something deeper and more complex.

I am having a hard time recalling positive experiences right now, especially ones that are “vibrant” in any way.

There’s vibrancy in deepest depression and the most boring line in the blandest grocery store. That’s for an artist to discover. But I’m not saying you should or should not take meds. But depression tends to lead to bad outcomes, and the world is full of depressed artists who didn’t make it.

Taking antidepressants does not have to reduce your creativity. Artists express their experience with their art. Sometimes it does it so well that people observing the art (through the lens of their conditioning) get moved. More damatic emotions get noticed more. But art can capture subtler experiences too. Antidepressants won’t remove your capacity to experience, it just changes the quality of the experience. Pay attention to all the qualities of your experience and you’ll notice it’s not just the intense ones that have vibrancy. You can convey that in art beautifully as well.

The suffering artist is a known trope but don’t think it’s a prophecy.

Hell yeah

You’d have to settle for close enough here.

This is my point. We can’t do it exactly, we just approximate. With every single experience we have, we can only approximately communicate it to other people. But here’s the kicker: does thinking about the taste of water feel like you’re actually drinking water? If you were parched in a desert, would thinking about water really hard actually bring the experience of water? Obviously not.

Once you have experienced something, thinking back to it, you are already kind of approximating it to yourself. You can’t manifest the exact experience even for yourself. Let alone to others.

I’m just highlighting this because it’s a pretty significant thing to get in this world where we are communicating by text a lot, and being very quick to judge other people’s experiences. Not saying you’re doing that though.

But how would I know if our experience of the taste of water is the same?

What does water taste like?

That’s a pretty tall order. How do you confirm that you objectively share the same experience if you can only ever access your own subjective experience?

You don’t have to but it’s good to be aware of if you’re really saving time or giving more of your energy to something other than your own needs.

No, but it seems unusually aggressive for very little reason.

Lots of psychoanalysis in this thread.

Wow. You really actually believe that? You actually equate non-dual ideology which necessarily posits a non-hierarchial ultimate reality without absolute good and evil with the bullshit of theistic religions?

Damn I have seen the memes about Marxists thinking they’re way smarter than they are but I thought they were exaggerating.

Removed by mod

For someone harping about science, you certainly fall for logical fallacies a lot. You keep pointing at the extracted brain, textbook appeal to the stone.

You are pointing to contents of consciousness to try to prove matter comes prior.

Maybe take the hint that you don’t understand the argument (and aren’t willing to try) and thus aren’t really equipped for this conversation.

Op made an public question I answered. I however did not ask anyone’s opinion.

Because all your proof hinges on matter being real and prior.

regardless of who is percieving it.

And since we require perception to say anything about matter, what does that say about which comes first, matter or consciousness?

Consciousness is a material, measurable process

Again, prove it. It is YOUR system of thought which requires that every claim must be backed with objective proof. Where is the objective proof of matter? All the rest you’re saying hingest upon that being a fact. But if you can’t prove it as a fact, all you have is an unverified belief that you insist everyone else should have. Which, again, makes you exactly the same as any other oppressor. In your own system of thought. And before you parade some scientists in front of me, ask yourself if you can know that they know what they are talking about, or do you just believe them because they share the same core belief system as you?

Oh you were SO CLOSE to getting it.

Why can’t materialists prove it though? By all their own rules, they should.