I want an answer right now.
Who wrote this book?
Why did they write it?
Is it true?
Have you read it?
HEY I'M TALKING TO YOU
>>18293162
I don't know man, I didn't do it.
>>18293175
THEN WHO DID
I can't even you're destroying me
HEY
LISTEN TO ME
whatever
>>18293150
If you're reading it, it must be true.
>>18293242
that's not TRUE
>>18293270
Everything is true.
>>18293274
All is a lie stop thinking my thoughts ive though after i've thought them.
The sky and the cosmos are one
>>18293277
Even lies are true.
What book is this?
Everything in this thread is correct.
>>18293150
We're all writing it, all the time.
It's weird unlike a harddrive you can read+write.
>>18293150
take your medication, if you don´t have any then pursue some drugs, sleep and don´t talk ever again about this. Ever
>>18293325
Earth is flat, science doesnt exist and this is all a simulation.
>>18294653
A holographic universe could and does give you a convincingly objective reality.
>>18293150
Where can I read this?
So edge
http://www.truthcontest.com/files/ThePresentComplete.zip
>>18295258
>http://www.truthcontest.com/files/ThePresentComplete.zip
>.zip
Reading just the first chapter, I think it's a valid belief. He posits that the idea that each being, whether bacteria or mammal or whatever is experiencing it's own separate existence is false. He says that before this life, you experienced another life, or that there is no real "you", only a consciousness that inhabits each living thing.
It's a neat idea, but we can't prove or disprove it so it's equally valid to the belief that we are each individuals with no overlap. We (scientists) have no idea how consciousness works and can't even prove that any human is conscious in the way we believe ourselves to be. See the idea of philosophical zombies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie
TLDR, it's interesting, but we can't say whether it's true or not.
>>18295294
But why is OP losing his shit over a personal perspective? Why ask us? If it were true technically did he not write the book? Have we not all read it through him reading it? Through you reading it?
>>18295307
OP is losing his shit because he believes that everyone would act differently if they knew what this book said. OP is wrong, of course. People will act the way they always have and change only slowly the way they always have.
>If it were true technically did he not write the book? Have we not all read it through him reading it? Through you reading it?
Yep.
I think the best thing you can take from this idea is that it's stupid to be shitty to other people. You will(have) experience(d) both your own perspective and the perspective of your victim, so you're only fucking with yourself.
>>18293270
Yeah, you're right. I didn't know there was actual source material to which OP was referring. After >>18295258, though, I find that I actually have read this before, but I think this is a more edited or polished edition.
Basically, it's a useful metaphor, certainly, and there is a lot of truth in it, but there's also plenty of cringeworthy assertions that reveal the subjective mania of the author (the obsession with the Beatles comes to mind).
I don't really know what OP means by asking who wrote it, because there's both a name and email address in the file, and it's from a website, so like spiritually I guess if the assertion that we are the culmination of all previous human history is true, and it seems fairly obvious that it is, then maybe in some sense we *all* wrote it?
Either way, I think it's more useful than distracting, and surely worth discussing and thinking about.