All problems and solutions are within the mind, not the world

One reason I love to read is that a few sentences in a book can make me go Wow! or Whoa! to such an extent, I feel like it is worth reading hundreds of pages to be exposed to a single fresh thought.

That happened to me this morning as I was reading the "Criteria for Reality" chapter in physicist David Deutsch's book, The Fabric of Reality. Here's what grabbed my attention:

Galileo may have seen the world as a book in which the laws of nature are written in mathematical symbols. But that is strictly a metaphor; there are no explanations in orbit out there with the planets. The fact is that all our problems and solutions are located within ourselves, having been created by ourselves. When we solve problems in science we arrive through argument at theories whose explanations seem best to us.

Now if this is true of science, it is doubly true of religion -- because science deals with problems concerning the observable outside world, and religions typically deal with problems involving what almost certainly is an imagined supernatural realm.

Thus, for example, religions would have us worry about what will happen with our immortal soul, conveniently failing to mention that there is no demonstrable evidence for the soul, much less its purported immortality. Likewise, religions raise the concern about how we can be sure we're doing God's will, even though there's no evidence that God exists.

So it's good to keep in mind, as Deutsch reminds us, that all problems and solutions exist within the human mind, not out there in the world. This doesn't mean that our problems and solutions aren't real, just that they have a different sort of reality than, say, electromagnetism, the planet Mars, or jellyfish.

I've pondered this general notion in several blog posts, though not in exactly the fashion Deutsch has. Here's links to some of those posts, along with an excerpt from each.

What if reality is completely different from how you think it is?

I'm not sure whether ultimate reality can be known. Heck, I'm not even sure whether limited reality can be known. 

Meaning, there may be no such thing as reality.

This might just be a word we humans use for our way of looking upon the world, a subjective viewpoint which has no resemblance to the way the world really is, because there is no really beyond the subjective viewpoint. 

Alternatively, perhaps reality really exists, but it is nothing like our thoughts about it.

Best statement about reality, in just thirteen words

There's nothing wrong with believing. We all believe in things that aren't objectively true, because doing this makes us feel subjectively good. Believing is part of being human.

However, we should keep in mind that everything within our mind isn't part of objective reality. That's the beauty of Philip K. Dick's one-sentence metaphysics -- perhaps better termed ontology.

It reminds us that not believing in something is the best way to determine whether it is part of the reality outside our own head. 

For example, stand on a first-floor balcony and get yourself to believe that an invisible floor extends beyond the railing. Which is equivalent to not believing in falling through empty space. Then jump off the railing. See what happens.

Science shows how humans create reality

We don't see the universe as it is. We see the universe as it appears to us through the filter of a Homo sapiens consciousness.

Bats, snakes, monkeys, salmon, dogs, and every other sort of sentient creature see things differently, as does, in a non-conscious sense, a radio telescope and other devices that enable us to perceive aspects of the cosmos beyond our natural capacity.

However, since no one has ever had a non-human experience of reality, both our individual and collective view of How Things Really Are is inextricably biased toward anthropomorphism.

We need to scratch the "Really" in both science and spirituality.

Pay attention to the world, not thoughts

On the other hand, thinking about how to experience something different from what is happening now often is necessary. If my computer won't start up, I need to think about what to do before doing it.

Religions, though, want us to think a lot about imaginary experiences. Prayers, mantras, ritual invocations, and such are designed to place true believers in a frame of mind where the here and now is made subservient to a fantasized there and then.

Sure, all this religious stuff can feel good. Sitting in church, surrounded by people who believe like you do, hearing tales of a heaven that is so much better than this imperfect world -- all this can produce highly appealing thoughts.

But that's all they are: thoughts. Reality is somewhere else, all around the worshipper. The sound of the preacher's voice, the hardness or softness of the pew, the brightness of candles, the sight of an image of Jesus on the cross. 

Comments

[Jen]

Problem is that reality is so bloody awful.

Read the mainstream media its mostly biased and false. Watch the news and its war and chaos. Watch the telly and Netflix and its all about violence. Politics nowadays seems to be about division and hatred (rioting in the street even). How do people keep themselves from going insane? Some just ignore everything around them and live their lives in a kind of selfish "I'm okay" mindset. Others do their best to live a moral, ethical lifestyle, but it still gets very heavy at times.

Its no wonder many people search for and follow some religion, spiritual path, maybe some form of mysticism or magic. Theres not a lot of love and peace out there and we need to have some sort of escape from the madness.

If "all problems and solutions exist within the human mind, not out there in the world" then how does the more empathic type of person not be affected by their surroundings? Yes, I know - "be in the world but not of it" - huh.

Sorry Brian for ranting, just voicing my existential angst and there ain't no religion that can cure it.

[Spencer Tepper]

To paraphrase Marcus Aurelius, the atmosphere around our lives that we build is the only place we have lived in.

Any system of belief which makes that a better place has merit.

[Jen]

Just looked up Marcus Aurelius Quotes. This one: "Very little is needed to make a happy life; it is all within yourself, in your way of thinking".

My problem with this is it seems selfish, like walking around and saying to oneself "I'm happy" in a world of suffering.

This quote I like: "You have power over your mind - not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength."

There are some good quotes by Marcus Aurelius, thanks Spence.

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi Jen

;)

[Dungeness]

conveniently failing to mention that there is no demonstrable evidence for the soul, much less its purported immortality. Likewise, religions raise the concern about how we can be sure we're doing God's will, even though there's no evidence that God exists.

I agree the blind faith of religion is unsustainable.
So does the mystic.

So throw out ritual blind faith. Holy scriptures are
unverified tomes; God, dead as a doornail. The mystic
argues for an experiential approach. Believe only
what you have experienced inside by the concentration
of attention. Repeatedly experienced.

Arguably though what's experienced inside could still
be fake. But what you see out in the real world is
rather insubstantial too looking through a quantum
physics lens. Maybe they're both dream worlds created
by consciousness.

Surely though, what you're seeing in the light of day
is real and the airy-fairy shadowy dream realm is just
that- a fantasy generated in the brain. How do you know?
Well, er, you just know.

It's like this. Say you get an inkling in a dream,
(maybe even a nightmarish one) that something about the
scenery or the actors or the script itself doesn't seem
real. You begin to doubt the monsters and their powers.

So by chance you turn and ask a co-dreamer. "Does all
this seem real?" He says "Well, hell, yes. Look at the
monsters. You better start running, fool". Then, severa
white-coated attendants race in. They question your
sanity, ridicule, cajole, even threaten you. You reach
reluctantly for the Kool-Aid when suddenly you wake
up. Then you know it was all a fraud.

How? You know because because experiencing a higher reality
gives you the perspective you needed to discern the truth.
You remember being awake and then falling asleep. And now
the shaming co-dreamer is gone. The white-coats have slinked
away too.

So, if the mystic repeatably has experiences inside, who
is to say he's delusional. Or your reality is genuine and
his isn't? If you're a zealot, you may try to convince the
poor, deluded one that it's all in his brain. But, the one
awake knows you're just prattling about the improbability
of something you have no experience of. You're wearing a
white-coat but it's smudged and worn

[Dungeness]

conveniently failing to mention that there is no demonstrable evidence for the soul, much less its purported immortality. Likewise, religions raise the concern about how we can be sure we're doing God's will, even though there's no evidence that God exists.

I agree the blind faith of religion is unsustainable.
So does the mystic.

So throw out ritual blind faith. Holy scriptures are
unverified tomes; God, dead as a doornail. The mystic
argues for an experiential approach. Believe only
what you have experienced inside by the concentration
of attention. Repeatedly experienced.

Arguably though what's experienced inside could still
be fake. But what you see out in the real world is
rather insubstantial too looking through a quantum
physics lens. Maybe they're both dream worlds created
by consciousness.

Surely though, what you're seeing in the light of day
is real and the airy-fairy shadowy dream realm is just
that- a fantasy generated in the brain. How do you know?
Well, er, you just know.

It's like this. Say you get an inkling in a dream,
(maybe even a nightmarish one) that something about the
scenery or the actors or the script itself doesn't seem
real. You begin to doubt the monsters and their powers.

So by chance you turn and ask a co-dreamer. "Does all
this seem real?" He says "Well, hell, yes. Look at the
monsters. You better start running, fool". Then, severa
white-coated attendants race in. They question your
sanity, ridicule, cajole, even threaten you. You reach
reluctantly for the Kool-Aid when suddenly you wake
up. Then you know it was all a fraud.

How? You know because because experiencing a higher reality
gives you the perspective you needed to discern the truth.
You remember being awake and then falling asleep. And now
the shaming co-dreamer is gone. The white-coats have slinked
away too.

So, if the mystic repeatably has experiences inside, who
is to say he's delusional. Or your reality is genuine and
his isn't? If you're a zealot, you may try to convince the
poor, deluded one that it's all in his brain. But, the one
awake knows you're just prattling about the improbability
of something you have no experience of. You're wearing a
white-coat but it's smudged and worn

[Dungeness]

conveniently failing to mention that there is no demonstrable evidence for the soul, much less its purported immortality. Likewise, religions raise the concern about how we can be sure we're doing God's will, even though there's no evidence that God exists.

I agree the blind faith of religion is unsustainable.
So does the mystic.

So throw out ritual blind faith. Holy scriptures are
unverified tomes; God, dead as a doornail. The mystic
argues for an experiential approach. Believe only
what you have experienced inside by the concentration
of attention. Repeatedly experienced.

Arguably though what's experienced inside could still
be fake. But what you see out in the real world is
rather insubstantial too looking through a quantum
physics lens. Maybe they're both dream worlds created
by consciousness.

Surely though, what you're seeing in the light of day
is real and the airy-fairy shadowy dream realm is just
that- a fantasy generated in the brain. How do you know?
Well, er, you just know.

It's like this. Say you get an inkling in a dream,
(maybe even a nightmarish one) that something about the
scenery or the actors or the script itself doesn't seem
real. You begin to doubt the monsters and their powers.

So by chance you turn and ask a co-dreamer. "Does all
this seem real?" He says "Well, hell, yes. Look at the
monsters. You better start running, fool". Then, severa
white-coated attendants race in. They question your
sanity, ridicule, cajole, even threaten you. You reach
reluctantly for the Kool-Aid when suddenly you wake
up. Then you know it was all a fraud.

How? You know because because experiencing a higher reality
gives you the perspective you needed to discern the truth.
You remember being awake and then falling asleep. And now
the shaming co-dreamer is gone. The white-coats have slinked
away too.

So, if the mystic repeatably has experiences inside, who
is to say he's delusional. Or your reality is genuine and
his isn't? If you're a zealot, you may try to convince the
poor, deluded one that it's all in his brain. But, the one
awake knows you're just prattling about the improbability
of something you have no experience of. You're wearing a
white-coat but it's smudged and worn

[pooh bear]

Well expressed by Dungeness:

'I agree the blind faith of religion is unsustainable.
So does the mystic.

So throw out ritual blind faith. Holy scriptures are
unverified tomes; God, dead as a doornail. The mystic
argues for an experiential approach. Believe only
what you have experienced inside by the concentration
of attention. Repeatedly experienced.'

This is the nub of the matter - ritualistic and scriptural religion are what they are - a substitute for inner experience.

Dungeness also states:

'Arguably though what's experienced inside could still be fake'.

Initially, what is experienced through inner concentration is not fake. It is as real as what we experience in our physical lives - just a little unfamiliar. It is simply at a slightly elevated state of consciousness. It is all however part of duality and either of universal mind substance or individual mind projection in origin.

The core of mystic teachings is that all things experienced are given life by means of Sound Current. The objective is to differentiate between the attributes and the current that animates them. This is not possible to do in the initial stage of inner ascent. Mystics teach how to recognise the Sound Current and place the conscious attention in it. This is what awakens the mind from its identification with duality, with form and its attributes. This is the first major step forward. Until that happens, the intellect cannot cope with the information it has, or deal with new inner experiences it is having.

Anyone else who has done the work of taking the attention in, will verify this.

[vinny]

The basis of all reality is Atomic energy/Shabd, from where that energy comes no one knows. That energy can be accessed by going beyond mind. Only Sant-mat/Yoga offers a solution that confronts the diktats of mind. The solution is so powerful, that anyone can witness stopped mind within 15 seconds of holding breath. Problem with atheists is that their half-baked mind is unable to comprehend Atomic energy/Shabd vibrating since ages, so the solutions they offer are half-baked.
These Atheists are not worthy of sitting at the feet of any Physicist, forget about Saints. Always misguiding innocent people, more dangerous than Snakes, these Atheists are a threat to any civilized society.

[Spencer Tepper]

Hi Dungeness

I once had a dream where several lab coated attendants woke me up. I was in a modern, futuristic round building with several floors and an open round center. I could hear laughter and cries from others in their rooms, so dreaming. But the loudest shouts were those being woken up by the attendants, their dream lifetimes, merely a few hours of therapy, over.

I was shocked, also. The attendant at my bedside, with a compassionate expression, gently pushed my shoulder so that I lay back in bed.

And then I woke up, here again.

Talk about a Philip K. Dick moment!

[Dungeness]

Hi Pooh Bear and Spence- thanks for the clarity and follow-on.

P.S. I have vague memories of reading Philip K. as a teen but it
really needs a maturer audience. Reviewing his Wikipedia entry,
my favorite quote of his: "I experienced an invasion of my mind
by a transcendentally rational mind, as if I had been insane all my
life and suddenly I had become sane,:

[777]

Wow Vinny , that was clear
and that's only about the mind , behind the 96% dark energy/matter

Yes Dungeness

To take at hand now
About Brains collecting - assembling project for increasing IQ up to 500
at the vastness of a planet ( trillions of brains combined )
Theodore Sturgeon > fascinating and exciting

77