I agree with this idea that reality without a viewpoint doesn't make much sense (maybe it's not logically impossible, but our reality surely isn't like that), but I don't think an unconscious viewpoint can exist. Really, I would say having/being a viewpoint is precisely what consciousness is about. It's easy to think of reality as some space you can just freely float around (like your unity example), but that's not how we experience it. The only viewpoints we can be absolutely sure actually exist, are our own. Let's say we extrapolate to other conscious beings to avoid solipsism. This still severely constrains the pool of all known viewpoints, but what they have in common is this; their movement is always constrained to some body, which others percieve as matter. In my opinion this hints at the fact that matter is probably not merely some symmetry within how reality is observed. Since it correlates so well with where other viewpoints are (viewpoints are always located where matter appears to be), it makes sense to say that at least a subset of viewpoints appear as matter when viewed from the outside. I think this dissolves the idea that there is no object being observed. The reason I'm calling reality subjective rather than relative is because I think the fact we can perceive it rather accurately and that human viewpoints are mostly coherent is more the exception than the rule. Take the hallucination example; when you hallucinate an object, what is being observed? I think the only possible answer is that the "viewpoint" in your head is observing some other stuff in your head. Since brain activity during visual hallucinations is very similar to brain activity when viewing a "real" object, this is likely always the case! What our brain is actually doing is collecting massive amounts of information from the environment and constructing integrated experience based on it, which represents the macroscopic features of reality accurately, because that was evolutionarily favourable. This means that the accurate and coherent perception we experience is likely only inherent to sufficiently complex evolved systems. If other viewpoints exist, they probably perceive reality in a completely different way than we do, and for all we know, they could be completely incoherent. In short, my metaphysical stance is something like this: The only ontic thing is experience, which is concentrated into minds Reality is a plurality of interacting minds Observation is when one mind affects the experience of another Matter is what minds appear like from the outside Space isn't some backdrop, but instead emerges from the relationships between minds, specifically the strength of interaction between them

"But Kiwifarms also go after animal abusers" nazis like to rally behind stuff like that. I not only had the misfortune knowing nazis that raised funds for "r-t-rded children", but also a few kiwifarms user that were actual animal abusers themselves, except it was okay for them, because they understand fascism enough that they knew people higher up the rank ladder are hypocrites and they themselves want to be hypocrites (also they literally pull the "I draw you as the crying soyjak and myself as the gigachad" if you question them).

You definitely had to keep the cd player in a level spot in your car where it didn't bounce around a lot

Horsehead Sheeran?

Actually warm and moist

I'll check it out at work today

Isn't he in an episode? I mean, almost everyone famous is.

where in london is fartham located?

I bet if you used a Samsung photo app it would show all the details of the moon's surface.

It was incredibly cringeworthy

Yeah I guess it would be challenging to say the least to find a prostate on a seagull.

what is happening? is ed sheeran the new beans?

i've wondered if it's partially correct but missing important context, like how it turns out autistic people are actually generally really good at communicating with other autistic people. like what it feels like to me is that autistic people can be better at reading people, we just aren't born with a cheat sheet in our brains, so we first have to learn to identify things and then we can pattern recognition the shit out of it.

Good question. Thinking about it, I believe you can still smoke if you're eating outside at a restaurant.

Is this a hidden RyeIsBread reference? [image: c86e3263-f7f8-4484-8d26-1c70e6e7f9fb.jpeg]

Too afraid of being blamed for cultural appropriation.

You remind me

That's not a footpath, it's a clearing or a small road even. You can't see the footpaths in winter, they're about a foot wide if that. 30 meters "at best"? Nah bruv. Maybe in the summer for that specific place, but as there's a ton of birch there and such an open place, it's probably a photo from the edge of a clearing on the side of a field or something. You don't get birch in most of the forests, it's just pine, and pine doesn't really have branches on the low part of trees. So in a pine forest, you'd see way further. tips and tricks for surviving the coming collapse Teaching Finns how to fight in wintery forests? We've a saying for that; "älä yritä opettaa isääs nussimaa".