How much of your life seems autonomous? How much of your life experience seems to happen on it’s own?

A lot more than I previously thought. Science would say it all does. It’s a very popular view in the mainstream scientific thinking.

The more I notice, the less it seems to be me.

I feel less autonomous since I quit working in the public domains.

Trying to take control of it can be exhausting. That’s the problem, the trying, the directed effort outward, the attempt to tackle problems that you believe to have an independent existence, and to follow rules independent of your personal experience.

If the bull wants to buck you off, it will, then spear your ass. There are many things that lead up to what a bull wants. There have been special individuals who were remarkable for being able to peacefully interact with even the most fierce animals.

Sometimes I have the energy, but no motivation. Sometimes I have the motivation, but no energy… Like digging a hole in sand and trying to climb out as the sand slides back in.

You have those experiences because of where you started from. Everything that happens depends on where you started from. The process that leads to your observation of the world around you, at any moment, in every moment, only appears to be motivated by your experience. It appears that you are prompted to look at specific things, or listen for specific things, but this is an illusion. This pattern of attention getting experiences is your personal habit only, and another person will not react to that same environment in the same way you do, not because of some strange abstract set of physical laws, but simply because that person is a different person, has different habits. What you meet in any given space you enter is not the world. You have never met the world. You are the world. You meet yourself. This is why walking through a doorway can make you lose track of something you were intending.

I am the world, I am the children… You are all the children that came before you, yes. Even science is coming to support this. They believe that our brain structures itself according to the arbitrary context of it’s environment. This cannot be correct or experiences would be more universal. The lexicon of attention getting signals would be more communal if this is what governed the structure of the human brain.

Which is why it’s so helpful to go to an office to get work done. It’s much harder to work at home. There is no evidence to back that up. There is a measure of consensus in experience, but this seems to conform more to human social interaction than to concrete environmental stimuli.

I have found that I am greatly impacted by my environment. When I was choosing colleges, I wanted one with a pretty campus. I would offer that you are greatly impacted by your functional expectations rather than your environment. As neuroscience is even establishing, there is a huge amount of data about any given environment that you don’t react to and likely never will. What the environment seems like to you is more innate to you than anything factual about the environment.

So we would have the same mindset if we were on a sunny beach, or a forest with breezes and birds chirping, as we would in a prison cell? Each time you were in each of those situations. You have a personal view of what a prison cell is to you. For some people prison cells are associated with home, are calming, even create a sense of freedom. For some people a beach is anxiety provoking, would leave them feeling lost and threatened even if they couldn’t tell you specifically what upsets them.

Does music have an effect on us? Music is an effect in us, expressed by us, and interpreted or digested by others in ways to some degree unique to them.

What it seems like vs the factual explains how paralysis or not doesn’t impact the level of happiness? Yes. It’s all about associations, sympathies, and what creates associations, attention. That is attentions purpose. We become oriented. We come to understand where we are and what we are doing when we have filled in the blanks. Not in an understanding of the environment, but in our understanding of our own state, of what has happened to us, why our sensations and experiences have changed.

They even produce this in the lab in extreme cases and perhaps this will make my statements easier to accept. When a patients brain is stimulated, especially those regions that provoke an emotional response, they will automatically produce a reason why they experienced that reaction. If laughter was artificially induced, they will decide that something they saw or heard was funny or make up an amusing thought that supposedly was the reason for their laughter.

Now this just seems to reinforce that we have no control of ourselves, yes? Within the context of the physical model of reality, it’s true. There is no control of the self in a physical world. It isn’t possible.

So if no control then nothing to let go of either? Yes, but we are not in a physical world. We are in a world of information and all information is structured by the context of attention. The very first part of any sentence serves to call upon the attention, and there is not a single attention getting signal, there are many.

Hello. That’s one, yes. Huh is a universal word. Literally it arose in every language, across the entire planet independently of every other instance, and it serves to indicate that something has caught our attention, even just something in the space around us. Huh, the ultimate observation. It’s not a question though we use it that way. Huh? It’s an input prompt. Functionally we use it to indicate that we are ready to input something new based on what we see or hear.

Like a blinking cursor. Yes, or to indicate we are requiring new input from another person.

Though it can come off as either dumb or sarcastic. To my experience the only dumb response is non response, non communication. That was, and I feel still, is the definition of dumb.

Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.

Travis Saunders
Dragon Intuitive
~science,mysticism,spirituality~