Philosophical Speculations

If meaning of something is translated as "Why does this 'something' even exist?" - I would postulate that this question can not be answered if the answerer is part of that 'something'. The answerer does not have enough context to know. This is different from conclusively saying this 'somet...

I will state what I understand. The observation you made about the cat's change in behaviour is real. It appears that change was caused by the interaction you had with the cat (we don't know - but seems likely) This would imply there is some ripple in the cat's consciousness from your interaction wi...

Yes, I am not suggesting that the dissociated process is not in fact a part of the universal consciousness. But postulating that a process like this can never behave like its true source as long as it is dissociated. Trying to understand if a dissociated form can create new dissociated forms at will...

Reproduction is not an example of this. We don't control exactly when the sperm and egg fuse to become conscious - when a new dissociative process actually begins.

Another framing for this might be

If you can't create something, you don't yet understand it.

Any thoughts?

Because if such a process could understand (or access) "truth" (universal consciousness) - it can translate that understanding (an experience) into other experiences - thereby creating new dissociative processes. So if a dissociative process can not give rise to new dissociate processes, i...