I think of it more as co-creation. There really is a body distinct from other bodies. There really is a brain-mind with unique content and firsthand perspective. There really is a set of experiences this body-mind has had, continues to have. The ‘glue’ that holds these all together, that connects the dots, is memory-thought.
???
Right. What could be more radical than, that the actual truth is, that “you don’t exist”.
Where does the you stop (at your skin?) - what are you co-creating with?
The subjective past is me - so what? whats the big deal? Whats so special about this imaginary entity? - Are you aware that your memories are not dependant on what actually happened? They are not in line with reality.
What’s more - if we take away both your legs, an arm, an eye, one of your lungs and one hemisphere of your brain, you would still feel like a you. Probably with a completely different personality, set of beliefs and memories, but still believing that you are you.
However if we took away the oxygen, or the sun, or all the other people, or bacteria, how long would you still be able to co create the self?
PS - I’m not actually sure you could survive with only half a brain - but if we sever the connections between the two hemispheres, there would be two different yous inhabiting the same body.
That would definitely be huge! Do you think it’s true?
At the boundary of your body (skin) and your mind (first-person consciousness). Not 100%, but significantly, enough to feel and act like an actual division between self and other.
Nature, reality, all-that-is.
The bigness or smallness of the deal is in the mind of the beholder. I’ve heard convincing arguments for the triviality of the self and the momentousness of the self. I have a gut feeling that these are not so much opposites as different sides of the same coin.
I trust that “what someone here says” is consistent with what they believe to be true, no matter how untrue and self-serving that may be.
But what about your own thoughts? So much of it is opinion, snap judgment, conjecture, theory, suspicion, and so on, that if you trust it implicitly you’re bound to be confused, misled, and ultimately demoralized. Why not distrust all thought that isn’t self-evidently true and obviously necessary?
Because common sense isn’t that common.
The deeper I’ve gone into exploring “What’s really going on here?” the less sense “common sense” has made to me. I don’t know if this is a good thing or a bad thing. Common sense asks: “Is your Grand Quest making you happier, more passionate, kinder, more intelligent?” But, like I said, I don’t pay much attention to what it says anymore.
I’m afraid so…
I feel I exist in some way, I’m just not sure how!
‘Nothing will come of nothing’, in King Lear by Shakespeare
Give me something that supports this illusory ego and I will give you something, my friendship, my love…give me nothing and I will give you nothing and you will be my enemy.
The sense of ‘being’?
After reading the motive of present thread, I felt that I do not know the actual meaning of ‘art’ and ‘art of thinking’.
What is art? what is an art of thinking? Is there any relation between both of them? How art is related to our life?
If anyone is interested, please share some thoughts in this aspect. 
Dan,
If I give you nothing and you give me nothing and still I’ll become your enemy, this notion of ‘nothing’ is a fallacy or fake otherwise it wouldn’t produce an enemy, it seems to me.
Lear was insisting his daughter Cordelia shower him with words of adulation as his two other manipulative daughters had hypocritically done. His ego depended on ‘words’…without that false display of words, which she was unable to give, he would leave her ‘nothing’.
In this case “art” means skill or ability
The main skill is seeing what thoughts are - and thus not being its slave.
We feel that thoughts are a true description of reality (thus we are enslaved/deluded) - but they are just mental habits that arise due to previous thoughts. My interpretation of what is happening, affects and produces the next moment’s action, perception, interpretation, action, perception, interpretation etc on and on
The skill is in being free to drop the action/interpretation immediately if need be - drop it without any difficulty, knowing that you have not dropped anything precious or real.
Sometimes the sense of being itself. Sometimes the sense of me being.
Hi Mac,
I felt many times, reluctant inside for dropping or doing things in a given situation. I think, it requires a certain level understanding about ourselves and the situation to reach such a state.
Ex: Sometimes my past decisions would govern the present actions, even though the present situation is not suitable for such thing, yet I feel reluctant to change the decision.
Does such an activity related to “art”? What is the effect of outcome bias in the art of thinking?
Dan,
Whatever! Our very existence implies ‘something’. In this particular case, Cordelia didn’t meet his father’s expectations, that was ‘something’ that he couldn’t tolerate. On her part, because of her behaviour she would be disinherited, this 'nothing’that she would receive meant quite a lot, actually. So my point is words have a relative meaning and while we will exist we will always leave a mark, we cannot be ‘nothing’.