People in the "conspiracy" sector tend to expose themselves to all sorts of theories about our root reality true nature, the accidental (or divinely ironic) state of our world.
If you wish to participate, i'd like to hear a recap of where (y)our minds are at. Probabilistically, i think the stage where there are 'certainties' has been mostly surpassed by most of the remaining crowd. But if you are 'certain' sure speak your mind.
As i opened this thread, i will start. Keep in mind my own thoughts aren't the subject i seek, i would like everyone to state their own and not a comment on my own as a main topic. Although comment are welcome. Saddened to even have to state it, i will ignore comments from known shills/antinazi faggots who make it their whole act.
I feel we are in a nested reality, and that 'the soul' and its dimension of being is the root of our own being.
I'm agnostic to a degree, with which i mean i do sense a 'source' or 'god' but i think i cannot sense it clearly and directly, but there is a nature inside and outside which i doubt a false god could create in its most basic elements and themes, therefore i prefer to disregard 'god' directly and instead try to listen to 'nature' as clearly as i can as it is my preferred way back to my own root. I feel if there is a god, and he hid his own being in the very rules of what i am and of what is around me, then i should listen to that and it is the surest path to him and my(true)self rather than any ideology or theology or dogma about the very idea of a source we emanate from.
I think we are clearly in a poisoned society, not even just detached but actively inverting the idea of what's good and bad.
I think that while jews are the closest ethnos to the culprits they are not the main source, just the middlemen between entities who prey on humans but cannot act directly. This is not an excuse for them, it's just that there is more. They accepted to hold the gate for gain, they are to be held guilty on an ethnos level. And while i think it is surely the first step i don't think it might be the last aswell.
I think Giordano Bruno was the greatest philosopher, in that he went beyond the rules of our own world and peeked further, and saw infinite worlds and infinite universes, all part of the same game, part of another game yet. He wasn't worried no longer about the rules of our passing life and universe, but only with those of his own soul or authentic being.
Those all might change tomorrow, but it's been a while i'm there, who knows what will change again.
Where is your mind at? What do you think/feel at large?
My one certainty is Reality: it is certain not because I accord it as such but because it establishes itself as such (IMHO). When we get to details, I find them all in Jesus, but that's building on the foundation you ask about.
That means that any "certainty" I experience is sufficient and imperfect even as my experience evidences that Reality makes itself certain, completely and perfectly. In practice I can't know everything but I can know anything.
If by Soul you mean Reality and by our being you mean nested reality, then I say "certainly".
Mindfulness (listening) to the Self-Other nature is "certainly" our path.
Poisons and predators and middlemen exist. I cannot judge an ethnos unless it has formally constituted itself as a corporate middleman, not just because it's close to guilt.
The math of universe to multiverse to multigame was also played by Georg Cantor, who famously said there's more than one kind of infinity. I think he was wrong, the infinity is the same but there's more than one way to look at it. What we perceive of as being "beyond" this universe is still only mediated by our perception in this universe, and thus any complex description of the beyond ends up being isomorphic with another if it stays consistent. This principle is more often abused than used (cf. poisons).
What I would draw from that is that, even as no ideology, theology, dogma can be complete in my mind, Reality itself does constitute its own ideology, theology, dogma in itself. The whole point of dogmatic proposition should be as hypothesis and not as absolute in itself. Hypotheses can be refined, absolutes cannot. Many here have come to reject the principle of dogma because of its abuse as if absolute; but the reality is that we all use the principle of proposition every time we listen to Self and Other in nature, and the issue is whether we treat our perceived propositions as absolute or whether we abandon them to the absolute being the transcendent and not any subset we can experience as a whole.
So all the propositions made by you or anyone here are proposed as sufficient but imperfect, falsifiable and in-progress. Over time some of them get familiar and dependable enough that we can raise them to an inspired level and call them statements of truth, but even then they are still only reflections of Reality. I encourage you to let this natural process bubble truths up for you as they can keep rising forever. I tell everyone simply to pursue Truth at all costs.