Thanks u/Plemethrock
We can have a discussion on whether or not free will exists. Discuss if every action we do is already predetermined by how our brain is wired, with the environment around us being the inputs.
We can also have a discussion on whether or not humans have souls and analyze the evidence for and against us just being our bodies
(I made an error and had to repost, apologies)
I would contend that it is an immutable law that for “existence” to, well, exist, duality is a prerequisite. An existence without duality is effectively the Monad, or the Tao, or the undifferentiated potential of God “before” the creation of existence. It is effectively “the Godhead”.
From the 42nd verse of the Tao Te Ching:
Regarding your other point:
To be honest, I don’t follow. Let me propose a hypothetical based on your contention:
Is it not self-evident that a universe wherein a billion souls can be killed with nothing more than a whim would be counter productive to the notion of “existence is a classroom”? If you’re the teacher and your class goes from 1,000,000,000 souls on day one to 1 single psychopath on graduation day, haven’t you blatantly failed in the design of your class room?
One could contend it's an immutable law for existence how we experience it now, but that is with a perception shackled only with an understanding of a reality with all systems that keep it functioning in place. It's possible existence could never take another form, but that means there is some kind of universal limitation on how conscious beings could be created.
Ok so now let's get back into classroom metaphors. First, numerous times I have posited that each person could be within their own universe. This universe could split off from the "main" one every time a person is born and everyone can act exactly as they would otherwise, the only difference would be the main person's actions Now this person can be completely tested, as can all people, plus you still get the same "richness" since everything else is the same.
Though the fact that the supposition that if we're being tested we should have an even greater capacity for evil was taken to the extreme of, one should be able to wipe out all of humanity on a whim, without considering the already numerous times proposed Individual-focused realities, I'm not sure how much consideration this idea is being given.
Regardless, I would like to dig into your classroom analogy. It seems you consider dying to be going "out of the classroom". We live in a reality where billions have been aborted, millions of babies die prematurely or shortly after birth, and millions can be (and have been) vaporized in an instant using technology we already have. Is this materially different the "self-evidence" of counter-productivity to the "classroom"? Since you have considered death to be no longer being "in class" (by your own analogy), clearly the deaths of all these who have yet to live, or the vaporization of millions who had no idea what was coming should be considered a catastrophic failure. Again, by your own criteria. As an aside, the person who is wiping out a billion people with a thought may decide only to wipe out those over retirement age, surely given the dynamics of your classroom analogy that would actually be quite preferable to the situation in real life. They have all had the chance to learn. Yet you insist this is the most ideal form of reality that is possible out of all forms
If duality doesn’t exist, there is nothing “other than you”, there is nothing to be conscious of. An existence without duality is literally a featureless white expanse that goes on to infinity in all directions, and nothing else. As I said in my last comment - logically, an existence without duality is equivalent to the undifferentiated existence of God before the creation of existence. If you want to challenge that notion please feel free, but you need something more convincing than “you just lack imagination, God could just do X”.
Yeah dude….you brought us back to the topic…. I said it can be put aside as it’s simply “my best guess” and then you ended your reply with
So obviously I didn’t ignore you and I responded to it.
You propose a universe in which you can do anything with no “real consequences”. This already exists bro, it’s called “consuming fiction” and “your imagination”. You already can read a biography of Hitler and imagine what you would do in each situation. You already can go start a playthrough of StarWars Knights of the Old Republic and play as a mass murdering sith psychopath. God doesn’t need to redesign anything about the way the universe works for you to get everything you want out of existence. If you want to interact with NPCs, go boot up your xbox.
I think it’s self evident that interacting with other human souls would provide a richer experience and infinitely more personal growth than interacting with NPCs in a virtual sandbox, do you not?
Ok, I recommend you start with these two sources:
https://www.lawofone.info/s/1
https://www.lawofone.info/s/10
https://www.wanttoknow.info/secret_societies/hidden_hand_081018
I granted it might not be possible for duality not to exist but I'm aware of my own limitations in understanding that.
You have chosen to ignore a bunch of the questions posed, and reduced the idea of heightened ability to do evil in to "play video games bro!!!" This is not about wanting to do evil but is about examining your claim this is all a test. You're trying to throw little barbs in now, "oh do you not think interacting with people is better than NPCs in video games?" when those are not material to the discussion. So much of my post was ignored or intentionally misunderstood (I assume, since you seem intelligent enough to understand) I'm now convinced you're only trying to justify a position as opposed to debating it. If you can't answer the questions I've posed or engage with why the hypotheticals I've posed are wrong without tangential conversations about video game NPCs (which really does not address what was proposed in any way), I see no fruit coming from this conversation.
Your questions are answered in the links. It makes no sense for me to go hunt through them and copy and paste them when you can just read them at your own pace instead.
I thought my comment quite well addressed your “why is it this way and not some other way?!?” notions. What you see as a “dig” was in response to your complaint that I was ignoring your “why didn’t God just design a private universe for each soul?” line of thought and forcing my “existence is a classroom” notion onto you, neither of which were true.
A “private universe” is literally synonymous with “your imagination” champ. It already exists!