4:10 Such a fascinating topic! The way you explore the nature of dreams is truly thought-provoking. Loved the insights you shared. Keep up the great work!
I believe it was the philosopher Descartes who once stated that if we can dream real life situations than who’s to say that real life situations are not dreams themselves? This entire life could be nothing but a dream caused by mental projections of the mind. Making us believe that what’s in front of us is real when it actually isn’t. And this would soon lead to the mind body problem of dualism. How reality is actually made of two different properties: Mind and Body.
Depends on how you define "real". The two most fundamental categories of existence is that which is absolute, eternal and never changing (cause or Mind), and that which is relative, temporary and constantly changing (effect). From that perspective, dreams are not real.
I can confirm, Plato did not believe that "the realm of forms" "exists exists somewhere outside this physical world" in the sense that it's a location in a different realm with quantitative existences.
when you think it effect other's thinking then can you say that your thoughts are atom can you say that your feeling's are atom if not then this universe is not just atoms and space
So, by everything presented here, the answer is no. Epicurus could have believed anything he wanted, but believing a thing does not make it a fact. Human senses are not perfect, & our ability to perceive something in no way provides any "truth" of the thing. We can't see ultraviolet light, but bees can. Whose view of a flower is more true? Epicurus's interpretations of atoms is correct in one way only, that matter is composed of them. Nothing else he says has any relation to atoms as we understand them today. He didn't 'discover' atoms, merely proposed an idea which happens to have a superficial similarity to reality. We use Epicurus's word 'atom' today because it serves as a useful illustration, not because he had any actual understanding of them. There are no 'films' emanating from atoms, & therefore those films cannot be replicas of the atoms, let alone perfect. The notion of super-sensations just makes me laugh. So no, thinking of a god does not mean the god is real, dreaming of one doesn't make it real, etc. Dreams are not real & nothing here holds any water. Sorry, friend.
Umm, you do understand that if someone talks about something, it does not mean that they believe it, right? You wrote some good stuff here (and I appreciate the comment) so you probably understand that. At the end of the vid I pretty much say that exploring these ideas is just fun, I didn't say whether it's true or not. By the way Epicurus didn't invent the term "atom". The first to talk about them is Democritus. Epicurus just copied and edited his theory (In a slightly worst direction probably by the way). Do read about Democritus it's pretty cool! Thanks for the comment! :))
@@idelo767 The video is presented as an exploration of a question, 'are dreams real.' It then goes on to outline its reasoning, as laid out by Epicurus. While coming close a couple times, it never comes out & says "obviously these things are not true." There is no philosophical introspection here, only a just-so exposition of a fantastical idea. The video ends without having declared the notions false, which gives it the appearance that a case has been made that the answer to 'are dreams real' as 'true' by default. Saying "these ideas are way out there" is not the same as saying they are false. Looking at some other comments, some folks seem to be taking this way more seriously than it should. If I've missed some fundamental aspect of this video or your channel, I apologize, but to me it looks like just more woo nonsense.
Dreams are reality outside the timeline shift. So before or after in and out of body of the host soul. Renember we are here to guide you. Not kill you like the fake ass fools with no hearts sending armys when all it took was truth and honer
You deserve many more views!
Thank you for the comment!
sick video man, always cool to think of spun out stuff like this
Can't Agree more and thanks for the comment! :))
4:10 Such a fascinating topic! The way you explore the nature of dreams is truly thought-provoking. Loved the insights you shared. Keep up the great work!
Thanks a lot! :))
very high quality production
Thank you! :))
I believe it was the philosopher Descartes who once stated that if we can dream real life situations than who’s to say that real life situations are not dreams themselves? This entire life could be nothing but a dream caused by mental projections of the mind. Making us believe that what’s in front of us is real when it actually isn’t. And this would soon lead to the mind body problem of dualism. How reality is actually made of two different properties: Mind and Body.
Depends on how you define "real". The two most fundamental categories of existence is that which is absolute, eternal and never changing (cause or Mind), and that which is relative, temporary and constantly changing (effect). From that perspective, dreams are not real.
nice video!
Thank You very much! :))
I can confirm, Plato did not believe that "the realm of forms" "exists exists somewhere outside this physical world" in the sense that it's a location in a different realm with quantitative existences.
Thanks for the comment! :Dd
Dreams and death is there a link??
when you think it effect other's thinking then can you say that your thoughts are atom
can you say that your feeling's are atom
if not then this universe is not just atoms and space
one time i dreamed i was in a feces shoop
Really, the ONLY time? :Dd
So, by everything presented here, the answer is no. Epicurus could have believed anything he wanted, but believing a thing does not make it a fact. Human senses are not perfect, & our ability to perceive something in no way provides any "truth" of the thing. We can't see ultraviolet light, but bees can. Whose view of a flower is more true? Epicurus's interpretations of atoms is correct in one way only, that matter is composed of them. Nothing else he says has any relation to atoms as we understand them today. He didn't 'discover' atoms, merely proposed an idea which happens to have a superficial similarity to reality. We use Epicurus's word 'atom' today because it serves as a useful illustration, not because he had any actual understanding of them. There are no 'films' emanating from atoms, & therefore those films cannot be replicas of the atoms, let alone perfect. The notion of super-sensations just makes me laugh. So no, thinking of a god does not mean the god is real, dreaming of one doesn't make it real, etc. Dreams are not real & nothing here holds any water. Sorry, friend.
Umm, you do understand that if someone talks about something, it does not mean that they believe it, right? You wrote some good stuff here (and I appreciate the comment) so you probably understand that. At the end of the vid I pretty much say that exploring these ideas is just fun, I didn't say whether it's true or not. By the way Epicurus didn't invent the term "atom". The first to talk about them is Democritus. Epicurus just copied and edited his theory (In a slightly worst direction probably by the way). Do read about Democritus it's pretty cool! Thanks for the comment! :))
@@idelo767 The video is presented as an exploration of a question, 'are dreams real.' It then goes on to outline its reasoning, as laid out by Epicurus. While coming close a couple times, it never comes out & says "obviously these things are not true." There is no philosophical introspection here, only a just-so exposition of a fantastical idea. The video ends without having declared the notions false, which gives it the appearance that a case has been made that the answer to 'are dreams real' as 'true' by default. Saying "these ideas are way out there" is not the same as saying they are false. Looking at some other comments, some folks seem to be taking this way more seriously than it should. If I've missed some fundamental aspect of this video or your channel, I apologize, but to me it looks like just more woo nonsense.
Dreams are reality outside the timeline shift. So before or after in and out of body of the host soul. Renember we are here to guide you. Not kill you like the fake ass fools with no hearts sending armys when all it took was truth and honer
Interesting, where do you get the term 'time shift' and the second sentence from? Some author or did your thoughts?
dude ur talking about ppl who lived centryies ago about dreams so if it was true wouldnt one have proof