JFC.

Now, now ... One it's Buddhist, two it's secular.

He is describing dissociation.

Who are you referring to with "he"?

The guy who babbles about his life for quite a bit as if it could possibly be of interest in the thing you posted. Around the 10 minute mark he is describing dissociation.

LOL ... Why the aggression bro?

Anyhow, yeah ... It does seem as though something was needed to allow the idea (no definite ontological being of "Chuck") to come through , so the whole drifting away scenario gets fabricated. I wouldn't agree that there was anything pathological though... Seems well enough integrated.

For the record, I don't think that this is the norm ... I think for the most part people integrate the idea of no-self or ego-death without "visions" or whatever.

I would also say that the use of "ego" in regard to these eastern philosophical things is a bad thing and confuses the issue.

Infants lack an ‘I’-thought, sense of self and others, ego, etc. They’re essentially in a state of emersion or oneness with reality, i.e., directly experiencing nondual reality. So it’s more of an undoing to get you back into that state than a doing. The basic idea is that the ego, ‘I’-thought or subject lacks substantial existence and cannot exist or persist on its own without an object. So if one can stop thinking “I am this,” “I am that,” “this is me, that is not me,” etc., the ego will not be able to connect with objects and cease to exist, leaving in its place the direct and immediate experience of nondual reality. In other words, since it’s the objectification of reality that gives rise to the ego, ergo, it’s the disobjectification of reality that kills the ego.

I actually thought it was going to be an interesting discussion. High expectations dashed upon the rocks of reality.

Dissociation isn't necessarily pathological. It is a useful skill to have. Apparently some people don't come naturally to it.

Many people simply realize that they can (with a bit of practice) just pay attention to what is going on passively and without emotion.

Many other people simply realize that they can control their state of consciousness to some extent.

Anyone who has ever drank a beer or fallen asleep or woken up or stood up too fast or read a good book or had sex (or or or) should realize that altered states of consciousness are mundane and part of normal every day life. Amusing and potentially enjoyable, but mundane.

Yeah, calling something that it "no-self" or "ego-death" or whatever is a bit dramatic.

Self-importance check
Charlatans selling books check
Math check
Eastern philosophy check
Existential bull**** check
Shrooms and acid check

Something is not of any physical substance at all if it only exists in your mind.

It's in the brain tissue, but as a representation. It is scattered around, but all there.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-space-digital

Hogan of Fermilab believes if we can look deep enough we would find a fuzzy hum which would imply the universe is digital. The complete article is contained in Best American Science writing and Nature writing 2013

Nice article.

It doesn't matter if things are real or not, if we can't actually tell the difference.

said every philosopher ever.

It matters because if we know its fake that opens up doors to possibly learn more about manipulating this artificial reality.

Just bec 'reality' may be entirely different than previously hypothesized does not make it artificial.

So if we're all just brains in a vat and a mad scientist is sending identical electrical impulses (identical to before we were brains in a vat) then that isn't a 'fake reality'?

I can see other possibilities then your scenario.

Sure, there's a plethora of examples in phil mind. I was simply giving one [and probably the most common].

woah

The brains in a vat just looks that 19th century. Sorry for bte then/than misspelling earlier. "in phil(=my) mind", lol.

It seems that you are using 'fake reality' to mean 'something other than our current understanding of reality.' If it turns out that our current understanding is way off and the real reality is super weird then that's just the way it is.

That seems reasonable, I was also trying to get at how do we know that we weren't put here a moment ago and our memories and current thoughts were planted into our heads [in a sense, and thus our reality is 'fake'].