If there is no apple, why is it that when I see an apple, its color, smell, touch, etc., is clearer than if I imagined an apple?

It's a difficult question to answer, and it's one that I've been haunted by all the time.

It turned out later that this question did not need to be answered at all, because the question itself was a guess.

I noticed that when the character was imagining an apple, the information about the apple's color, smell, etc., was vague. And I noticed that when the character holds an apple, the color, smell, touch, and other information will be much richer.

That's what I'm aware of. So, if we assume that an apple exists, it is really good to explain the above perception. There is a real apple that is indeed able to satisfy the above state of awareness of content.

However, no matter how "well explained", no matter how "concise and clear", no matter how "reasonable", it cannot be changed that "there is a real apple" is just a guess. This is a hypothesis, and the nature of its speculation cannot be disproved in any way.

Then, using a hypothesis as the starting sentence of the question is as if it were a determined real condition. This way of asking questions is nonsense in itself, and anyone who tries to answer this kind of question has already admitted that assumption.

It's like Mario would ask, if I didn't see the princess being snatched by the Great Demon King, why did I go through the mountains and rivers to save the princess?

If there was no Big Bang, how did the universe come to be?

If all the technology is replaced by gods, it can explain a lot of things as well. The movement of any molecule and atom can be said to be controlled by God.

If there were no aliens, how could human science and technology develop so rapidly? Why did human civilization make such slow progress for thousands of years, and why did it develop by leaps and bounds if there was no external help?

There are many more questions that can be asked, and the premise of the question is a hypothesis, so there is no need to answer it at all. Seeing that hypothesis has destroyed the whole problem.

What I perceive is changing, but who knows how this change is caused? At one moment I perceive a partial body with a bedroom bed next to it, and the next moment I perceive a partial body with a bedroom door around it, can I claim that this body is walking from the bed to the door?

Of course, I wouldn't say that the body is in fact just trapped in an alien lab, because that's also speculation.

I don't know what these perceived contents are, but why do we have to know them? With all these years of knowledge, but the knowledge itself is the content of awareness, so how can we be sure that this knowledge is useful?

It seems that the character really wants to figure out these situations, but he doesn't really want to figure them out. Because when a character really tries to figure out what they're doing, they're going to go crazy, just like I did before. Maybe the level of madness is different, but it's certainly easy to see how the twists in your head are controlling you.

It doesn't take much knowledge and wisdom, it's just honesty.

It's not about believing that the apple isn't real, it's about stopping believing that the apple really exists, and about the connection between the perceived content of the picture. What's so difficult about that? What knowledge does it take? It's just being honest to the point of cruelty, just stopping believing.

It's ridiculous, why do you make claims about the content of the picture, why do you take the content of the picture for granted, and why do you take these explanations as true and never think about the hypothesis of these explanations?

If this feeling continues to deepen, then it is inevitable that he will not work hard to do anything for the role of Yuan Changwen, let alone do anything for the role of others in the picture that he is aware of.

Is it more ridiculous to try to gain praise for other people's characters on the screen?

What kind of being am I wandering around this world, and what is the reason why I can be aware of all this happening?

There is a problem with the metaphor of the actor, I always thought that I was just playing the role of Yuan Changwen, and then I acted too well and forgot that I was not the role of Yuan Changwen at all. The problem with this metaphor is to affirm that you are still a person, as if you have just forgotten something.

But in fact, I can't be sure what kind of existence I am, and no one knows what kind of "awareness" exists. However, the metaphor of the actor did help me get through the difficulties at some point before, and it did make me feel relaxed to kill.

A metaphor is a metaphor after all, and at some point, a metaphor can be used to effectively slash and kill. But then, the metaphor must be discarded and the attempt to use a metaphor from beginning to end is just another performance of fear.

Well, so many books, the Tao Te Ching, the Quran, the Bible, the Song of the World-Honored One, the parables in them are only useful at certain moments. Even the parables in the books that record the words and deeds of the Buddha are only useful to the minds of the people of the time.

I know that many people think that these books are sacrosanct, that they don't understand the metaphors in them, and that it's entirely their own problem. However, these books were written thousands of years ago, when people thought differently than they do now, so it is natural that certain parables were only noticeably touched by those of the time.

It doesn't seem ashamed to claim that you can't read it, but it's a little smug that you're a person who specializes in these books and doesn't just know how to make money. However, if these metaphors are declared meaningless, then many people will rebel through emotions.

It's as if these books will always be higher than me, as if I can never reach the heights of those books. In other words, even though you have surpassed these books, you have to doubt yourself because of these statements, or for the time being, believe that the books are still above you.

How did this ridiculous idea come about, and how did I get it?

Some people who have studied these books all their lives do not dare to say that they have surpassed them. I'm a half-ass, and I don't even read through the whole book, and I dare to claim that I have surpassed these books?

I don't know how many people have been wiped out by this theory! Has anyone considered the absurdity of this theory?

It's like a person who claims that he hasn't graduated from a driving school for decades, and you dare to claim that you've graduated after a few weeks of study?

The reason why we don't go beyond these books is because we don't know what they're talking about. Once the gaze is met, those deep contradictions dissipate.

Truth, that awareness is everything, and these books can only talk about these things.

If these books aren't about touching real words, they're just junk books.