Dead, never thought that he would want to die so much, and did not think that death was a bad thing in the slightest.

Kill yourself, destroy the world.

When I think of the callback world, I always think of high-tech weapons or meteorite strikes on planets and the like.

It is not this kind of destruction at all, the word "world" is directly removed from cognition.

There is no world that is only aware of the content at this moment.

Content is not the key, awareness is.

This consciousness is not thinking, but that awareness, and it has nothing to do with whether the character of Yuan Changwen survives.

Truth is always there, thinking is just a picture element, and whether thinking knows the truth or not does not affect the existence of reality.

Even if the mind disappears, even if the character dies, the truth is still real.

It's not the mind that perceives that consciousness, but the content that that consciousness presents is all that is related to "the mind knows the truth."

None of me was thinking, not a single character was thinking, thinking was just a representation of the picture element, and there was no picture element of "thinking" at all, it was just a name that I forcibly distorted in order to understand.

There are no characters in reality, reality is everything, so reality can't see itself?

All that is realized is just to prove that there really is?

The mind looks a lot like consciousness, but it is not, the mind is just a picture element, and consciousness is the thing that holds these picture elements.

Just like a movie screen holds a movie screen, no matter what the picture element is, it doesn't affect the screen, and even the presence or absence of picture elements doesn't affect the screen.

It's not that the name of the real is consciousness, or that awareness, but I found a word to describe the real.

I use the word "consciousness" because "everything is just what is conscious" makes it easy for me to feel that all of this is happening inside and not outside.

I use the word "that awareness" just to distinguish the mind, just to remind myself that there is no one I am thinking.

That is, I can't be sure of what is true at all, only that "reality must exist", and what is really true?

I've chosen a few words to describe what these words represent, which is reality.

There must be one thing that wraps around these limitations, and that thing is the truth.

After removing all the unreal, that awareness is only vaguely there, and it is impossible to hold it in your hand and claim that it is true.

"Consciousness" and "awareness" should only be the effects of real manifestations, or rather, things that I can deduce with all my brains.

These words do not represent the truth, nor do they describe the whole picture of the truth.

There's something that's hearing the character talking, it's seeing what the character sees, and that's reality.

"I exist" is just an expression that there is a thing that carries all these limitations.

is the drama role on the stage, words, deeds and thinking are all just presented, what can not be admitted.

I have to grasp the role of Yuan Changwen, I have to think that the role of Yuan Changwen is unique and very important, and I have to think that the world and the characters are real.

I often remind myself not to get caught up in vocabulary, and the words "consciousness" and "awareness" are misleading me.

If I don't need to explain to others, I don't need to use any simple and concise words to make me look like a master.

What is Consciousness?

I don't know how the dictionary explains it, but consciousness here is something that "has an infinite enveloping limit, can hear all the sounds, can see all the images, and all the things of this dualistic world will be fed back there, and the whole picture element is transfigurated from that thing".

There are also many descriptive words that can be added, in order to prevent misleading and to make the expression clearer, but to explain the words in words, do we need to continue to explain those words that are used to explain?

Instead of describing what is real, it is better to directly describe what is not real, so that the rest is true.

The world is unreal, the ending has already been finalized in one sentence, and all the discussion is just the character's struggle for survival.

I'm afraid, whatever I grasp, it's just emotions grabbing.

Knowing that these are not true, but not allowing certain things to happen, they hold on to it and let themselves be feared.

There is a key problem, the so-called true and false, not the distorted understanding of the mind.

For example, "This table is square", this is true.

And, "This table is made of chocolate", this one is fake.

True, more want to describe something similar to the truth or falsehood of dreams, "whether everything in the dream is true or false", this is what reality wants to express.

I had a dream, is this dream real?

Same question, I see a square table here, but is this table real?

Or rather, is there really a table here?

It feels very subtle, and I don't know if I can express the difference between this "real" and the so-called "real and fake".

However, it doesn't matter, I can understand it myself.

The character always wants to think of himself as real, just as that awareness is real, and then everything in this world can be real, everything is real.

It's like believing that the dreamer is real, but always thinking that everything in the dream is also real.

The point is that I simply can't confirm the reality of objective things.

My sense of reality in the world is just a feeling, as if I was in a dream.

On the contrary, once the real existence of that awareness is confirmed, there is no place for any world-universe or anything like that.

It seems that "truth is everything" is not easy to convince itself, and the characters always think that it can all be real.

The table is real, the world is real, and the universe is real.

I felt like I was being pulled back into character, as if I couldn't prove that the world was fake, as if "these are all realized things" just belonged to some particular worldview.

It seems that the character struggles at the end, and once I can prove the falsity of the world, then the character will never survive again.

And if I can't prove the falsity of the world, then maybe I will never be able to kill it, and I can only be in this awkward position, an awkward position of believing and not believing.

As soon as I say, "I can't be sure of the truth of the world at all," then the twist in my mind says, "You can't be sure, can you prove to be false?"

And the inference that "reality is everything, consciousness is real, so consciousness is everything" does not seem to be enough to make the character die, consciousness is everything, then all things are just the content of consciousness, or rather, it is just the illusion of consciousness.

Do I need to find a new direction to prove the falsity of objective things?

It's just a procrastination, it's as simple as that, I don't need to convince the twist in my head, just destroy.

Genius one second to remember the address of this site:. Mobile version reading URL: m.