Our ‘reality’ is seamless and all encompassing.

It consists of what we are conscious of, but also flavoured by ‘the effects’ of what we are not directly conscious of.

It makes for a dynamic and reflexive experience.

We use our intellect and intuition to make models and these models are all still a part of our experience.

Models are ways of ordering and navigating reality, but the map should not be mistaken for the territory.

I am quite resistant to ideas of ‘truth’ and ‘ultimate truth’. Words mean different things to different people. I like the idea of ‘nestled worlds’, where, from a modelling point of view, it can easily be seen that one world is more ‘fundamental’ than the world it spawns, such as our world and a computer simulation, or our world and the world of dream. But, of course, we are still just wrestling with these ideas from within our own encompassing experience.

The ‘only’ power these ideas have over us is to affect how we act, think and speak!

Our current dominant line of inquiry, the scientific method, has shown us that ‘objectively’ our physical bodies are only able to perceive ‘incoming data’ from a very narrow band of possible data.

"Solution: assume instead that all experience is valid. And that if you find that the experience you had then was, as you see it now, an illusion, that does not invalidate your 'old' experience. It simply makes your perspective now different from your perspective then."

I am with you on this. The ‘earlier’ parts of a journey are not negated by the ‘later’ parts. The later parts, 'in fact', are reliant on and informed by the earlier parts.

All the best Johnny.