Reality, Hyperreality and Hyporeality

Picture taken from this site

When something (*) can exert an influence on me, and I can exert an influence on it, I call it real.

When something can exert an influence on me, and I cannot exert an influence on it, I call it hyperreal.

When something cannot exert an influence on me, and I can exert an influence on it, I call it hyporeal.

(*) Something could also mean someone.

Subjectivity of Dreams?

Picture taken from this sitethis site

The sentence life is (also) a dream does not close the gap between the subjectivity of dreams and the objectivity of waking life; it merely states that this realm is erroneously called waking life, because the real waking life is to find in “another place” (nevertheless, it essentially differs from all realms that could be called dreams).

From the psychological point of view, there is nothing terrifying in the sentence life is (also) a dream.

The idea that the gap between subjectivity of dreams and objectivity of waking life is only illusory, is truly terrifying; and I like this idea.


Ego and Paradoxes of Evaluating

Picture taken from this site

Every evaluating is an effect of ego, even the evaluating of ego itself.

The statement: the waking life is as real as dreamworlds is informative, as well as: ego is as real as dreamworlds.

Statements: the walking life is merely as real as dreamworlds, ego is merely as real as dreamworlds, are evaluative.

We should try to get rid of ego or shrink it, is a commandment stemming from ego.

Philosopher’s Crystal and Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker


Picture taken from this site

The throne room scene is astonishingly similar to that described in the epilogue of Philosopher’s Crystal (published in 2016).

Three protagonists who found their way into this chamber are suprisingly similar to protagonists of Philosopher’s Crystal (two of them being in identical familiar relationship in both plots).

How nice, so it seems that this motive is rather universal (I would not give more details in order not to spoil the movie).


Did Oneiric Personalism Contribute to Metaphysics?

Picture taken from this site

I have been working on my concept called oneiric personalism for almost ten years. Is it a valuable contribution to metaphysics? All I could claim in this regard is that I added a footnote to a statement expressed in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus:

” 5.641. There is therefore really a sense in which in philosophy we can talk of a non psychological I. The I occurs in philosophy through the fact that the “world is my world”.
The philosophical I is not the man, not the human body or the human soul of which psychology treats, but the metaphysical subject, the limit—not a part of the world.” Source

My footnote: the world, which I experience, is my world – just like dreamworlds, which I experience, are my dreamworlds. If you wish to understand deeper the sentence: “the world is my world”, take closer a look at your dreamworlds.

It should be pointed out that Wittgenstein fiercely opposed the idea that one could be conscious in her/his dream; at most one could dream that she/he is conscious. Two days before his demise he noted: “”But even if in such cases I can’t be mistaken, isn’t it possible that I am drugged?” If I am and if the drug has taken away my consciousness, then I am not now really talking and thinking. I cannot seriously suppose that I am at this moment dreaming. Someone who, dreaming, says “I am dreaming”, even if he speaks audibly in doing so, is no more right than if he said in his dream “it is raining”, while it was in fact raining. Even if his dream were actually connected with the noise of the rain.” Source