I’ve read quite a number of your posts today. Most have two things in common. First, they impress me with your ability to “hook” me. Second, they make me wish you satisfied better my initial interest. Reality is not out there; I get it. But do you have anything more to share? My intention is to be supportive, not critical. You are putting a lot of time and effort into this, with little or no community engagement. If reality is in here, why share posts with others? And if you want to engage others, maybe you need more substance in your posts. What exactly do you want us to do differently? Or do you simply want us to stop trying and just be? If so, perhaps you should model that behavior.
Thank you, Bruce. I’m taking this as it was offered, and it’s a good comment.
You say my posts hook you and then leave you unsatisfied. Both of those happened in you, while you were reading. The hook wasn’t in my sentences and the dissatisfaction wasn’t in my missing paragraphs. That isn’t a dodge. It’s the entire content of what I write, and it’s the one thing a post can’t hand you.
You say “Reality is not out there; I get it.” If it were something to get, you’d have it by now and there would be nothing left for me to write. It isn’t an idea. You can collect ideas. Seeing either happens or it doesn’t, and no amount of collecting makes it happen.
On substance: I think by substance you mean technique, something to do. I don’t offer any, on purpose. A technique is something you do to get a feeling, a state or a result. What I’m pointing at is what already makes every feeling, state and result you’ve ever had. I don’t know anything more substantial than that.
What do I want you to do differently? Nothing. I’m not asking you to stop trying and just be either, because that’s one more instruction. I’d like you to see. Seeing isn’t a behaviour, so there’s nothing for me to model.
Why share, and why keep going with little engagement? Because writing this is what I love doing, and the numbers were never where that came from. I suspect you know the question from the inside, writing as much as you do.
One more thing. Comments like this used to get under my skin. I would have questioned myself and the whole project. This morning I just enjoyed it, because I could see it’s an honest report from your experience, not a verdict on mine. That shift is the substance. It’s also the only thing I’ve ever written about.
Your publication is called Your Environment Always Wins. I’d say it has never once got in.
Thanks for your reply, Atmos. When I experience awe or love or true connection, it is because I have the capacity to respond in the manner that I do. It's possible that I might respond in exactly the same manner to an internal experience completely disconnected from any outside or (or reality). But the human experience is not one of sitting in the dark alone forever. We are connected to so many things. We interact with other humans, creatures, elements. As you know, I believe the environment we choose to occupy tremendously impacts the quality of our life, on the inside as well as the outside.
As someone who has never met me, you have no idea what has or hasn't got in. You can't - and shouldn't - judge the totality of my being based on a couple of social media comments. Maybe I'm a figment of your imagination. Maybe not.
It is not my intention to judge you. I simply perceive that someone who spent a few days making an excellent book trailer would like other people to read his book. Personally, I treasure frank, well-meaning feedback, so I have offered some to you.
Thanks again for seeing that I have simply shared my own experience. It's not right or wrong, it's simply a report from another angle.
That last line of mine was badly put, and I can see why it read as a verdict on you. It wasn’t about you at all. I meant that no environment has ever got inside anyone, you, me, or anybody else. It was a statement about how experience works, not about what has or hasn’t happened in your life. You’re right that I couldn’t know that, and I wasn’t claiming to.
It actually says the opposite of a judgment. If nothing outside can get in, then my comments can’t get into you either. That’s also why yours didn’t land on me as an attack.
On connection, we’re closer than it looks. Separate realities isn’t sitting alone in the dark. The awe, the love and the connection you describe are completely real, and they’re lived in you, where every connection has ever been felt. That isn’t less connection. It’s where connection happens.
Choose beautiful places. I do too. Where I’d differ is the word “impact”. The ocean doesn’t push awe into you. You meet it, and the awe is made in you. That’s why the same ocean can leave you flat on a bad day.
And you’re not a figment. You’re a real man in a real place. My experience of you is made in me, and your experience of me is made in you. That’s all I’ve been pointing at.
As for the book: yes, I’d love people to read it. Wanting that and being fine either way sit together quite comfortably.
I’ve read quite a number of your posts today. Most have two things in common. First, they impress me with your ability to “hook” me. Second, they make me wish you satisfied better my initial interest. Reality is not out there; I get it. But do you have anything more to share? My intention is to be supportive, not critical. You are putting a lot of time and effort into this, with little or no community engagement. If reality is in here, why share posts with others? And if you want to engage others, maybe you need more substance in your posts. What exactly do you want us to do differently? Or do you simply want us to stop trying and just be? If so, perhaps you should model that behavior.
PS I liked your book trailer.
🫶🏻
Thank you, Bruce. I’m taking this as it was offered, and it’s a good comment.
You say my posts hook you and then leave you unsatisfied. Both of those happened in you, while you were reading. The hook wasn’t in my sentences and the dissatisfaction wasn’t in my missing paragraphs. That isn’t a dodge. It’s the entire content of what I write, and it’s the one thing a post can’t hand you.
You say “Reality is not out there; I get it.” If it were something to get, you’d have it by now and there would be nothing left for me to write. It isn’t an idea. You can collect ideas. Seeing either happens or it doesn’t, and no amount of collecting makes it happen.
On substance: I think by substance you mean technique, something to do. I don’t offer any, on purpose. A technique is something you do to get a feeling, a state or a result. What I’m pointing at is what already makes every feeling, state and result you’ve ever had. I don’t know anything more substantial than that.
What do I want you to do differently? Nothing. I’m not asking you to stop trying and just be either, because that’s one more instruction. I’d like you to see. Seeing isn’t a behaviour, so there’s nothing for me to model.
Why share, and why keep going with little engagement? Because writing this is what I love doing, and the numbers were never where that came from. I suspect you know the question from the inside, writing as much as you do.
One more thing. Comments like this used to get under my skin. I would have questioned myself and the whole project. This morning I just enjoyed it, because I could see it’s an honest report from your experience, not a verdict on mine. That shift is the substance. It’s also the only thing I’ve ever written about.
Your publication is called Your Environment Always Wins. I’d say it has never once got in.
Thanks for your reply, Atmos. When I experience awe or love or true connection, it is because I have the capacity to respond in the manner that I do. It's possible that I might respond in exactly the same manner to an internal experience completely disconnected from any outside or (or reality). But the human experience is not one of sitting in the dark alone forever. We are connected to so many things. We interact with other humans, creatures, elements. As you know, I believe the environment we choose to occupy tremendously impacts the quality of our life, on the inside as well as the outside.
As someone who has never met me, you have no idea what has or hasn't got in. You can't - and shouldn't - judge the totality of my being based on a couple of social media comments. Maybe I'm a figment of your imagination. Maybe not.
It is not my intention to judge you. I simply perceive that someone who spent a few days making an excellent book trailer would like other people to read his book. Personally, I treasure frank, well-meaning feedback, so I have offered some to you.
Thanks again for seeing that I have simply shared my own experience. It's not right or wrong, it's simply a report from another angle.
Thanks, Bruce. I’m glad you came back.
That last line of mine was badly put, and I can see why it read as a verdict on you. It wasn’t about you at all. I meant that no environment has ever got inside anyone, you, me, or anybody else. It was a statement about how experience works, not about what has or hasn’t happened in your life. You’re right that I couldn’t know that, and I wasn’t claiming to.
It actually says the opposite of a judgment. If nothing outside can get in, then my comments can’t get into you either. That’s also why yours didn’t land on me as an attack.
On connection, we’re closer than it looks. Separate realities isn’t sitting alone in the dark. The awe, the love and the connection you describe are completely real, and they’re lived in you, where every connection has ever been felt. That isn’t less connection. It’s where connection happens.
Choose beautiful places. I do too. Where I’d differ is the word “impact”. The ocean doesn’t push awe into you. You meet it, and the awe is made in you. That’s why the same ocean can leave you flat on a bad day.
And you’re not a figment. You’re a real man in a real place. My experience of you is made in me, and your experience of me is made in you. That’s all I’ve been pointing at.
As for the book: yes, I’d love people to read it. Wanting that and being fine either way sit together quite comfortably.
Thank you for the frank feedback. I value it.