Beings of a 'common consciousness' should be able to read others' minds!

[Okoth David]

While it's intriguing, the concept of reading minds raises ethical considerations, such as privacy and individual autonomy. Balancing such a connection with respect for personal boundaries would be crucial.

[Pranav Dewangan]

What you are describing sounds more like intuition or gut feeling. Our brain can detect patterns of thoughts someone is thinking and it tries to predict what someone will say next. Shared consciousness is something that is not accessible unless we are in a meditative state. That is as far as I know. Carl Jung called it the Collective Unconscious. As the name implies, it's unconscious memory so we cannot access it in the conscious state. Unless we go very deep in meditation which is also called a state of altered consciousness, they are unavailable. Those memories are like cloud storage which we do not have a password for.

[Dani Elle Ele]

In my reflections, I often contemplate the profound idea that our physical bodies serve as a constraint to our shared consciousness. This perceived veil, shrouding the reasons for our incarnation and the destination beyond death, sparks intriguing thoughts about the evolution of our bodies. As humans have developed physical means of communication, I believe we are on a path to evolving the means to communicate through our shared consciousness.

[Ammirati Michael]

Being more social can lead to aggressive behavior, which shows that we often favor our own family over others around us.

[Vanessa Agu]

I agree that opening up our minds can be quite distressing, and it's something I personally don't feel the need to do.

[Nessa Vee]

One reason why people might lose their connection to understand each other's thoughts could be because they focus too much on material things. Our brains can recognize patterns in other people's thoughts and try to guess what they might say next.

[Agoms Collins]

In "In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All," Eckhart Aurelius Hughes suggests that beings of a 'common consciousness' transcend individual separateness, fostering deep empathy and understanding. This unity allows for intuitive connections, almost like reading minds, as shared struggles and experiences create a profound sense of mutual comprehension.

[Boring Pigeon]

The concept of a shared consciousness is fascinating. It raises profound questions about the nature of identity and reality. Is our sense of individuality merely an illusion created by our physical bodies and personal experiences? Or is there a deeper, interconnected level where we are all part of something greater? The ability to anticipate others' thoughts could be a glimpse into this shared consciousness, or simply a result of strong interpersonal bonds. Either way, it's a compelling exploration of the boundaries of self and other.

[Sushan]

Away from our physical differences, at the very core of our being, we definitely have a common consciousness as humans. We like to think we are diverse and so removed from each other but we essentially have similar thought processes, similar beliefs in different supreme beings, and similar feelings to many life situations. Even if we can't know the specifics of each other's thoughts, we have an idea of what goes on in people's heads in given situations.

You're absolutely right that, at a deeper level, we share more in common than we often realize. It’s interesting to think about how this "common consciousness" shapes our interactions, even if we don’t have the ability to literally read each other's minds. We often have a pretty good sense of what someone might be thinking or feeling in certain situations, which hints at that underlying connection you’re talking about.

But here’s a question: If we do share this common consciousness, why do you think we sometimes feel so disconnected from others? Do you think this shared understanding can be strengthened, or is it just something we tap into now and then?

[Sushan]

While it's intriguing, the concept of reading minds raises ethical considerations, such as privacy and individual autonomy. Balancing such a connection with respect for personal boundaries would be crucial.

The choice to share our thoughts and feelings is a fundamental part of what makes our interactions meaningful. Without the agency to decide what to share and what to keep private, much of the depth and complexity of our connections could be lost. Privacy and personal boundaries are crucial in maintaining the richness of human relationships, and any concept of shared consciousness must account for these elements. Balancing a deeper connection with respect for individual autonomy would be essential for preserving the meaningfulness of our interactions.

[Sushan]

What you are describing sounds more like intuition or gut feeling. Our brain can detect patterns of thoughts someone is thinking and it tries to predict what someone will say next. Shared consciousness is something that is not accessible unless we are in a meditative state. That is as far as I know. Carl Jung called it the Collective Unconscious. As the name implies, it's unconscious memory so we cannot access it in the conscious state. Unless we go very deep in meditation which is also called a state of altered consciousness, they are unavailable. Those memories are like cloud storage which we do not have a password for.

The idea that our brains can detect patterns and make predictions about others' thoughts seems quite plausible, especially considering how much of our communication relies on non-verbal cues and context.

As you mentioned, Jung's theory suggests that we share a reservoir of memories and ideas that influence our behaviors and perceptions, even if we aren't consciously aware of them. However, it's worth noting that while these unconscious elements might connect us on a deeper level, accessing them directly—such as through meditation—remains a highly personal and often elusive experience.

But this also raises the question: If we could somehow access this shared consciousness more readily, would it change how we interact with each other? Would it bring us closer together or create new challenges in communication and privacy?

[Sushan]

In my reflections, I often contemplate the profound idea that our physical bodies serve as a constraint to our shared consciousness. This perceived veil, shrouding the reasons for our incarnation and the destination beyond death, sparks intriguing thoughts about the evolution of our bodies. As humans have developed physical means of communication, I believe we are on a path to evolving the means to communicate through our shared consciousness.

It’s fascinating to consider how our physical forms might act as barriers to a deeper, more intrinsic form of communication. As we evolve, our means of communication might also evolve to tap into a shared consciousness, and this reminds me of the Neuralink project. We’re already seeing hints of this with how interconnected we’ve become through digital means—could it be that this is just a step toward something even more profound?

It also makes me wonder if there are ways we can start breaking down these barriers now, even on a small scale. Practices like meditation or mindfulness, which aim to quiet the physical mind, could be seen as steps toward accessing this shared consciousness more fully.

But this also raises questions about the implications of such a connection. If we were all more directly linked on a consciousness level, how would that impact our sense of individuality, privacy, or even conflict? What do you think—could we handle such a shift in how we connect with each other?

[Sushan]

Being more social can lead to aggressive behavior, which shows that we often favor our own family over others around us.

That’s an interesting point! It's true that our instinct to protect and prioritize our families can sometimes create tensions or even conflict with others. This is a fundamental part of human nature, where our social bonds can both unite and divide us.

However, it's one thing to protect and favor those closest to us, but we also have to navigate the broader social environment where cooperation with others is crucial.

If we had a stronger connection through a shared consciousness, could it help us move beyond these instinctive behaviors, or would it just amplify them?

[Sushan]

The idea of a "common consciousness" and its consequences for human life are examined in the text. Scott's consciousnesses at ages 26 and 36 are compared as two distinct bodies in spacetime, and the argument is made that while these consciousnesses are fundamentally one, they are not capable of reading each other's thoughts. In addition, the book explores panpsychism and the idea of "The Two Yous," arguing that consciousnesses are not actually separated by borders. A materialistic mindset could be the reason behind the breakup of the interconsciousness connection.

One possible explanation for the breakup of the inter-consciousness connection could be a materialistic perspective that keeps individuals from being able to feel it. Every person saves experiences from their physical bodies in a cloud memory, maintaining their own identity. Each consciousness's ideas and feelings are discernible after death; they are not combined into a single person. Certain adepts have the ability to access memories from the cloud through hypnosis or meditation.

Thank you for bringing up the concepts you’ve brought up from In It Together by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes. It’s intriguing to think about how materialistic perspectives might act as barriers, preventing us from fully accessing this shared consciousness.

What really caught my attention is your idea that our physical experiences are stored in a "cloud memory" and that certain people can access this through hypnosis or meditation. It’s almost like our consciousnesses are individual threads in a larger tapestry, each with its own story, yet all contributing to a bigger picture. The separation we feel might be more of an illusion, shaped by our materialistic worldview and the limitations of our physical senses.

If we could somehow overcome these barriers—whether through spiritual practice, altered states of consciousness, or even technological advancements—what would that mean for our sense of individuality? Would we still value our personal experiences and identities, or would we start to see them as less important compared to the collective consciousness?

[Sushan]

I agree that opening up our minds can be quite distressing, and it's something I personally don't feel the need to do.

I get where you're coming from. There's a vulnerability in exposing our thoughts and feelings that many of us aren't comfortable with, and it’s understandable to want to keep that part of ourselves private. It’s one thing to connect on a deeper level, but another entirely to lose that sense of individuality or have our personal boundaries blurred.

At the same time, I wonder if there could be a middle ground. Maybe it’s not about completely opening up or reading minds, but rather about being more attuned to others' emotions and perspectives. We could strengthen our connections without necessarily crossing into that more distressing territory of mind-reading. What do you think?