I appreciate your concern, but I’m confident in my perception and experiences. I understand that my situation might seem unusual, but my observations are consistent and real to me. If there’s a discrepancy in perception, it might be related to unique sensory or physiological aspects rather than hallucination. If needed, I can seek professional evaluation to ensure everything is aligned with my overall health.

And I have been.

Could you possibly explain how I’d be seeing that without seeing it. Without using things like psychosis and schizophrenia as that’s already been checked and disproven. Many times… 😂

Well that’s the issue I see colour on trees and stuff around but the sky is grey and clouds white.

I am doing a systemic experimentation since day one lol I’m between step 3&4&5

Then once they finish I can fully create step 6&7

But ykkk most ppl won’t even engage

An inherit bias because I can describe my own body? Otherwise I’m just going with whatever comes.

I mean you do realize the moon reflects some light? Though I’m not; I can see how that may break your idea of reality. Also there’s different light spectrums? You sure I’m not seeing a different spectrum.

Uhhhh science, any system of knowledge that is concerned with the physical world and its phenomena and that entails unbiased observations and systematic experimentation. In general, a science involves a pursuit of knowledge covering general truths or the operations of fundamental laws.

Yeah I was almost certain that wasn’t the definition but here!

Definition

That’s the thing I for sure am… Yesterday when I took this video that’s published here. I could clearly see the colour on the wall and even see and say how many tapestries are in storage or me describing the colour and pattern on blanket. Wait you should already know this because it was in the video. Though I will 100% bet you. You are unwilling to even hear.

I understand your perspective on night vision being related to psychology. However, night vision involves both biological and psychological aspects. Biologically, night vision relies on the function of the eyes, specifically the rod cells in the retina that detect low light levels. This physiological process is a key part of biology. On the other hand, how we perceive and interpret what we see in low light conditions involves cognitive processes, which is where psychology comes in. So, while the biological mechanisms are crucial for night vision, the way we experience and understand it also involves psychological factors.

I appreciate your input. To clarify, my perception of the night sky is light grey. I’m open to discussing the science behind these observations, but let’s keep the conversation respectful and focused. If there’s a specific point you’d like to discuss, I’m happy to engage with that.

Also I’m not gonna lie I have a hard time understanding things with biology and sometimes I wish I had some help because think of the things we could achieve. The scientific community helping me build ideas beyond our imagination.

Ohhh I never really thought of that. Though can I ask why? Isn’t human biology science? Is light waves science? I can understand the basic of what I am using crosses beyond what’s not science. Though what it is activating is.

I appreciate your feedback and understand where you’re coming from. However, I believe my manuscript does indeed engage with science and philosophy, though it might not be immediately apparent. Here’s how:

1. Scientific Exploration of Cognitive Evolution: The manuscript discusses how cognitive and emotional capacities evolved in humans, considering both biological and environmental factors. This is more than just an opinion; it’s an inquiry into the scientific reasons behind our unique development.
2. Philosophical Inquiry into Intelligence: By questioning whether our intelligence has become a double-edged sword and if our evolution has stalled, the manuscript engages in philosophical analysis. It’s not just stating opinions but probing the implications of our cognitive advancements and their impact on human progress.
3. Ethical Considerations of Technological Advancement: The discussion on whether we should become a creator race involves ethical and philosophical questions about responsibility and the impact of our technological capabilities. This is a reflection on the broader implications of our actions, grounded in both ethical theory and practical concerns.
4. Impact of Trauma on the Human Psyche: The text explores how trauma affects the brain and emotional regulation, merging scientific understanding with philosophical considerations about personal and societal growth.
5. Societal and Cultural Influences on Evolution: The manuscript addresses how societal values and structures influence human evolution, blending scientific insights into social dynamics with philosophical reflection on individualism versus collective well-being.

I strive to integrate scientific analysis with philosophical exploration throughout the manuscript, aiming to provide a comprehensive view of human evolution and its implications. If you have specific areas where you feel this integration is lacking, I’d be open to discussing those in more detail.

Science and Philosophy in Cognitive and Emotional Evolution:

• Quote: “Why did our cognitive and emotional capacities develop so uniquely? What purpose does this extraordinary consciousness serve, and why has no other species followed this path?” (Chapter 1)
• Explanation: This question dives into both the science of how our brains evolved and the philosophical ponderings about why our consciousness is so unique. It’s not just about the mechanics of evolution but also about the deeper meaning and implications of our mental development.

Philosophical Considerations of Intelligence:

• Quote: “Has our intelligence become a double-edged sword? Have we reached a point where our mental and emotional evolution has stalled due to the absence of existential threats that once spurred our progress?” (Chapter 2)
• Explanation: Here, we’re exploring the philosophical side of intelligence. It’s about questioning whether our smarts, which have allowed us to shape the world, might also be holding us back because we’ve lost the threats that used to drive our evolution.

Ethical Implications of Technological Advancement:

• Quote: “The central question is not merely whether we can become a creator race, but whether we should.”(Chapter 3)
• Explanation: This quote taps into the ethical debate about our technological power. It’s not just about what we can do, but whether we should. It’s a philosophical take on our responsibilities as we advance technologically.

The Impact of Trauma on the Human Psyche:

• Quote: “Trauma alters brain structure and function, particularly affecting areas related to stress response and emotional regulation.” (Chapter 6)
• Explanation: This part combines the science of how trauma affects the brain with the deeper questions of how these changes impact our emotional lives and personal growth. It’s about understanding both the biological and existential aspects of trauma.

Ethical Guidelines and Global Collaboration:

• Quote: “Developing comprehensive ethical guidelines and regulatory frameworks is crucial for guiding responsible use of advanced technologies.” (Chapter 7)
• Explanation: This reflects a philosophical approach to how we should handle our tech advancements. It’s about creating ethical guidelines to ensure we use our knowledge responsibly, which is as much a philosophical issue as it is a practical one.

Societal and Cultural Influences on Evolution:

• Quote: “Balancing individualism with collective well-being presents a key challenge. While individual rights have driven progress, they also contribute to social fragmentation.” (Chapter 8)
• Explanation: This discusses how our societal structures impact human evolution. It’s a blend of scientific understanding of social dynamics and philosophical reflection on how we balance personal freedom with collective needs.

deleted by creator

My words?

Haha, did my mention of consulting medical professionals make your comment seem irrelevant? Is that why you downvoted and remained silent? It looks like you’re just sticking to the status quo out of sheer ignorance.

To judge someone’s mental health based solely on their name and posts is both unfair and unprofessional. It’s disappointing that you’ve commented without even reading my manuscript, as this approach shows a lack of engagement and consideration. Your assumptions about my mental state are based on social norms and appearances which reflect a narrow perspective and undermine genuine discourse. As someone with a background in psychology and psychiatry, I find such judgments to be counterproductive and dismissive. I encourage you to read the manuscript before making further comments, as this will allow for a more informed and respectful discussion.

I have been in contact with psychiatrists and other medical professionals, who have provided valuable insights into my mental health. Despite the unconventional nature of my ideas, both my psychiatrist and medical team have affirmed that my medication is effective. My psychiatrist has ruled out schizophrenia and confirmed that I am not in a psychotic episode. Given this, I am confident that my mental health is being appropriately managed, and I am committed to continuing my treatment and consultations with my medical team.

Can you clarify why you believe this paper indicates that I need psychological help? I understand that the content may be unconventional or challenge existing norms, but the paper incorporates scientifically and psychologically supported concepts alongside visionary ideas.