230328 How do I know I'm right?

When I make these recordings, I seem to sound like I know what I'm talking about. Obviously, if I'm talking about personal experience, I must. Because who else would know what I experience but me? I am the world's foremost expert on me, just as you are on you. But if I'm talking about a subject, an idea, something I've thought about, how on earth do I know that what I'm saying is correct? Why are those words coming out of my mouth in that way, in that order, about that thing when I haven't thought about what I'm going to say? I haven't written down and carefully constructed, edited, polished, and then read out loud so that this is what I actually think. What's coming out of my mouth is coming out unthought of, spontaneous, stream of consciousness. I don't know how to describe it. Even talking about talking, which is meta, standing above, looking down, and observing the process, is the same process. Where does it come from? Why am I sure? Why does it make sense? If there's no time, at least from my experience, to construct the thought pattern, the process, the argument, the idea, how can it come out as if it's fully formed? Where is it coming from? Subconscious. But what's creating it? It has to be conscious. It has structure, just like a dream, as I was talking about before. What we know of as consciousness seems to be vast, that we only have the slightest, we're at the tip, the top, and there's this huge amount of us underneath we call subconscious. But that is who we are. It's the bit at the top that projects whatever the process has taken place to produce. I'm channeling, you might say. I'm channeling myself, my subconscious, my ideas, my thoughts. But where is it coming from? Why is it clear, coherent? Why does it sometimes resonate with you? Why does it make you think? I haven't edited. I'm not going back, oh no, I haven't said that right, or no, I'm not sure that's what I really think. Let me just say that again. I never take anything out. I never put anything in. It is complete in itself. I'm not saying I've got it all figured out. I'm sure that there could be, would be many perspectives, many additional ideas that could be added, that would make it a more complete picture. But I can't add what I'm not aware of, what doesn't come, what I don't see, but somebody, if I'm having a conversation, somebody could say something that triggers me to add in ideas that might not have come out otherwise. Well, why didn't they come out until what was said was said? If I recognize the validity in another person's perspective, I must have already understood it. It must already be within me, otherwise it wouldn't make any sense to me. It would be nonsensical, just ideas that I hear, the words, but doesn't make any sense, like listening to a foreign language. No matter how articulate the person is, if I don't understand the language, I have no idea what they're talking about. So there's that part of it as well, the fact that I am expressing it in the language that I know. I only know one language that I can express things in, but we know that there are many people who speak multiple languages and can express articulately thoughts and ideas in a completely different tongue. But I only know myself as an English speaker. That is how I perceive, experience and express myself. There are people who are so fluent in other languages that they can think in those languages, they dream in those languages. It all makes sense to them just as it does to me in English. I think I can understand, I just can't really relate because I don't have another language I'm competent enough in to experience it that way. But when in Israel I spoke a little Hebrew and the beginnings of something that could be considered another language were forming, so I get it. But for me, English is the one I have mastered, the one I can speak fluently, coherently. I like the way words somehow represent what it is I'm experiencing, what I feel, what makes sense. Sometimes they can be a hindrance in the fact that they have to be said sequentially, linearly. It takes time to reveal certain things and time may not be my friend. Sometimes it makes more sense to be able to give it in one telepathically, just the whole thing is received and there's a sense of knowing without having gone through it linearly to do so. Generally, communication, for the most part, involves words, body language is important, facial expression, tone of voice, all of these things matter tremendously. But if I'm doing communication without words, it's a lot harder to get across complex, detailed ideas with just body language. And obviously, as you know, I make a lot of recordings. Do I like the sound of my own voice, as I have been accused of a number of times when I was a kid? Oh, he does like the sound of his own voice. I suppose I do like the sound of my voice and I also notice that sometimes it doesn't sound the same, that there is a difference in the way I speak, depending perhaps on the subject, on how I feel. I don't know. I notice it. I don't always comment on it, but I do notice it, especially if I listen, that sometimes the way I sound is more engaging. I feel like I am really getting it. Other times I might be more energetic, emotional, speak faster, and it isn't always as easy to listen to. It seems to make sense that there are pauses, both for reflection, complex or interesting ideas, if revealed too quickly, overwhelm. If there are moments of reflection, of pause, while thinking about what's been said isn't something I do when I'm listening, that in those pause moments I am just present, aware, not exactly waiting for more, but available for it, that I am hearing, I've heard what's been said, which has either felt, I felt connected to, resonated with, or not. I suppose I'd have to be to continue really. And then when more comes, especially after a period of silence, I realize that if I'm really listening, I'm also listening to the silence, that in fact there is silence between every word, every sentence, but even every word, even though it isn't always noticed, just like in music, if there wasn't silence it would just be one continuous noise. With the right silence, the right pause in music, we have a symphony, we have something wonderful. Same goes for speaking. Without pause, it all just merges into one thing, and I can be overwhelmed. Sometimes when I'm listening to someone who seems to be speaking without taking a breath, I have to stop, because it's just too much. A pause, the silence, can go on quite a while. Most people have no patience for it, because they're not listening to the silence. They don't understand the importance of the silence, and that in some ways it's as important as the words. To be able to listen without thinking, even if I'm hearing something that is really interesting, I don't have to stop and think about it. If I stop and think about it, I'm not listening anymore. So really I should stop the recording and think about it. I sometimes listen to an audiobook, and I might be browsing the internet at the same time. I come across something that I'm reading, how can I be reading and listening at the same time? I'm listening, but I'm also reading, which are creating words in my head, just like the thing I'm listening to. I realise I'm not focusing on either of them properly. It is possible to do it, but something must be lost, something is being overlooked. If it's important, if I'm really interested in something, then I give it full attention, not partial. I don't watch the television, I don't watch a film while reading a book. Some people do. I don't watch a film while having a conversation. Some people do. I don't listen to music while having a conversation. Not if I'm interested in the music per se. If it's in the background, it's not important, that's different. I'm not really listening to it, but I know it's there. But if I put something on to listen to, then I give it my full attention. If I can do so without thinking, without going off into memory, or future imagination, if I'm actually really present with things, that makes me feel very peaceful. Content. Music can do that. So can a film. If it's really interesting, if the performances are really good, then I'm not exactly lost in it. I know I'm watching a film, but whatever else is going on around me isn't noticed, because I'm really focusing on the thing that I'm interested in. And that seems to be really important. Really focusing. To be able to really focus. To not be distracted. To not be affected by external experience that isn't relevant. I would prefer to watch things in darkness, because that limits sensory input to the thing I'm actually watching. I don't need blue lights on to be distracted by external images that aren't relevant. If I'm listening to music, really listening, I want headphones in. I want isolation. Noise cancelling, if possible. But certainly passive attenuation of external input, so that I'm only listening to the thing I'm choosing to listen to. Being specific in what's observed or heard seems to make a massive difference. Many people never really do it that way. There's always many things going on at once. People are watching films while sending texts. Sending texts while driving. And for the most part it seems to work OK for them. Until it doesn't. We have laws that are supposed to discourage such things. Driving while texting is not a good idea, but people do it. Even driving while talking on the phone seems to be not a way to focus. When we watch drama, and it bothers me a lot when I see this, and someone is driving and they're talking to their passenger, they often look over far too long. Now that's because they're not actually driving. But in reality, if I'm talking to somebody while I'm driving, I'm never looking at them, ever. I don't have to. I don't take my eyes off the road for a second. I don't have to look over to make the point. The words will do that. And I'm driving, so I must keep my focus on the road, especially if I'm going fast. It's a real problem for me in drama when I see that thing take place where somebody has looked over to make their point, and three, four, five seconds has gone by and they haven't looked at the road once. It's terrible acting. Bad directing, I think. But it seems to happen a lot. And sometimes it happens in a ridiculous amount of time and I think this is just ridiculous. You know, and especially if you're driving in a busy urban area, anything could happen if you actually did that in real life. That's just one of my annoyances. I have to try to suspend disbelief when I see actors not looking at the road, that somehow they are in a... they're not in a car at all because they don't actually have to be concerned. They're not driving. They're in a low loader. It's being driven by another vehicle and they're just there to do the scene. But it bothers me because it takes me out of the scene. It makes me realise that I'm only watching a drama and I can't immerse myself as I might when I don't have that distraction. Just like if I'm watching actors round a dining table eating. If they eat properly, which is what you do when you've got your food, whether you're talking or not, I'm immersed. But when they just move the food around or they hold a tiny bit of lettuce on the fork, which is not how people eat, I realise that it's not real. The better actors know that. I understand why they do it because they may have to repeat the scene several times and if they keep eating they'll feel full and just won't want to eat anymore. But then I've also watched amazing actors who eat ravenously and it's so realistic and so normal that it makes the scene realer. Yes. There's a couple of things that, as an avid drama watcher, always stand out for me. Always. I've heard actors talk about this and the best ones understand that. If you have to have a scene where you're eating, eat. If you have to have a scene where you're driving, drive. Yes.