On Confidence on Mental Symmetry and how to be prepared for getting in the Matrix.

This is a presentation of my current experience gaining confidence on mental symmetry and what it made me in general to learn after that. When experiencing dominant confidence on mental symmetry, it is in some sense, emerging in the first phases of stage 3, or to be more motivated to be driven on stage 3 instead of stage 2. If you don't understand what I mean by stages, you can look at the sources of life section within my blog.

My confidence of mental symmetry was kind of sheer luck. I was lucky, to tell the truth, as I find this theory at a young age, around age of 15 or something, and I didn't had any care or interest or concept that the world could have even have a theory on how the personal works. So it was my first theory and I didn't had any experience of feeling having incompatible input from my previous theory because I didn't have a previous theory in the first place. However, even in that use case, it was a challenge to have enough confidence to believe this theory, because believing this theory suggests the theory itself that in order for you to believe it, you have to use confidence in the end (meta-theories are like looking at the mirror, there is no shortcuts to pass the mirror). So Lorin Friesen tried to associate with many different books with his own theory of mental symmetry in the past years, and as always, you should always have the doubt the person who is writing this research whether he selects those books he associates selectively and excludes other books, making exceptions of the theory. So without further ado, I did my own associations as well with many different books randomly, like an auditor does to check the accounting of a company's profile. I picked some books that where the main highlights on the library and read them. Not a lot of them astounded me, but no book had any flaws about mental symmetry. In particular, the book "executive paradox" and "black box thinking" where the best books that went through my list that boosted me the strongest confidence that the theory of mental symmetry is not fluke and it is the real thing. Along with many other experiences I associated with it which are analyzed through this blog, and along reading more excerpts from others and from the author of the book mental symmetry, I was kind of convinced that this is the best theory for the personal content has to offer. Again, I have to repeat myself, don't believe it directly, gain confidence to believe it, it takes a lot of time. I suggest it takes more time believing a theory than creating a product with a theory. I think it is more challenging for people that have existing theories of how the world works in their head.

I also have to tell gaining confidence comes at a big cost. It is no wonder gaining confidence on theories contains a lot of sacrifice on the physical, making people maintaining in their lowest of lows in the physical world (as in the classical parable, depending on the pace, you have to sacrifice the appropriate flesh (concrete) in order to get the appropriate magic (abstract)). I had to ignore relationships, even my health at times, and I am kind of paying the price now for not taking my health carefully, but I still have ample time to fix it. I don't know about genetics, but my father also did the same thing. He studied so much in the old days that he forgot to go to the potty for months. In a big picture about my overall experience between me and my dad, I cannot deny that a lot of his time I saw him facing the problems of gastronomical problems, having to stay at the toilet for hours to cleanse his system. There is a huge price to pay to sacrifice your physical self. However, there can be a lot of rewards gaining confidence on the abstract world. For instance, his end result on his full effort on studying so much ended him up to work as a nuclear engineer moving to different nuclear plants to every state in the United States every two years, gaining the title of being a chief engineer, and so on. I think my dad did a more energy efficient world, but I don't think he learned much about himself with science. And it is very speculative how he felt his life internally, as he ended up to have Parkinson disease, a disease no much of any of our generation of our family ever had.

Believing a theory through confidence and not directly is imperative, but don't spend too much time on it, but not so little either, as our time is anyways limited. Think of taking this part of belief as buying a land in the physical world where you will end up living in your rest of your life and give it to the grandchildren. Location is very important and you have to compare other locations to pick the best one. You have to research, associate, compare, in order to pick the best location because once you are in, you will never be able to check out. Some decisions are small and you can go over them and forget them, but some of them you only have one lifeline on where you want to end up to. However, buying a land is not the only element of life. There are other two elements that we should take into consideration: Building a house in the land and making a street for others to access the house. If we spend too much time on buying a land, we won't have time to do the other two. Let me tell you why the other two are important.

If you don't build a house, there is no evidence that you expressed your confidence in some way or not. You are kind of definitely saved "in some way", but if we take this as the ultimate way in terms of the categorical imperative by Immanuel Kant, we are not saving ourself, because how can I help myself if others don't help in the end? Helping our world thus is half of our purpose and not doing so makes us incomplete on aligning the path this simulation wants to go in the end. And since the simulation is the theory, then it is like we do not believe in the theory so much in the end. The main catalyst of the simulation is to reach us to our ultimate state. You wouldn't be gifted now without others gifting first in the first place, it is our duty to give back as well. We also know that we will only know better building a thing instead of observing a thing. At the same time, building a thing has chances to make a better version of the existing buildings. Our other natural human drive is marginal gains or automating a manual labor to become a scarce resource. So if you have ample time and have an existing house, you can build new houses or improve existing ones.

Due to our limit of time, our efforts should start on building only a small house using most of our strengths. Let others build the rest of the house, learn your limits and focus on your strengths. Now the type of houses we have can be of two types: objective and personal. The objective ones currently are almost in a platonic form and almost flawless while the personal one has no uniform direction, living in the same nightmares pre-scientific thought used to be for the challenges of the objective world.

Let me tell you one thing: I respect the objective world very much. However, my direction is to fill houses of personal world. I just can't imagine how many benefits the objective world would be without it. It made our life more convenient, eliminating most of our manual labor, much easier to catch errors earlier, and do the same things by using less or more efficient resources, as well immerse our imagination in things that we wouldn't possible have access to. However, the source of the source problem of many of silly mistakes and irrationality humans behave in all of those platforms (please read the book black box thinking to understand that) have not been solved and we can do something as a solution not only for that, but to have a better sense of understanding for our purpose of our life, of others, and to improve the quality of relationships we have with people. I have seen a lot of problems in my life: Bad management decisions, bad lifestyles, and misunderstandings my parents had. I also have seen through my software experience people not understanding how to manage properly the abstract world of software, as well huge teams vanishing within a workplace in a very short amount of time. I don't mean that this could be prevented with mental symmetry, but they could be reduced and understood why people create not lost lasting mental networks instead of lasting ones and the only way for that to happen is to put those mental networks openly in the table. Given my experience in technology and my passion to make mental networks the opportunity to become explicit, my aim is to create the next social network that will attribute to that.

However, there can be so many directions with the same foundation of mental symmetry, so please don't be limited to what I just say, set your own personal path, it will be worthwhile as you know the most context of the situation on how it can fit with mental symmetry.

And last but not least, we have to create the streets of the road where anybody can gain access to that house. In other words, we have to create visibility. What is the point of building a house if nobody can get in there? That is why I also tell you to not waste all your time on building a house and instead building a small one, so you have time to make awareness that this house exists. As for the people you connect, don't focus in people where their time is oversaturate  or fully booked. Focus on people who have more time and a beginner's mindset attitude. Pick the fisher man and train them to become knights. Start this as early as possible, once you are already confident of your goals, cause you need to teach them that same confidence to them before they can even start on something. Another reason why you should build a house in incremental steps is due to the following: Learn from your environment how to adapt that idea steadily in fruition, the differentiator between the present world and your ultimate vision has extremity and facilitator thought would not let that to pass through, requiring for you to instead to break the big chunk into small pieces. Timing into specific steps of action instead one single action is of essence.

Now if you read this and have read and followed my blogs, understand my confidence, trying or achieved to get the same confidence as me, then we all have to grasp the following about mental symmetry: How mental symmetry works is like a mental network. It is incompatible with the present world cause it overlaps with another paradigm we currently live. So in the end we may just believe it and engage that mental network to be "on" privately. But then we kill it when we come to reality and are forced to live in the current paradigm in order to survive and make connections with society. It becomes an "on & off" switch and it is not a very fun way to live life with such a theory that always becomes incompatible. However, we have to realize that the current paradigm is limited, aiming to suggest that living has no main purpose and assumes it represents the correct paradigm. How can it be the correct paradigm when we set exceptions on the economic system or accept paradoxes as a natural thing of life in contrast with the scientific community where if the paradigm had those type of characteristics, it would have addressed as a violation of reality and we instead had to adjust to a better paradigm than the one we instead have.

Do we set robots or machine learning to have no purpose at all? To not go from point A to point B? What if after we die we expect to be at point B in order to pass the simulation? Isn't it the same way we treat our creations of our simulated environment? To have a purpose? If after death, we don't reach it, can we reach to such point B immediately, without the ability to practice, after we die? I leave that question up to you.

My passion is to bring mental symmetry to fruition. Many will treat it as seclusive religion or as a cult to anyone who personifies a theory. But aren't we just hypocrites that we say we don't personify a theory, when we actually do to a one we believe it has no main purpose in life? We actually are so reactive to a theory, as quoted by Lorin Friesen, people would say "You have wasted your life. You do not know how to think rationally. You need to stop what you are doing. Your theory deeply offends me". They will definitely do this either by their words, non-verbally, or through their actions. You should know that this is a reaction of a teacher mental network trying to hold to itself. So do you want to believe in a theory that implies that there is not any real strategical purpose in this world? For I do not. I believe in a world of order and things making sense instead of believing we are in full control from the fate of the environment. Mental symmetry is already a battle lost when we are enforced to live in a world with the current paradigm, as we have to take care for our well being and survival. The mental network immediately decays and it doesn't emit the light when we go back in reality living in the current paradigm. Don't expect hope of any change by using still the same environment as it is, yet don't forget it is possible to light it eternally if you change the existing environment first. Mental symmetry is living in the darkness in the same way as science lived too once. Have instead hope to create this mental symmetry even if it doesn't emit light now from an implicit thing to an explicit thing for that is and that is the only way it can emit its light. My project, the next social network will aim to tackle that, how far I can reach depends on how many I can connect and help me on this idea.

We all have to follow the same path of confidence as I did and the less your mind has a beginner mindset and the less you are passionate to approach it, the longer time it will take to believe it. There is no shortcuts to this, it is a long path to take. Once you are in, you are more prepared to live in the matrix. Take your time strategically what you can do on the above (land, house, street) with balance. You shouldn't be frustrated, as I was frustrated too, but having this process as a strategy at least means your character did its best based on the situation, and as long you don't forget daily your purpose, you have high chances to understand the whole purpose of this simulation. If you hold this, the rest of the context of the life will be straightforward on how to go.  

Lets not be just brilliant only objectively, but brilliant also personally.