Readers often ask me, “Steve, how do you know if the whole subjective reality belief system you describe is accurate? Do you really believe in this stuff? It just seems so… you know… out there.”
Behind such questions is usually an assumption that reality is in fact objective and that accuracy is an objective standard. But in order to appreciate the merits of subjective reality, it’s important to use a subjective standard for accuracy rather than trying to force it through an objective lens.
First, recognize that the subjective and objective belief systems are merely perspectives — they’re different ways of looking at the same data you perceive through your inner and outer senses. Consequently, they’re not in conflict with each other anymore than your eyesight and hearing are in conflict. To say, “I am a subjectivist,” or “I am an objectivist,” is in my opinion like saying, “I am a seer,” or “I am a listener,” but not both. There’s absolutely no reason you can’t consider your experiences through both lenses in parallel. It’s totally unnecessary to fix and equate your identity with a single perspective… not to mention extremely limiting.
When people ask me whether I truly believe in subjective reality, their question usually assumes that I must equate my identity with it in order to believe in it, which I don’t. To me the subjective perspective is no more or less valid than the objective one. I enable myself to perceive reality through both perspectives at once. And I do not “believe” in one at the cost of disbelieving the other. One is eyesight; the other is hearing. I take advantage of both. They’re both individually interesting, but the sum of both is greater than the parts.
What is accuracy?
The concept of accuracy depends on the lens through which it is viewed. In a general sense, accuracy means correctness, truth, and exactitude. However, this means different things depending on whether you view it through an objective or a subjective lens.
Objective accuracy
The objective version of accuracy is rooted in prediction. This lens assumes there’s an objective physical world out there, and consciousness is something that arises within it. Our objective accuracy is determined by the extent to which we can successfully predict what’s going to happen. This is essentially our standard for correct logic and good science – and more generally, for overall human intelligence. The more objectively accurate you are, the better you are at successfully predicting the future within one or more domains of knowledge. This probably sounds like common sense to you because it’s the belief system under which most people are raised today.
Subjective accuracy
The subjective version of accuracy is rooted in creation. This lens assumes that consciousness is the container in which objective reality occurs. This is not the limited consciousness of your own ego (that would be solipsism), but the larger God-consciousness or Source-level consciousness in which all of reality occurs. You naturally experience this level of consciousness when having a lucid dream — you know that you’re the dreamer and everything in the dream is taking place within your consciousness. Subjective reality recognizes that there’s no such thing as strictly objective perception without creation. To observe reality is to create it. Consequently, the more accurate your subjective beliefs are, the more empowered you become as a creator. Simply put, this means you get better at creating what you intend to create.
Subjective vs. objective accuracy
When I view reality through the objective lens, my standard of accuracy is how well I can predict what’s going to happen.
When I view reality through the subjective lens, my standard of accuracy is how well I can create what’s going to happen.
When I view reality through both lenses simultaneously, my standard of accuracy is an ongoing dance of prediction and creation. This is the place where logic meets intuition and where science meets art.
In any meaningful human endeavor, such as building a business, governing a country, or writing a song, prediction and creation are inseparable. To achieve peak accuracy and effectiveness requires that both channels are in sync. Intelligent prediction fuels creative decisions because you rely on accurate observations to decide what to create next. And creative output enhances predictive ability, since you’re intentionally setting new causes in motion, thereby actively contributing to the resulting effects.
译文:
精确的含义
读者经常问我，“Steve，你怎么知道你所表述的整个主观现实信仰系统就是准确无误的呢？你真的相信这些信息材料么？这些材料似乎有点.....怎么说呢......太直观了。”
在这些疑问的背后经常会存在一种“现实实际上是客观的而精确这个问题只是个客观标准”的假设。但是为了正确评价主观现实的价值，用主观标准来评价它而不是强制性的试图（用显微镜的物镜来）看它的外部特征是十分必要的。
首先，我们必须承认主观和客观的信仰体系仅仅只是观察问题的不同视角——他们是通过感知自身内在和外在的判断力在考虑相同事务时的不同途径。因此，与所见和所闻的矛盾相比他们彼此并不冲突。比方说,"我是主观主义者"或者“我是个客观主义者”在我看来就类似在说“我是一个看客（旁观者），”或“我是个听众，”但是仅仅指一方面。毫无疑问，你可以同时的用两种不同的角度来仔细考虑你的经历。完全没有必要在不全面的观点上去决定和调整你的认知感....更不用说走极端了。
当大家问我到底深信主观现实时，他们的询问一般都有个假设：为了去相信那些我不信的东西，我必须使我对这个问题的认知观和此问题同等对待。对我来说主观观点和客观观点都很有说服力。这是我自己能够马上从两个不同角度来认知现实。我不会以否认其他观点为代价而来证明某个观点是可信的。一个是看到的，那个是听到的。我们要把两者结合，综合分析。他们彼此是有趣的独立体，然而两者的结合却比独立时更有说服力。
精确的定义是什么？
精确的概念取决于看待它的角度。一般的意义上来说，精确意味着正确性，真实性和严谨性。然而，这又意味着不同的事物取决于你用主观的角度还是客观的角度去看待它。
客观精确度
精确度的客观看法主要来源于预测。这种认识假设那种客观的物质世界确实存在，意识也存在与其中。我们的客观精确性绝大程度上由我们能否成功预测将来会发生什么来决定。这是评价我们具备正确的逻辑和端正的科学观标准的必要条件---一般来说，针对于全人类的聪明才智。你具备的客观地精确性越强，你就能更好的利用各领域的知识去顺利的预测未来。这听起来像是常识因为这正是伴随着人类崛起而形成的信仰体系。
主观精确度
精确度的主观看法主要来源于创造。这种认识假设意识是客观现实发生的载体.这不是狭隘地说意识是自我所有的（那应该是唯我论），但是大量的神权意识或者本源阶层意识都是真实发生过的。在你拥有一个清晰的理想，当你自然地经历后这种意识水平后——你知道你是个空想家而且梦里发生的一切都是你的意识造成的。主观现实承认创造性绝对是和客观预测相辅相成的。遵守现实是通过创造而实现的。所以，你具备的主观地精确性越强，那会使你能够成为一个创造者。简单的说，这意味着你会在你创造打算创造的东西时，你会更上一层楼。
主观精确度和客观精确度的比较
当我站在客观的角度上看问题时，我对精确度的衡量标准是我对将要发生的事情的预测究竟有多准。
当我站在主观的角度上看问题时，我对精确度的衡量标准是我对将要发生的事情的创造力究竟有多强。
当我同时用这两种角度综合对待问题时，我对精确度的衡量标准是预测性和创造性的融会贯通。这将是逻辑性和直观意识的碰撞，科学和艺术的共鸣。
在那些富有意义的人类事业中，例如商务经营，管理国家，歌曲创作，预测性和创造性是密不可分的。为了达到精确度的最高点和令人满意的效果，我们需要双管齐下。智能预测引起创造性决策，因为你依靠精确性的观察值来进行下一步的创造性活动。同时，创造性的产出又增强了预测能力，既然你在提议中有意的开启了新的动机，那么由此产生的积极行动就会有助于结果的最终实现。