>>136912
>The names are just symbolic representations
Which have definitions and different connotations and implications, so it's not all actually peanut butter. You'd have to wonder what all the sectarian and religious bickering was all about if everything is really just a symbolic representation of this one thing.
I did however find the idea of
>Humans who seek knowledge ultimately find that all knowledge is dependant upon sensory information
Compelling up to a point, until the moment I realized that sensory information was the mind interacting with itself fundamentally. Something being unreal because it is changing doesn't make much sense except as a mental gotcha and trap. You'd have to wonder if the stages of birth, childhood, and ultimately adulthood (and really death) are unreal because none is permanently the same. What the reference frame you're looking at? If you focus on only being alive, then it's only until the state of death that a person is alive. If looked at as merely existing, a person dies and is taken back to the earth, and still exists even if not exactly himself. The rising sun is the sun in a state of descending, a person born is a person dying, any action denotes it's ending. Things only look permanent if you take a broad and wide mindframe, else it is all illusory.
I think the fact that there is something can be taken as proof of something being there. Changing the definition of what something precisely is, looks to be your stance.
>you destroy your connection to the reality within you which is the source
After trying to engage in a purely rational state of mind for a couple of months I've realized that rationality is a proxy for a fundamentally destructive process of creation. It's essentially at the state of complete emptiness that all things can be allowed to exist, and rationality is the burning fire that makes way for that space.
The nihilistic, "there is nothing because I refuse to accept there is something" doesn't really allow you to do anything. Why even post on /fringe/? I don't think there's enough ground to claim that all deities are internal if there really are no deities. I also find it much more likely that you have a connection to these deities, rather than them literally being you. There is a separation, even if it's purely categorical. In my mind it's like claiming a piece of grass is really dirt, since they're both made of matter.