I Am Soul

[Navigator]

…Six years later, I was sleeping one night when I awoke. (*that is to say – I became consciously aware of my immediate surroundings)

I was in my bed, which face a room directly opposite, where my 3 year old son was sleeping.
This room was closed off from mine by a pair of glass doors.
I immediately noticed a strange blue electric-type of light which seemed to fill my sons room,
I thought this to be very strange and immediately thought to get up and investigate.
It was at this point that I relished I couldn’t move. It felt like something was holding me down.
As soon as I became aware of my predicament, I heard a deep low evil-sounding laugh which directed my attention to my left and at the end of the bed.
I used curtains as a partition between the bedroom and the lounge, and there between the end of the bed and the curtain was an apparition.

Now this entity was and still is unlike anything I have ever seen.

It was about 4 foot tall and had no hair. It was incredibly ancient looking, its whole face etched with deep, deep wrinkles.
Its skin was grey.

It wore an off white cloth that looked like a simple robe.
It had large very dark eyes – not human looking eyes, but shaped more like those eyes of the aliens known as ‘the Greys’, only smaller than is usually seen in common pictures of those aliens.

Its arms were crossed over one another, right over left. Its fingers were very long – half again as long as human fingers.

The animal part of me – my human instrument - was well freaked. I could feel every hair on my body raised in alarm and I believe that had my body not been paralyzed, I would have lost control and be screaming and climbing the walls trying to get away from this apparition.

However, while my body was freaking, my mind was very alert and due to my upbringing, I decided there and then that I was being visited by the Devil himself.

I tired to speak to this apparition, but my words came out slurred because I had no control of my body.

However, I was enraged by this intrusion and another aspect of my self was bravado of sorts. I had encountered this being before – I recognized the laugh, and the presence. The energy signature of this being I recognized from a previous encounter.
However, I had not up until this point, ever seen this being.

As I was trying to speak, I was full of some kind of righteous indignation for the un invited intrusion.

This spilled over into an animosity which I tried to verbalize. What I said to this being was.

“What do you want you ugly Bastrd – oh sorry, your not a bastrd…even YOU have a Father”

While I was ranting, the apparition floated toward me and as it did, its right arm stared to extend towards me with the intention of the hand being placed on my head.

This was more than I could take, and with every bit of effort to eascape the paralysis, I mustered strength to move, as I continued to say..

“You can leave…you can leave right NOW!”

On the word ‘NOW!” I sat up and put my face directly up to the entities face and as this happened, the entity disappeared AND my eyes opened.

*I immediately realized that my eyes had been closed the whole time. However, I also noticed that apart from the blue light and the entity now gone, the room was exactly the same in every other way.

I immediately got up to check on my son. He was sleeping soundly.

The very next night I was revisited, and had my first conscious OBE experience...

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

Well, here is my extraordinary experience: I was sitting in my bed listening to an Advaita Vedanta podcast (by Adyashanti), I had a hangover, I looked at my legs and didn’t recognize them as being mine; then I realized that I didn’t recognise them as being mine and started laughing in a sort of a bliss. Then I though about life and death and recognize that death was an impossibility; a really absurd though. I could not possibly die, not possible at all. After that, I had some really profound revelations about existence that were so obvious at the time, but later on I didn’t/can’t know how to explain them: there was simply a state of obviousness, but I cannot say what exactly was so obvious.

Later, I sat in the sun and started to drift away. I knew my eyes were closed but I could see everything in my surrounding in the brightest colours I could ever imagine. There was no self at all, no one to experience all this, only experiencing – pure experiencing. After a while (probably a few minutes later) I could see, sense, and feel, the self coming back, trying to be convincing about it having had the experience. But I knew that there wasn’t a self present at the moment of experience (I could exactly see how the sensation of self came back, desperately trying to make sense of things). It is probably the closest way of experiencing reality as such I have ever experienced, it was extraordinarily profound and real, everything was just more real than any other experience so far in my life.

 

[edge]

So very good you recognize there is a difference.
And let me add this.

The truth is very simple, and for everyone, no one has the patent on truth! Science is also for everyone, not just those who hold to a particular theory. It truly amazes me how much of what I will call Mainstream Science is unscientific and irrational. And when you disagree with MSS and one of its theories, they try to say you are disagreeing with science as a whole, not just a theory! How arrogant is it to claim to own science?

I wrote earlier in this thread how my girl friend stopped the sleep paralysis.
Each one of these is a diffrent form of awarness.
It can be induced by scientific means or by accident, or in a willful manner.
Sleep paralysis, OBE, NDE.
The scientific explanations of what they want you to believe, they are all one and the same and they are not.
Their way of nullifying the truth.
Please continue.

 

[Moochie]

Well, here is my extraordinary experience: I was sitting in my bed listening to an Advaita Vedanta podcast (by Adyashanti), I had a hangover, I looked at my legs and didn’t recognize them as being mine; then I realized that I didn’t recognise them as being mine and started laughing in a sort of a bliss. Then I though about life and death and recognize that death was an impossibility; a really absurd though. I could not possibly die, not possible at all. After that, I had some really profound revelations about existence that were so obvious at the time, but later on I didn’t/can’t know how to explain them: there was simply a state of obviousness, but I cannot say what exactly was so obvious.

Later, I sat in the sun and started to drift away. I knew my eyes were closed but I could see everything in my surrounding in the brightest colours I could ever imagine. There was no self at all, no one to experience all this, only experiencing – pure experiencing. After a while (probably a few minutes later) I could see, sense, and feel, the self coming back, trying to be convincing about it having had the experience. But I knew that there wasn’t a self present at the moment of experience (I could exactly see how the sensation of self came back, desperately trying to make sense of things). It is probably the closest way of experiencing reality as such I have ever experienced, it was extraordinarily profound and real, everything was just more real than any other experience so far in my life.

I've had people describe similar experiences after they'd taken certain drugs. It's supposedly possible to have this experience without the drugs. Either way, so what? It shows the brain can be affected by all kinds of things, as others have already pointed out. What it doesn't show is anything out of the ordinary, no matter what spin is chosen when describing such experiences.

M.

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

I've had people describe similar experiences after they'd taken certain drugs. It's supposedly possible to have this experience without the drugs. Either way, so what? It shows the brain can be affected by all kinds of things, as others have already pointed out. What it doesn't show is anything out of the ordinary, no matter what spin is chosen when describing such experiences.

M.

Indeed. There’s no necessity to leap towards weird interpretations and explanations about the world.

 

[Navigator]

Have you separated the experience from the self, or at least attempted to?
It is your last line that stands out for me regarding this experience. Well the last couple of lines.
It is probably the closest way of experiencing reality as such I have ever experienced,
this seems to contradict this:
There was no self at all, no one to experience all this, only experiencing – pure experiencing.
which seems to contradict this:
it was extraordinarily profound and real, everything was just more real than any other experience so far in my life.

(In My Life)

Your sharing of this experience seems to suggest that an experience was had in a way that the sense of self (how you think of yourself as being) recognized that an experience was had, and in that experience the sense of self was not having the experience.
When the experience was finished, the sense of self wanted to claim the experience as its own…?

After a while (probably a few minutes later) I could see, sense, and feel, the self coming back, trying to be convincing about it having had the experience.

…but your self knew that it had not experienced anything, because the particular experience excluded the sense of the self…

But I knew that there wasn’t a self present at the moment of experience

(in this statement the “I knew” you refer to is the self?)

(I could exactly see how the sensation of self came back, desperately trying to make sense of things).

So here was an experience that your sense of self knew had happened but IT was actually not a subjective witness to the experience, but may have been an objective witness, even though it did not experience the experience for (or as) its self?

What it doesn't show is anything out of the ordinary, no matter what spin is chosen when describing such experiences.

Certainly not even as you read of an experience and put your own unspoken spin to it

Indeed. There’s no necessity to leap towards weird interpretations and explanations about the world.

These are interesting interactions. Anything experienced for a first time, is ‘out of the ordinary’ for the one experiencing it.
Truly I agree, that there needn’t be cause for leaping to any type of interpretation, even as it may be, the experiences are weird (understandably due to the weird nature of the experiences as compared to normal everyday events) and certainly when describing such experiences there doesn’t need to be given with those descriptions any kind of explanatory commentary.

 

[Moochie]

Have you separated the experience from the self, or at least attempted to?
It is your last line that stands out for me regarding this experience. Well the last couple of lines.
It is probably the closest way of experiencing reality as such I have ever experienced,
this seems to contradict this:
There was no self at all, no one to experience all this, only experiencing – pure experiencing.
which seems to contradict this:
it was extraordinarily profound and real, everything was just more real than any other experience so far in my life.

(In My Life)

Your sharing of this experience seems to suggest that an experience was had in a way that the sense of self (how you think of yourself as being) recognized that an experience was had, and in that experience the sense of self was not having the experience.
When the experience was finished, the sense of self wanted to claim the experience as its own…?

After a while (probably a few minutes later) I could see, sense, and feel, the self coming back, trying to be convincing about it having had the experience.

…but your self knew that it had not experienced anything, because the particular experience excluded the sense of the self…

But I knew that there wasn’t a self present at the moment of experience

(in this statement the “I knew” you refer to is the self?)

(I could exactly see how the sensation of self came back, desperately trying to make sense of things).

So here was an experience that your sense of self knew had happened but IT was actually not a subjective witness to the experience, but may have been an objective witness, even though it did not experience the experience for (or as) its self?



Certainly not even as you read of an experience and put your own unspoken spin to it



These are interesting interactions. Anything experienced for a first time, is ‘out of the ordinary’ for the one experiencing it.
Truly I agree, that there needn’t be cause for leaping to any type of interpretation, even as it may be, the experiences are weird (understandably due to the weird nature of the experiences as compared to normal everyday events) and certainly when describing such experiences there doesn’t need to be given with those descriptions any kind of explanatory commentary.

This kind of experience can occur after a period of intense concentration, and as such, is really not that unusual.

M.

 

[Navigator]

This kind of experience can occur after a period of intense concentration, and as such, is really not that unusual.

M.

Will you share an example of your own in relation to this type of experience?

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

Have you separated the experience from the self, or at least attempted to?
It is your last line that stands out for me regarding this experience. Well the last couple of lines.
It is probably the closest way of experiencing reality as such I have ever experienced,
this seems to contradict this:
There was no self at all, no one to experience all this, only experiencing – pure experiencing.
which seems to contradict this:
it was extraordinarily profound and real, everything was just more real than any other experience so far in my life.

By ”closest way of experiencing reality” I mean a sort of euphemism by which I mean: with a minimum of interpretation or chatter/thoughts constantly reframing the experience in real time. Obviously everything we experience is as real as any other experience (although interpretations and meaning ascribed to them vary).

…but your self knew that it had not experienced anything, because the particular experience excluded the sense of the self…

This is how I interpret the self: the sensation of identity to an experience. Surely it was me having the experience, but within the experience there was no obvious sensation of identity, to whom that experience at that exact moment could have been ascribed to.

To me it’s rather obvious that I simply wasn’t aware of the usual sensation of self/identity. Ultimately, the self cannot be aware of anything (that’s just how we talk in everyday conversation), it is a process. When that process isn’t registering, then it feels like no-self.

 

[Moochie]

Will you share an example of your own in relation to this type of experience?

No.

M.

 

[Moochie]

By ”closest way of experiencing reality” I mean a sort of euphemism by which I mean: with a minimum of interpretation or chatter/thoughts constantly reframing the experience in real time. Obviously everything we experience is as real as any other experience (although interpretations and meaning ascribed to them vary).

This is how I interpret the self: the sensation of identity to an experience. Surely it was me having the experience, but within the experience there was no obvious sensation of identity, to whom that experience at that exact moment could have been ascribed to.

To me it’s rather obvious that I simply wasn’t aware of the usual sensation of self/identity. Ultimately, the self cannot be aware of anything (that’s just how we talk in everyday conversation), it is a process. When that process isn’t registering, then it feels like no-self.

Consider it a holiday from "self," because that is what it seems to be to me. I think that when it happens, it's probably necessary.

M.

 

[Navigator]

Consider it a holiday from "self," because that is what it seems to be to me. I think that when it happens, it's probably necessary.

Well this is one spin chosen to describe such experiences.
‘Probably a necessary holiday’
It is kind of wooish, but each to their own.

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

This kind of experience can occur after a period of intense concentration, and as such, is really not that unusual.

Intense concentration is a good description. Moreover, I suppose there could also be some similarities with sudden fearful situations; it’s not uncommon that people explain their experience as “time stood still” (perception of time changes), “it was like a movie”, “I don’t know what took over me”, “I just reacted without thinking about what could happen to me” etc. On the other hand, it doesn’t seem to be far away from a situation where you’re just being engulfed in an activity you really enjoy.

Consider it a holiday from "self," because that is what it seems to be to me. I think that when it happens, it's probably necessary.

The brain is an instrument that makes perception and experiencing possible (hard to tell the difference). Change the parameters of the instrument and you’ll have a different output (sometimes that can be confused as being a case of different input from the surrounding). Think how different the world would appear to us if we could directly perceive the whole frequency range of light, or how particles just passes through us, or how the boundaries between us and other stuff just isn’t as obvious as we commonly perceive. The properties of the world at large would not have changed, yet we would probably think it has – at least at first. Perhaps we would think we were teleported into another dimension or something?

That’s where scientific inquiry and critical thinking comes into play: we can still make pretty good evaluations about what’s taking place inside our heads and what takes place outside (although the difference must perhaps be abandoned at some level of inquiry anyway).

 

[Navigator]

By ”closest way of experiencing reality” I mean a sort of euphemism by which I mean: with a minimum of interpretation or chatter/thoughts constantly reframing the experience in real time. Obviously everything we experience is as real as any other experience (although interpretations and meaning ascribed to them vary).

So you were being courteous to the ‘self’ that you are which wanted to assign ‘this’ or ‘that’ to the experience it had - an experience devoid of self recognition?

This is how I interpret the self: the sensation of identity to an experience. Surely it was me having the experience, but within the experience there was no obvious sensation of identity, to whom that experience at that exact moment could have been ascribed to.

Self interpretation. Your sense of self had the experience which gave you (sense of self) no sense of self?
This is interesting. Like something which has shared an experience of self-less-ness with your self – but was that something so …alien… as to be recognized as being some other thing not of the self?
It was something (experience) but it seems to be an experience which took self into non self.
Obviously conscious of the experience but not as a self – an identity having the experience.
That something experienced, was a reality – but perhaps self was unable to express in any way, what that experience was.
So unable to relate it to anything that the self relates to, the self had no reference within itself to chatter or offer commentary on.
When the experience diminished, it was necessary for the self – which essentially had the experience – to at least TRY and explain the experience – but:

After a while (probably a few minutes later) I could see, sense, and feel, the self coming back, trying to be convincing about it having had the experience. But I knew that there wasn’t a self present at the moment of experience (I could exactly see how the sensation of self came back, desperately trying to make sense of things).

Twice you mention ‘self’ coming back, and I get the impression that it isn’t that ‘self’ went anywhere other than somewhere which negated its sense of its self.

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

Navigator…

…if the sensation of self is a process (or a collection of processes), then, the self as an entity exists only as a narrative figure in a particular plot. As I already explained, when you ultimately see it as a process, the confusion you try to build your case around disappears. Only because a particular set doesn’t register at a particular moment, does not mean other sets also fail to register. The self as an entity cannot go away and come back – but I can present it as such if it actually felt so in the narrative – because it’s not an entity in the first place; it only appears to be an entity on a superficial level of internal and external communication. In the same way as we use words to signify something, we use nouns like the self in order to make it easier to explain stuff. Ultimately they are abstractions, as you already know.

Perhaps I should have tried to be more specific in my original presentation of the experience; the fault is probably mine if there’s a misunderstanding.

 

[Navigator]

Wolf in the fable…

So you are by this definition – an abstract - a necessary abstract.
Necessary because, regardless of whether self is an entity or an abstract, you cannot be anything in this world without a sense of the self being real, rather than abstract.
Thus, in order to function in this world you have to make the abstract real – believe in it to the degree that you function as an individual participant within the matrix this abstract finds itself in, and not alone – for there are billions of other abstract selves doing just that.

Obviously the “IF” you began your paragraph with and the “THEN” of your conclusion must signify that you see your life within this matrix as a ‘character in a plot’ and in this way can remain kind of impersonal to that personality – don’t take it seriously even – it is a mere *blip of life in an otherwise empty book.

(*Your life – my life all life)

Talk of the devil and he will appear….

The ‘fault’ is also abstract.

Do you think that if artificial intelligence is made possible that it too one day might build an abstract self? There would have to be a need for it to do so.

It is fun to explore the possibility that brain creates self. First lifeless universe through accidental process creates complex (understatement) life forms and within those complex life form are brains, which in turn create (of necessity – mother of invention) senses of ‘selves’ which then develop ways of actually manipulating other selves or simply don’t even realize they are being manipulated…and together these selves as a whole, appear to realize that they are in an environment which not exactly friendly – quite abrasive in fact.
Unfortunately, the brain which created the sense of self (likely an automatic reflex) is unable to make the connection with this creation because it (self) is busy having a life and does not even realize it is not.

Self then makes up fables in order to make its life that much more bearable (explain the illogical process of creation without purpose) and in doing so, makes it that much easier to experience this existence now that the is purpose.

Over time, these fables become facts. A major reason for this has to do with the brain, which has amazing powers and can verify to the self, that the fables the self believes in are in fact TRUE, simply by creating sensual stimulation to which the self will respond favorably toward.

This way, the brain uses ITS abilities to manipulate the self it created.

Then again, this is not always the case. Sometimes the brain actually creates delusion which is NOT what the self wants, or goes against the beliefs of the self – intrudes and insinuates.

The self then reaches for its fable manuals (another trick brain creator developed for self) and find within the pages reason why something negative happened – of course, it was lupus in fibula – mortal enemy of all selves – destroyer of selves – tormentor of selves.

Oops – what is brain trying to accomplish. Not such a good idea creating selves that – which ever way it tries to manipulate the self, the self is unpredictable to the point where it cannot be controlled by the creator.

The self has a mind of its own.

But wait!

Are we (our selves) assuming that brain actually has a purpose? A vision? A particular place it wants to take humanity?

You know Wolf – it is fun examining what the creator brain is capable of in relation to the sense of self – however, there is also a convenient wall – so high you can’t get over it…only that abstract sense of self requires an answer to:

IF the brain creator is the cause of all experiences SELF endures, then WHY (any particular experience)

Then there is the other aspect of those individual experiences. Mine for example…WHY did creator brain spin a particular illusion for my abstract self to endure, and WHY do other unconnected selves have similar visuals.

This seems to denote a possible connection between individual brains.

Yes…I have read other abstracts selves explanations…you must have got up in your sleep and looked out the window without realizing it…You must have read about it or seen something regarding it and then you “subconscious” (woowoo) made a story up about it…oops nope – your creator brain did it all.

In a sense, a self could think of a brain as being rather a nasty piece of works -0 alien and manipulative without even reason or purpose other than it can so it does, because it is after all the creator…but how can it know or be blamed or chastised unless it was or had a sense of self anyway?

So low you can’t get under it….

 

[Navigator]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3581248#post3581248

….The very next night, I awoke* again, this time with the feeling of being held down by an invisible presence – sleep paralysis.
I tried to move my leg, hoping that this would wake my partner who was sleeping next to me, but to no avail.

The next thing that happened was that I felt two hands grab my wrists and I was pulled into an upright position
By that I mean, I was stiff as aboard, being unable to move at all while lying in bed, My wrists were grabbed and I was pulled upright. Essentially in the standing position…only not standing – I was floating (I felt a wee bobbing motion)

Then the invisible hands pushed my arms across eacn other over my chest area – right forearm over left forearm, in the same position I had seen the Ancient Grey Entities arms, the night before.

As soon as my arms had been crossed over, I was let go of.
The feeling was pleasant. I then wondered what to do next. (I was not fearful) I thought I would go into my sons room, and as I thought this, I started to float sideways over the bed, and when I reached the space where the side of the bed ended, I began to drift downwards to the floor. As my feet touched the floor, I immediately awoke, and was again lying in bed.

These two events, over the two nights changed my path completely. Changed a great deal about the way I thought and the things I believed.
It took years for me to understand what had happened, enough for me to enter into the next phase of my learning.

My next OBE (where I consciously remembered) happened at least 15 years later.

 

[Moochie]

Intense concentration is a good description. Moreover, I suppose there could also be some similarities with sudden fearful situations; it’s not uncommon that people explain their experience as “time stood still” (perception of time changes), “it was like a movie”, “I don’t know what took over me”, “I just reacted without thinking about what could happen to me” etc. On the other hand, it doesn’t seem to be far away from a situation where you’re just being engulfed in an activity you really enjoy.

The brain is an instrument that makes perception and experiencing possible (hard to tell the difference). Change the parameters of the instrument and you’ll have a different output (sometimes that can be confused as being a case of different input from the surrounding). Think how different the world would appear to us if we could directly perceive the whole frequency range of light, or how particles just passes through us, or how the boundaries between us and other stuff just isn’t as obvious as we commonly perceive. The properties of the world at large would not have changed, yet we would probably think it has – at least at first. Perhaps we would think we were teleported into another dimension or something?

That’s where scientific inquiry and critical thinking comes into play: we can still make pretty good evaluations about what’s taking place inside our heads and what takes place outside (although the difference must perhaps be abandoned at some level of inquiry anyway).

The experience, as you describe it, is reminiscent of a state apparently experienced by Buddhists while meditating. I'm not quite sure of what it's called, but the descriptions I've read seem very similar. The catch, though, if I remember correctly, is that Buddhists are meant to not make this state the be-all and end-all of their spiritual practice, i.e., doing so is almost a form of spiritual masturbation.

All very interesting, but not evidence for anything in particular.

M.

 

[RandFan]

The experience, as you describe it, is reminiscent of a state apparently experienced by Buddhists while meditating. I'm not quite sure of what it's called, but the descriptions I've read seem very similar. The catch, though, if I remember correctly, is that Buddhists are meant to not make this state the be-all and end-all of their spiritual practice, i.e., doing so is almost a form of spiritual masturbation.

All very interesting, but not evidence for anything in particular.

M.

Susan Blackmore had just such an experience and spent decades (I believe decades) trying to prove the metaphysical. She was a true believer to say the least.

No more. After all of that time she has become convinced it's all woo and she is passionate about that position. Not too many people have been so sincere, tireless and intellectually honest (committed to the scientific method) in such a pursuit.

 

[Navigator]

Regarding Susan Blackmore (Visual) “There is no stream of consciousness”

http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Articles/jcs02.htm

In this I am wondering if the same results will be forthcoming with persons who have the ability of that thing called ‘photographic memory’.
If those with this ability can note change, than the theory of their being no ‘stream of consciousness’ might be challengeable.

What this theory seems to focus on, is that human beings in general have a common disability to be attendant to what is going on around them. It would be better to teach ways and methods in which to improve the ability to remain sharp and focused on conscious awareness, as is pertains to each individual.

It may be also, that individual and collective belief systems (or personal preferences) actually prohibit the ability for individuals to remain constantly/consistently aware of the experience they are having at the time they are having it, or to hone up on their powers of unbiased recollection.
Also there is this mystery place called the subconscious which tends to be an abstract to describe something which in theory might exist as a sort of storehouse of actual experience (as a stream of unconsciousness.)

The conscious is not fully involved with the unconscious realm because if it was, the unconscious realm would cease to exist as that, because it would become the conscious realm.

The conscious is rather – concerned with its immediate, or more commonly, with its sense of self and the beliefs which give substance (purpose/reason) for it being a self.

The conscious is connected to the unconscious but that connection is prone to an impure recall, largely because of the conscious preoccupation with itself, as it sees itself, and its external reality, a reality which is viewed also in a way which is more for the convenience of that sense of self, than for the facts as presented.

In the case where the stranger stops another to ask for directions and the persons carrying the door walking between these two.
A switch is made by one of the persons carrying the door and the original person asking for directions.

Half the people who had been stopped and asked for directions did not even notice the person who had stopped them to ask for directions had actually swapped places and there was another person in place of the original.

This happens frequently in life, and indeed – such lack of attention to details is what magicians rely on in order to entertain. This is not to say that that a lack of attention to details is what makes magical tricks seem to be real, but it does help.
Why I mention the magician is to say that the experiment itself may have used certain tricks in order to come up with the desired result.

If this is the case, then the experiment has faults, and depends on distractions and the common reality that most people are not that good with the details of what is occurring.
For example, if those that swapped roles looked similar in appearance and wore similar clothing, it is less likely the differences would be noticed on a conscious level.
Bearing in mind that the person being asked for directions is quite likely preoccupied with a myriad of other things and this interruption to those things can be part of the reason why they did not notice the change.

(It is like when one drives from one town to another. One is not conscious of details of the whole journey because we tend to be able to drive – even safely – and think about a lot of other things spending a great deal of conscious ‘now’ time in thoughts about things that have already occurred.)

The person too is likely predisposed to politeness. A stranger has asked a question that is likely able to be answered, but the question concerns directions, and so naturally whatever the person was occupied with up to that time, has to be put to one side in order to deal with this unfolding distraction.

Therefore it is likely that the details of the person asking the question are not going to be the main focus attention of the person being asked.

Consciousness is involved within a stream of constant information but cannot deal with that stream as a whole, focusing on and able to recall every detail. What might best be asked then, is if there actually is a subconscious and if so, is this thing able to deal with the stream of information (experience store and recall) and can this information be retrieved by the conscious in detail without any interpretation being twisted to suit the beliefs of the conscious.

If so, then we all would have to reconsider what we imply when we say “I AM”.
It has been said that there are methods whereby information can be extracted from the memories of an individual, which are not consciously available to that person.