Acharya Prashant addresses a question about how an experience that is happening in front of someone can be considered false. He begins by identifying the questioner's premise—"If it is happening in front of me, how can it be false?"—as the very definition of ego. The ego operates on the logic, "Because I am saying it, how can it be wrong?" or "It is happening before me, so how can it be false?" The speaker explains that the ego is the ultimate arbiter of truth for itself. To understand the falsehood of experience, Acharya Prashant suggests observing the changing nature of experiences over time. He advises the questioner to sit in the same spot for five consecutive days and see how the experience changes. He uses the analogy of clouds: a single photograph makes a cloud seem permanent, but observing them over time reveals they are transient and not the ultimate truth. Similarly, one's thoughts about oneself change from age 5 to 15 to 25, and even day to day. The experiences of the past, which once felt so real, are now gone. This constant change demonstrates that experiences, and the experiencer itself, are false. The benefit of past experiences is that they show us that experiences are false. The search for Truth, he explains, is fundamentally a search for something that does not change, something that does not deceive. We seek Truth because we are hurt by the impermanent and the false. The definition of Truth is that which does not change. Consciousness seeks Truth because it gets hurt without it. He clarifies that we do not live in facts or objectivity, but in subjectivity and stories. For instance, a blister from a hot pan is a physical event, but the experience is a whole story woven around it, involving blame, misfortune, and exploitation. The mind uses facts as raw material to create stories to sustain itself. The speaker concludes by advising caution against the stories the mind creates and to practice self-inquiry by doubting one's own perceptions and beliefs.