Xstream

Showing all content.

This stream auto-updates   

  1. Past hour
  2. Wait, what do you think you are doing here other than purely intellectualizing about it? You are not doing anything more than expressing your skeptical beliefs about it. Yeah and thats fine. But I am not as myopic and superficial as "X thing isnt true in my current experience right now, therefore X is definitely false". X might actually be false, but an appeal to my current experience is a super weak appeal.
  3. Go live with one of those guys for a week and see if they can actually function without sleep. Just a week. Again, I acknowledge that in some specific cases, one might go without food for quite some time. I have no problem with that, even though I find it unnecessary and dysfunctional. My concern is more with the claims about sleep and water.
  4. Right. See how long you can go without sleep. Don't actually do that, by the way.
  5. If your body is imaginary, then the idea that you could survive for years without water, food, or sleep is a massive hallucination.
  6. Die and come chat, then. The point that's being made is that the person is dead, and it is believed that they can function after death because they are perceived as "conscious" individuals. Your notion of openness is superficial and merely intellectual. I suggest your questioning should go the other way: what the fuck are the people who believe that up to? You don't even believe it in your experience. It's just a fancy philosophical diversion.

  7. Do You Feel Restored After Sleep?

    Carl-Richard replied to SimpleGuy's topic in Personal Development -- [Main]

    Are you overtraining? What's your exercise regimen? I noticed I had to cut back on some training last year because the volume and intensity was simply too much combined with all the other work I was doing (I noticed it by not waking up rested).
  8. If by "fantasy" you mean "I dont have good reason to entertain it or I dont have any good reason to think its true", thats fine. But if you want to say - "that thing is definitely false" - then I would ask for a supporting argument for that claim.

  9. Finished the LP course

    Jannes replied to Jannes's topic in Self-Actualization Journals

    I felt a bit emotionally unstable in the gym today and right now as well. Not sure why. Maybe because I lowered the dose. Or maybe because I am not in my routine anymore.
  10. Today

  11. Finished the LP course

    Jannes replied to Jannes's topic in Self-Actualization Journals

    Well for one its simply the adhd mind in its natural state, it cant regulate that easily, intensity and creativity in expression is natural. So in a way its like breathing.
  12. Yesterday
  13. @Leo Gura Thats not true. Here is a source for personal income tax in france: https://taxsummaries.pwc.com/france/individual/taxes-on-personal-income. I think alot of americans dont understand how taxes work in alot european countries, yes there high top tax for the highest earners but no where near 60% lol. Here is an example from france: If you make EUR 60'000 a year living in the region of Île-de-France you will be taxed EUR 16'449. That means that your net pay will be EUR 43'551 per year or EUR 3'629.25 per month. Your average tax rate is 27.4%. Here you can check it out: https://www.service-public.gouv.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F1419?lang=en
  14. Once you have different notions of impossible, you can make more precise claims like "okay, I say that x thing is bullshit , and by bullshit I mean it violates the law of biology - and by that I mean the biology given our current scientific understanding) But I dont even think that in most cases one can even spell out the nomological violation, its just some super unexpected thing that is probably even compatible with your current understanding of nomological laws.

  15. Finished the LP course

    Jannes replied to Jannes's topic in Self-Actualization Journals

    I am running around my room again going through intense acting scenes. Wanting to actually open myself enough to really go through them. Maybe with a microdose. I want to do this intense acting until I black out. Why do I have this desire or romanticizing of it so badly?
  16. RIP GRACE 🙏🏼🦋❤️‍🩹

  17. Do You Feel Restored After Sleep?

    Elliott replied to SimpleGuy's topic in Personal Development -- [Main]

    You sound way too sedentary, i know my body would feel like crap, and get bad sleep. Ever try hot yoga?
  18. You need to differentiate between different notions of impossible. You can have logical , nomological, metaphysical impossibility. Logical impossibility would be something generally that would violate the laws of logic or generally things that would actually entail a contradiction. Metaphysical impossibility is more blurry and more complicated. Nomological impossibility would be things that would violate the laws of nature. The math example is logically impossible, but when it comes to nomological laws (anything science related) there are a lot of weird things that are logically possible that you dont even want to entertain and you dont even have the capacity to entertain and at the same time nomologically impossible (where it would violate some scientific law) You can say that we shouldnt entertain all logically possible things ,and we should only focus on the nomologically possible things and thats fine, but your sense about what is nomologically possible is grounded in your current understanding of the Universe and all of that is subject to be wrong. Almost all of that shit is based on inductive reasoning that is super subject to be wrong - just take a look at how many things we adjusted in the 20 and 21st century about our understanding of science and the Universe. You can also think about it this way - go back to the 10th century check what set of things would be rational to accept given the scientific knowledge they had back then and tell me how you wouldnt be the guy back then who would make the exact same argument you are making right now. Think about what sense they had back then about what is nomologically possible. When it comes to your claim about openness, i agree with you in 99.9999% of the cases , but not when it comes to claims about what is logically possible, because none of what you did shows how those things are logically impossible, at best it only show that given your current understanding of the Universe some thing might be violated (but even that claim is often times too strong) - and again to be clear, I agree with you that when it comes to appealing epistemic norms - we shouldn't appeal to what is logically possible and we should appeal to our sense of rationality that is grounded in our current understanding of the Universe, but not when it comes to philosophy and not when it comes to claims about impossibility. It doesnt matter how weird or absurd a given proposition is to you, because that doesnt prove that the proposition is actually false. Its fine to say that we shouldnt entertain it, or that we dont yet a have good reason to entertain it (again an appeal to our current understanding, which is totally fair), but its not fine to say that it is therefore definitely false.
  19. "Basic biology" is based on current scientific evidence. Scientific evidence might change in the future. And that's again a problem breatharianism has, because gathering (rigorous) scientific evidence is quite difficult. Tracking a person for multiple years, in a way that completely rules out any doubt about interfering factors, is really only something you could maybe figure out in theory, but doing it in practice is essentially economically, practically and even ethically insoluable, certainly by any mainstream scientific standards. Or actually, if you could surgically insert a monitor that can detect when exogenous water or food passes the esophagus, that could maybe work. But that would also require of course substantial funding for technological development and validation trials, granted you even get it past an ethics commitee based on the existing lack of convincing evidence from non-invasive studies (which brings you back to the original problem again).
  21. You are just conforming to the collective opinion of 2 + 2 = 4. You didnt even derive this for yourself, you learned from somebody else. Consider that this "fact" doesnt even exist for ants, chimps, horses and so on. It is relative to state and the form you are in. So any claim of realness or objectivity is absolutely bogus. 2 + 2 = 4 doesnt exist in your dreams also, so this should be ringing some bells in you.

  23. Teal Swan - A Deep Dive Into Her Work

    ExploringReality replied to Miguel1's topic in Personal Development -- [Main]

    It depends on where you are at in life. She may be helpful depending on your circumstances. Like if your a young spiral dynamics stage purple/blue person that gets walked all over in relationships or come from a dysfunctional family and are seeking an understanding to your situations she can be helpful. It's relative depending on your stage of development and where you are in life, she may provide some insights and clarity. I listened to her when I was in highschool and some of the things she said resonated and others didn't. Wasn't my fit but I kept an open mind and already understood at that point that every teacher has its own taste and people resonate with different teachers depending on what you want. Also people get sucked into idealizing a certain teacher so you have to be careful not to just consume her content blindly, any teacher in fact. Just be careful not to judge prematurely based on personal bias, listen with open ears but also be honest with yourself if she a good teacher for you, maybe not. I was at one point attracted to emeralds teachings for understanding my shadow and I love how she has a great angle from Carl Jung's collective and individual unconscious and how we project it rather than facing it, owning it and transmuting it. Teal has some good stuff too but her charisma can lure you into an idealogy and cult like dynamic. Sometimes I watch emerald because she is well versed and really dialed in on that niche on YouTube, it's helpful. Teal has some gems to. Just be careful
  24. Where did you even learn that notion and term from? Give it an Indian name, and so-called spiritual people will pretty much eat it up indiscriminately, as long as it satisfies their inclinations.

  25. Does understanding god entail losing ones mind?

    emptiness dancing replied to Elshaddai's topic in Psychedelics

    The way i think about it is your "default" position is safe, survival mode. Anything other than that will feel like sanity cause youre in unfamiliar territory.
  26. Well, from my current point of view, it's basically an impossibility rooted in wishful thinking. Even going a couple of days without sleep is extremely difficult. And it's a scientific fact that humans can't survive more than 3 to 7 days without water. Claiming you can go for years is objectively wrong. Openness doesn't mean pretentiousness or "anything goes." It's easy to be abstractly impartial, but things work a certain way, not the way we wish they did. Asking to be open to the possibility that 2 + 2 might equal 7 is absurd.
  27. I would explode yes but because I’m still not conscious enough space, pressure, astronaut suit and cie are imaginary.
  28. You can make this move where you claim that anyone who tried to help others definitely werent enlightened and by that move you can maintain your theory that anyone who tries to help others in any way is lost and has an inflated ego. We dont need to rely on Buddha or Jesus, we only need to find one person who was enlightened that you agree with who tried to help others. If you say so.
  1. Load more activity