LastThursday

More on my YouTube enumeration journey. This next category is a slightly weird one for me. Despite being on this forum and consuming much of Leo's content, I don't really actively watch stuff about spirituality and religion, mysticism etc. I did so more in the past whilst I was ramping up with my knowledge of these things, and I went through the mill of BATGAP, Alan Watts, Rupert Spira, Mooji, Eckhart Tolle and Sadhguru. But in general I find YouTube content on this sort of stuff just a bit too New Agey and cringe. So here's my small selection that I still watch regularly. If you know of any more good ones, then let me know. Dr Justin Sledge covers matters around the occult and mysticism and alchemy, mostly medieval stuff. There really is a wealth of knowledge there Jeffery Mishlove interviews a huge range of guest in lots of different areas of the paranormal, occult and more fringe stuff. I think it's ultimately a reboot of an 80's TV programme in America, but I don't know the history of it. I like the approach of looking at religion in a more academic way, and Dr Andrew Henry does exactly that, well researched and educational

I missed one guy off the YouTube roll call yesterday. David Bruce is kind of understated, but is very good at explaining different aspects of music theory. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And on to today's list. Languages. I have a deep love of languages and linguistics. I'm bilingual in Spanish, in fact Spanish is my mother tongue, who knew? To this day I find it astounding that the hole in my face I use to eat and kiss with, can also make sounds that mean something to others. I very nearly did linguistics for a degree. Paul Jorgensen is very good at explaining the basic grammar and syntax of a language or comparing related languages to give you a flavour of how it works If you want a bit of history behind Spanish or Latin or specific areas of linguistics then Elena Herraiz is very entertaining (in Spanish, switch on subtitles) Simon Roper is like some guy next door, but he's also a bit of a polymath and covers a lot of English language history and linguistics This guy speaks Latin and Ancient Greek fluently and he covers lots of areas related to those, very informative. Luke Ranieri. Jackson Crawford covers Scandinavian and Old Norse language history among other things and again very insightful Julie Maksimova is similar to Paul Jorgensen covering lots of different languages and some linguistics Rob Watts covers mostly English language etymology, and occasionally related subjects And Joshua Rudder covers all sorts of language related things and has catchy animations and voice over, you'll learn something new

People on reddit are not going to be straight up scientists, they're just on there giving you their opinions or parroting what they've casually learnt. What you're rubbing up against is that most people are deep in the materialist paradigm. When you're stuck in a paradigm it's very difficult to see things any other way, or to even realise that you're stuck in one. It's not their fault however, it's just Western society's main paradigm.

Instead of talking about myself, I thought I'd talk about myself. These days I watch a lot of YouTube. Whilst it's probably an addiction, it's not all bad. I do like to keep up with things this way, but also suck in new knowledge along the way. It's also entertainment, which in itself is not to be underestimated. I'm sure at some point I'll stop watching YouTube so much, but not yet. I think I'll cover a different thing each day, and maybe someone else will get the same kick out of it that I do. First up music. I do play mostly piano well, but have also been known to play clarinet and guitar (badly). Andrew Huang is a phenomenon. A part of me wished I was that dedicated and creative. Rick Beato is like the internet godfather of everything rock and pop music. I especially like his breakdowns of popular songs. Adam Neely is equally interesting for his expositions on music theory. For the piano nerd in me, these two do it for me for different reasons, I so wished I had the talent and dedication. Nahre Sol Annique Gottler - mostly technique and Chopin, but amazing and entertaining nevertheless I grew up with synth music and have a soft spot for it, and Claudio Passavanti has a real passion and sense of humour Charles Cornell, love his breakdowns and enthusiasm - more keyboards! Who doesn't like a bit of rock history, this guy covers it all, Adam Reader More history, Warren Huart, deep dives into the history behind songs I do also like guitars, and Paul Hermosin is fantastic, and does a little history as well (in Spanish, so switch on the subtitles for English) And last but not least recorders (!!) An instrument we all butchered when we were six, and one which nobody ever actually plays, but Sarah Jeffery does

I was joking. But I suspect you've just got to the root of why you're asking the question: self judgement.

@Sugarcoat just tell your family you're not a fan of their low consciousness behaviour. (and I wonder why I get in trouble...)

@Chadders that's a great observation, parts of us are dying all the time. But clearly something new was born to take its place.

I was thinking about all the good and bad things that have happened to me in my life and how they've changed me. I was curious to know if there was some event or realisation that fundamentally changed you as a person or the way you saw life? Positive or negative. It would be good to know what it was and why it changed you. For example, when I split with my first girlfriend as a teen, I was still friends with her brother. Occasionally, I would see my ex around with her new boyfriend. The level of jealously I felt was so intense that I vowed I would never get myself into that position again, so a clean break every time! But also realised for the first time that relationships are messy.

@MuadDib thanks man.

@Evelyna that's intense, I'm glad you pulled through.

Good answers. How did it change you? What do you do differently now?

Some things that spring to mind for capitalistic societies: Unrestrained growth mindset: using the resources of the Earth unchecked. Huge wealth inequality. Does any one human being really need a billion dollars? Selling cheap food that is poisonous to health in the long run, food with high sugar, salt and fat. Poisons such as nicotine and alcohol being actively marketed. Strong disconnect between government and what the majority of people actually need and want. The general mindset of society that anything goes when making money, even if it is detrimental to people or the planet. Entrenched and sanctioned gambling in the form of stock markets, think 2008 crash. Inability for governments to have long term action and strong commitment on things like climate change. Inability for legislation to keep pace with technological change. I could go on...

@Keryo Koffa I appreciate the love. This forum is a love fest, even if it doesn't seem that way sometimes. Everyone who asks a question and everyone who answers one is giving their love.

More purging. I've never been one to get angry at life, my default emotions are more frustration, disappointment and dejection. I do know how to get angry, but I worked out early on that that emotion never served me well. Anger has its place however and I well know how to portray strong irritation if nothing else, it's good enough. One thing that bugs me about life is that I don't feel like I've ever been good enough. That not being good enough is inextricably linked to being "othered" that I journaled about above. If you're labelled as "other" then you're automatically not "good enough", not good enough in many different ways and senses. Given enough time that sort of thing can eat away at your confidence and self esteem, and to a degree it has in my case. It's been a long and sometimes hard slog to build those things up again, and I'm still doing it, and it's tiresome. As a form of protection for not being good enough, I've built up a kind of "I don't give a fuck" demeanour, specifically towards the people who "other" me. What better form of defence than that? I could have got angry instead and very visibly shown my disdain for being "othered" but, I chose the more subtle path, the less stressful path. I real issue is, is that I actually do give a fuck. I've felt pain every time I've been excluded from anything. The problem with IDGAF is that it can create a vicious cycle. In a workplace setting that means that I will get purposefully overlooked at times. You see a decent manager would think like this: "What makes Guillermo tick? How can I motivate the guy to be more productive?", but what happens in reality is more like "Guillermo doesn't give a fuck, we'll give the work to someone else who does". Although, in the case of work, I actually don't give a fuck, I work to live not live to work, and maybe that comes across just a bit too well? I remember a few years back, having a sort of mini competition at work for producing a mock up of an app. The company produced betting products, the app would have a kind of roulette wheel with different wins on it. There was a limited time of a couple of hours to mock something up. I was the only guy there that was able to complete it, despite my skills not being in CSS and HTML design. My fellow developers acknowledged my brilliance, the management? not so much. Whatever vibe I give off, managers have never liked it. The app idea was quietly dropped eventually, I wasn't nominated for employee of the month. And that's it in a nutshell. Despite my self-assured brilliance in many things, nobody wants to acknowledge it in any meaningful way. Personally, it makes me feel frustrated and trapped, how is it I can prove to people that I'm worthy enough of their praise? But eventually I realised that it's really not me that's the problem, it's everyone else, and I've learned to feel some form of pity for them. The bottom line is that people will only give you praise, awards and other goodies, if you provide "value" to them, that's it, nothing else. Personally it makes me sad the world works this way, but it is what it is. And the converse is also true, that if you're a pain in the arse (or seen as not part of the group), you will get overlooked, shunned and ignored. It's actually a very easy equation, but a very hard lesson. Brilliance does not trump value. And, value does not always trump being "one of us". So I take solace in the fact that I know I'm good at a lot of things, and extremely good at some things specifically. It would be nice to receive praise and recognition for my talents, but I've mostly given up on that by now. And anyway, that need for recognition (aka love) whilst natural, can also become neurotic and is often a sign that inner work needs to be done. Still, just sometimes, please tell me: Guillermo you're good enough and we love you.

The graph is percentage not absolute numbers. Men might marry younger women on average. People can marry more than once. Men could marry men.

One of the biggest parts of my Shadow is the dynamic around inclusion/exclusion and being a lone wolf. It's hard for me to parse its entirety as there appears to be so many parts to it. Let's start somewhere, it may be incoherent lol. When I was young I felt secure and content in our family unit of four: my sister and my parents. We regularly and one way or another saw extended family members also. Our unit had its own way of being and dynamic and I felt comfortable in that. My mum was the nurturer, my dad everything else. My sister was like an extension of myself - and it stayed that way until our teens. I always cherished the times I would spend with my dad, and he would provide me with the mental stimulation I craved. But even then there was an undercurrent of "otherness" which I felt. My dad was accepted by the Spanish side of the family, but I was very aware that he wasn't "one of them". On the occasions when my British family would visit Spain I became aware of how different they were. The same dynamic bore out with my mum when we lived in the UK for a short while before Spain and before my sister was born. My mum never learned English and so relied heavily on my dad for everything: she was very obviously "other" throughout her life. I think that's were this Shadow first started. I embodied that sensation of being something "other" than the people around me - even if this wasn't true in actuality at the time. This wasn't a problem in my early years, because I did fit in within my immediate family unit. Even when I started going to school in Spain I didn't feel like I didn't belong (although I had other problems there). In general, the Spanish were more accepting than the English. Moving to England and London in particular, was a different world. In retrospect the culture was casually racist and in particular my British grandparents were. We lived with them initially crammed in like sardines in their small council flat. That wasn't a recipe for happy communal living, however my grandparents were openly hostile towards my mum. There was definitely an undercurrent of racism there, and their inability to communicate properly with each other didn't help. There was a lot of shouting. The absurdity of the situation is that both mum and grandmother dealt with the each other in exactly the same way, by getting emotional and lashing out. I think when you're young, you don't have a very strongly defined sense of self, it's kind of spread out into the people you identify with. Those attacks on my mum felt like direct attacks on me. How is it I can be both loved and hated at the same time? It makes for strong cognitive dissonance. This very sensation has stayed with me all my life. In the end and fairly recently I made the following vow which goes something like: "if you don't show me love then fuck off". It may seem extreme, but the only way for me to break that dissonance is to not accept it. I have learned to detach from hate. I have often been openly hostile to people who haven't respected me, and sometimes to my detriment, but I have to stand by it. This feeling of "otherness" has made me needy over time. Again, when I was young I very much looked up to my dad. But he was mostly distant and absent; it started off well in the early years but he got progressively more distant as time went by. You see my dad provided the kind of stimulation and attention that my mum could never provide. It's the reason I am the way I am, he is the reason for my curiosity and intellect the two things I hold most dear in this life. That diminishing lack of attention from dad and inability to get the attention I needed from my mum, has deeply affected me. Both my sister and me suffered in the same way - albeit with differing outcomes. That need for attention would drive my behaviour quite strongly later on in my teens. Despite the wranglings between my mum and grandparents in England, I was fairly well integrated in school and had good friends. Although, even then I still had the occasional bit of racism directed towards me from other kids - more ignorance than malintent. And out of school I would play outside most of the time with the local kids and that was fine also. That street smartness and needing to defend myself and sister made me hardy and independently minded. A lot of my need to do things my way and my own self-assuredness comes from those times: and this has largely counterbalanced my Shadow all along. When I went to secondary school at age 11 things got worse. Already I had installed within me this feeling of being different, and I think I really stood out to the school bullies for this reason. I wouldn't say I was odd or strange, but just different enough to stand out. I would fight back and stand my ground when I could, but the size and strength difference meant I couldn't always do that. I found it soul destroying, but not enough for me to get depressed by it, I just wanted it to stop. But it did reinforce that feeling of being different, that people could make your life a misery for sport and for the crime of being "other". In the end I largely withdrew. I stopped playing outside. I kept myself to myself in school and just mechanically went through the motions day by day. Then my parents split and to this day I resent my parents for the way they simply expected me to pick up the pieces of the aftermath. The ultimate "we love you" but you're now responsible for your mum at 14. To that I still say "fuck you" both. I don't think my dad even now understands that pain he put me through. I talk about this because that conditional love from people is part of my Shadow. Over time I've fought with the strong need to withdraw and insulate myself from the nastiness and "otherness" the world's imposed on me, just so that I can breathe and be myself in private. On the other hand, I yearn for communality and to be integrated into the lives of others and be a proper part of something: so I can breathe and be myself in public. But I haven't found my people yet, and I don't think I ever really will. The strongest bond I ever had was with my sister, but that dissolved many decades ago. I really am adrift and I want to stop being someone other.

And hopefully vice versa. I can definitely see an AI in future that will challenge you and not just be a suck-up that agrees with everything you want. This could be good for self development. What I don't see being replicated any time soon is the extreme subtlety of interactions. A huge amount of context and nuance is lost through interacting on a device of any sort. I mean, is my AI gf going to look at me in a certain way because we have some sort of in joke where five years ago I walked headfirst into a glass door? (e.g.) I don't think so. And there's a huge amount of non-verbal communication that goes on that only a physical presence can produce. An AI robot partner may be better, but still, I'm not convinced. On the other hand, there are many socially isolated people - for whatever reasons - and AI may be the only way they could get companionship, I don't think that should be denied in any way, there may even be a moral obligation to provide it.

I'd say that the more abstract you go the less possible it is to tell if creativity is based on something else - think mathematics. In any case, if you build a house, the bricks and wood are not new ideas, but the house is unique. The product of creativity may be based on previous ideas, but the new creation is a kind of platonic form which is divorced from everything else, and is its own thing. It's basically the sameness versus difference argument: creativity creates "difference", but many aspects of it will be "the same". So @Bobby_2021 you're asking if you can have "difference" without "sameness".

Exactly. There is no right year. It is completely arbritrary. There are other calendars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_calendar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_calendar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_calendar There is no conspiracy either though, just very good book keeping and dissemination of information - like the blockchain ledger of old. Did you know Britain lost 11 days in 1752? Bad book keeping.

I was thinking about localisation. Here are my half-chewed thoughts about it. Whilst we go about our everyday activities the one thing that seems undeniable is that we have a limited effect on the on the world; both limited in scope and locality. By locality I mean that we affect things in our vicinity or a proxy for vicinity. For example, if I put down a mug of coffee on my table, then the only thing I have affected is the position of my mug in space and more importantly that mug is in my vicinity, it is not a mug on a table in a different country say. It may seem obvious if we're talking about things you can affect physically: our bodies are localised in a small amount of space, so the things within our reach is small. We can move our bodies to a different location, but it's a slow process and we can cover miles at best without aid. The subtlety is that even if we move our bodies that is still an insignificant amount of space and material we can affect compared to the whole. But what we affect is still localised in small pockets of space. We can augment greatly what we can affect by using machines of one type or another. With a machine we could dig a huge hole in a few hours for example, or we can send a message to a person in another part of the world and affect them that way. We could ask that person a thousand miles away to put a coffee mug on a table and we have effectively become more delocalised. Although, still, relative to the whole we can only affect very tiny amounts of stuff and in localised pockets of space, even if those pockets are spread far apart (that is what I mean by proxy for vicinity). But does reality really work this way? If everything is affected by everything else (think butterfly effect), then surely our effects are greatly non-local and non-linear? The coffee mug heats the air around it and the table it's sitting on. One of those hot molecules of air may go to warm up an insect which helps keep it alive just long enough to infect a person miles away and on and on in an infinite chain of cause and effect. However, most of those side effects will not be meaningful and are so miniscule as not to matter to us directly. Indeed, the mug can warp the fabric of space itself via gravity and this has unbounded reach. The closer you look at the world the more interconnected it appears. If it is the case that reality itself is a unity, then everything must affect everything else... eventually. Science has discovered however, that the speed of cause and effect cannot be faster than the speed of light. So even if localisation is untrue (we affect everything), then localisation is true over finite time periods (we affect everything only eventually). Like the ripples in a pond our actions spread out forever. Quantum mechanics says that there is ''spooky action at a distance'', i.e. non-localised correlations, but no information can be exchanged instantaneously - there is no instantaneous cause and effect. Is there something possibly outside of time and space that is not bound by its limitations and laws? Is it possible for us to affect stuff non-locally? Scientists don't think so, but I'm not so sure. Anecdotally, I have experienced coincidences, synchronocities, guiding events through thought or thought-transference that just seem too uncanny to dismiss. Perhaps the unity of reality is a lot deeper than mere cause and effect, and much happens non-locally. It's as if reality had a mind of its own co-ordinating the entire universe in all its mind-boggling detail. Scientists will never find a particle transferring thoughts from one person to another, because the mind of reality doesn't work that way.

We are in 2024.

@integral I know this situation all too well, in my case it was a family member. You're right to be concerned for the welfare of another human being. You're also right to be concerned for your own welfare. The answer then really comes down to this: balance. Looking after someone else can take away from your own freedoms and welfare, so how much are you willing to give up? Is it 100% them and 0% you, or 100% you and 0% them? Realistically, things will happen organically and you settle down into a pattern, even if it can be detrimental to your own well being. In the end with my family member things were set up so that effectively they were self sufficient, but regularly I would have to help out with anything that was too complex for them to handle. A lot can be done so that things are easier on yourself. Involving other people (and professionals) can help a great deal. But also, getting the person themselves to take responsibility helps a lot. After all, if that person had no-one then they would have to fend for themselves in any case. So counterintuitively helping less can be more productive, but it really depends on the situation. You always have the option to walk away even if it would play on your conscience. It can be done.

I see emotions as being like a messaging system. Your being is trying to maintain homeostasis, the further away from that you go the louder the emotional messages are (either positive or negative). From this paradigm chasing emotions or ignoring them doesn't make much sense. Rather you should be looking to maintain good homeostatis: basically you're not in imminent danger and all your needs are being met. A plant doesn't chase emotions it searches for nutrients and daylight.

Is there a right way to live to have a fulfilling life? What is time, what is space, what is stuff? Is reality governed by strict laws or is it more flexible? How does reality maintain itself, what is persistence? What is thought exactly? Voices, hallucinations etc. Do my thoughts leak and/or do they come from "somewhere else"? Does my body do its own thing, or do "I" control it? What should living be about if anything? Fun, finding God, grinding, socialising, mastery etc.? What is and what is the function of dreaming? Are dreams "other worlds"? Will anything be left of "me" or my conscious experience after death?

The past existed, the confusion is over what you mean by exist. For example, the past doesn't exist in the same way the present does. If you think about your episodic memories they are nebulous and low quality (and many probably wrong), and very much like a dream - it's another type of existence. Materially, the past is always concertinaed into the present, with clues everywhere, but even that is a different sort of existence than "the present moment". For example around the corner from here are streets lined with Edwardian houses: evidence of existence of a past, but it's actually the present - I have to reconstruct a past from what I see now, a reconstructed type of existence.