electroBeam

Yes you do very briefly. 1. How are you sure cross reference is a valid way of predicting the truth of something? Cross reference relies on the assumption that consistency leads to truth. Do you believe that and if so why? 2. How much do you trust gut feelings? Not in that video, but in a comment you once wrote to me in regards to that video, you said that you read from all different sources, then throw it away and let your subconscious mind eat all of it up and generate a feel for what's right and what's wrong. Does this mean your technique largely involves trusting your gut feeling? Is there a difference between an inner muse and a gut feeling? Can you trust either one? Why do you trust your gut feeling? When can you? Are there techniques for training your gut feeling so that its more effective at existential stuff like spirituality(in other words beyond the ways mentioned in thinking fast and slow)? 3. How do you effectively map raw experience to intellectual concepts/information/knowledge? If you have an existential insight about something, what ways can you know whether someone else is talking about the same thing as you? How do you effectively map this experience to words(without distorting it, or alternatively distorting it in a way that helps you compare it to other sources)? 4. What is active listening in essence? What is critical thinking in essence? How do you measure your performance in either one? How do you improve them? 5. Does spirituality help you in this topic? 6. What is believing vs thinking for yourself in essence? 7. What is fundamentally the difference between thinking in principle, and thinking in analogies? What are the ramifications of this for making use of spiritual sources, and also sources in general for scientific work? 8. if you don't want to answer any of the above questions, at least answer this one, the most important one of all: What is high quality critical thinking vs low quality critical thinking? How can you improve your skills? What metrics or performance indicators can you use to improve it? Are there any metaphysical and existential practices to improve this area?

where did you learn your techniques on critical thinking and taking advantage of knowledge and information for the sake of Truth rather than just blindly believing it? How do you critically think? This is something you seem to do that very few teacher do.

did God create survival?

@okulele thanks! Didn't realize that video existed. Must have missed it a year ago.

Which books are great for teaching you skills and techinques for how to understand reality well. Well I mean with clarity, holistically, etc. Understanding the universe from a yellow or turquoise perspective. Are there any spiritual techniques for this? Maybe like a jnana yoga but not for absolute infinity but for relative reality? Any good books on critical thinking? Active listening? How do you absorb stuff from a philosophy book in a totally wise way, what's the best way to get insights from them? Are there any meditation techniques directly applicable for such a use case? Would really love a jnana yoga sort of philosophy and practice for studying the universe, rather than studying who you are. Like a contemplative practice where you could contemplate on some phenomena of reality and get really deep with it. Would love to understand what the laws of physics are made of, why they work the way they do, what is a square in essence? What is light? What is qualia? I'm looking for some practice or technique to really go deep and understand what is all this stuff and how it was created, why it was created, the consequences of its creation, etc. My life purpose is to revolutionise science in a way which sparks waves of curiosity in people and enables the human race to reduce suffering. To do this, one needs a really good understanding of what science is, and what needs to change. Also what reality is too.

Imagine the scenario that man A stole money from man B. man B then decided to plan a massive plot to not only take all of the money back, but also critically injure the person, along with take all of his money, then left a note explaining to the family of the person that if they did it again their child would be next to get critically injured. What stage contains such behavior? Is it possible for stage green, orange or yellow to do such a thing?

@Aakash you are right, the map isn't the territory. Mickey mouse isn't real, its just an illusion. Yet what is real is the understanding of Mickey mouse, the knowingness of what mickey mouse is. I'm not saying the map is the territory, I'm saying your understanding of the map is the territory, if you dare contemplate on that facet of reality. If you wish to keep practicing self inquiry and digging through the map, which will in turn lead you to the territory, then you may, but there is a lot to discover about understanding which is missed by the hindu traditions.

yes, but that's not point. Science doesn't tell the truth, but something made science, something was the almighty creator of science, something created all of the patterns science observes. There are some truly magnificent and beautiful patterns in the world that are deeply mind fucking. What is it that created that? Just think what could have created such an expansive and deeply intelligent set of patterns? Hint: its not you (the ego) and precisely because of this point, Maya as it stands is deeply intriguing for its own sake.

Interesting, but, when an enlightenment experience is happening, there is an understanding of it. Its an understanding that there is no inner or outer world. understanding does = infinite humor, but it wasn't created by illusion, it was created by god. This is deeply significant, the understanding has God in it. This is also different to nothingness and everythingness. It explains how the world was created, instead of what it is fundamentally.

on the one hand, it is just play - but keep in mind, this play was created, and it wasn't created by beliefs, it was created by god. This play has god in it, it is made of god's intelligence.

Are you talking about modern day science, like western science, or science in general? Science can also mean yoga, contemplation, zen, etc? understanding and science are 2 different things. Its possible to understand without science. You can develop a very genuine insight about how to defeat an opponent in League of Legends, yet this insight is about a fantasy land called league of legends, not 'reality'. BUT the insight is just as genuine here as it is for the insight to make an aeroplane fly. Both require a taste of consciousness-intelligence(the thing in your intelligence video/philosophical nirvana). Reality is Maya, and Maya is illusion BUT that illusion is deeply intelligent. The devil/illusion/Maya is filled with deeply mysterious and intelligent patterns, each capable of being understood through insight. Most people seeking enlightenment ignore these patterns and just dig straight through Maya to get to god, but they miss that Maya wreaks of consciousness-intelligence. And just observing this is enough for an awakening. If you dig through thoughts to ordinary nirvana, you will get to consciousness in the form of everything-nothing, but if you understand deeply the patterns in Maya, you will get to consciousness in the form of intelligence, yet these 2 things are actually equal to each other. What is your answer as of now, to that question you posted? Isn't the answer to this question deeply related to your intelligence video?

here's a riddle for you: how is it possible that a chess pawn is able to take a horse in the right conditions, if the pawn is just a symbol/story/imagination? Like how can an imaginary character (like a pawn) destroy a character like a horse? Its not like we made it up, we didn't just say 'ok im changing the rules, the pawn can now move anywhere, Bingo! there goes your horse!" No! We agreed upon a set of rule prior to the pawn taking the horse, and then throughout the game, it actually took the horse without us changing the rules or making anything up! We did it by following the rules! Wow! but isn't it possible because that's the rule we've agreed upon in the first place? So how does science manipulate reality so well? Well reality is a set of rules we've agreed upon, and we agreed upon them at birth or close to it. A light turning off and on isn't something Absolutely true, its a rule we agreed upon. We chose to understand reality in that way, we are assigning the beliefs of 'light', 'switch' 'turning off and on' ourselves, reality isn't that way fundamentally. And then you ask the question, how can science manipulate that switch that well! But, you gotta remember, we are the ones who made that rule, we are the ones who understand it that way, so is it really surprising that if we play by the rules of science and mathematics, we can make a rule (which we accepted and developed at birth) happen in the future, just like the pawn and the horse?

it doesn't matter whether or not this life is True or False, regardless you cannot deny that within this false life lies patterns, relationships and qualia which work together in an intelligent way - and this is a very important observation about life. If you take an Absolute stance about every single phenomena about reality, you will certainly get an experience of God, but you will miss out on Understanding the intelligence of God, and how he creates. This facet is deeply intriguing, as intriguing as experiencing god directly. Why does gravity exist as opposed to antigravity? You can dig deeper and become conscious of how gravity existing and antigravity existing are the same thing, but that doesn't answer the question, and you bet there's a bloody good answer to that question, God has a magnificent answer for everything, no matter how mundane or meaningless it is.

so in other words, it doesn't show you what you want, but shows you what you TRULY want. @kieranperez yes, of course they do.

I took leo's LP course a few months ago again. my lp statement was "to expand the possibilities of what man can do by inventing tools and techniques" which naturally points towards engineering. Yet ive been doing engineering all my life already. I gave it a second crack again recently, tried to like it or at least convince myself that I did, but now im burnt out again. I've discovered 1 massive issue with engineering: the happiness comes from a desire to see your ideas turn into reality. Yet this keeps you (or at least me) constantly miserable, because you're always looking forward to the future and never the present. I think ive finally discovered what I really enjoy about engineering. I enjoy expanding my thinking and awareness. I enjoy the feeling of mystery (moreso than discovering the mystery itself) and adventure and discovering completely different universes, worlds and paradigms. What LP could possibly fit this? I have a burning desire to try astral projection, dmt, lucid dreaming, anything to break my mundane existence and explore something really cool and awesome. Something more awesome than the stars. Could a scientist ever have a life like this? I find science to be highly mundane. You do discover things, but its no where near as awesome as what I need to quench my thirst. Any tips on how someone could make money off this or if someone has before?

@CreamCat he is enthusiastic.. but about going to mars, which is some fantastical future event. After a while being enthusiastic about imagination gets tiring and boring, because you're getting excited over something made of thought. And even if you materialize it, the material is fun for a few days, or even weeks, but it gets boring aswell. And this process goes on forever. What's actually exciting about building a spaceship to mars is the process of expanding your mind beyond mundane existence, it has nothing to do with the engineering process at all. Engineering is 10% this, 90% banging your head against a wall because your rocket engine keeps thrusting backwards instead of forwards. The actual process of doing engineering is dry, cumbersome and myopic.

First of all, I will describe the experience so that we are on the same page about what we are talking about. The experience tends to go generally along the lines of this: 1. through yoga, or meditation, the mind becomes reasonably still. There are still thoughts, but the mind is so still that the body feels like it isnt being controlled by anything. The ego still exists but its not the focus or in control of anything. I like the analogy I heard for this feeling: "its like your supported by steel at either ends of your consciousness". 2. The world seems like its fading away. I don't know how to describe this. Its like going to sleep, except you're wide awake. Also you don't feel tired. Maybe you could say its like you're entering a void? Literal nothingness? 3. The scary part. In yoga at least (not sure about self inquiry because I haven't had this experience through any other way except kundalini type practices) this is where you feel heaps of energy permeating your body. The energy feels like a more strong, intense version of 'a chill up your spine'. Again I don't know how to describe this feeling. When you go to the gym sometimes you can feel it. Its similar to that energetic burning sensation. 4. If you keep going with the 'world is fading away' step, using the energy to explode the world, it feels like you could die. Like literally, forever. None of this you will come back crap. Maybe I'm wrong and my ego is just over reacting, but it certainly feels extremely scary. First of all the lost control over your body means you can't stop it after a certain point, and your heart tends to rise to levels that could kill you, if I'm not over reacting. Has anyone ever exceeded through step 4? How did you make sure that you didn't get hurt? What was the circumstances that led you there? Would you recommend people to exceed past step 4? I've never tried psychedelics, but would be super interested if someone out there has had this experience using a psychedelic like lsd or something.

@Wisebaxter in my experience, spiral dynamics is a useful tool for developing your intellect in ways which develop and sophisticate your perspective, correct judgment and understanding of social aspects of society, but its not a magic bullet for teaching you how to master a specialized skill such as turning value into money. I think I resonate with your approach. I'm very idealistic, and because of that when I get an idea which really fascinates me I want to solve every problem through that idea. For example, I read this really cool book on shamanism. I loved the techniques in it so much that I tried to use them to cure every problem I had, including my low self esteem. Its just not gonna work. Unfortunately tools are tools, and they are suitable for some jobs and not others. Learning about and trying to embody orange stage personality traits will develop your perspective and understanding of life, but it will not miraculously turn you into a money making machine. Simply having a more accurate perspective in life, and better judgment will not make you a master at mathematics art or any other specialised domain, so why would spiral dynamics help you master money making? If you want to become a world class musician, the approach is to learn it and then practice. If you want to turn value into money, you got to learn it then practice. Also if you're having judgment problems, embodying orange isn't going to solve that. Like if you have an aunty you absolutely despise, seeing her more often isn't going to miraculously make you like her. I personally don't really know how to cure judgement problems apart from very intense awareness and focus on those judgments. If fact I would be inclined to say that if you have judgment issues its only going to be cured by mastering yellow. Judgments fall at the yellow stage, not orange. If you didn't understand something about orange (from a perspective/intellectual sense) then embodying it will allow you to understand it better, but its not going to cure your judgments, or turn you into a money making machine.

@Wisebaxter the world doesn't revolve around spiral dynamics. Its a model, a fantastical depiction of a few swirls in the ocean of sociology which a few guys jumped on and made a language game about. And now we got hippies like you trying to see the whole personal development game through this language game. Just by reading your post I can't convey how wrong the spiral dynamics model is for solving your problem. This issue isn't that you're yellow or turquoise or coral or that you need to embody orange hahahaha. The problem is that you don't have money and this is causing you suffering. End of story. You may not like the scientific method because its too 'orange' for you, but if the scientific method got 1 thing right, its that beautiful idea of solving a problem through making it simpler. Chuck out all that spiral dynamics garbage and focus on the problem: you don't have enough money. You can easily solve that in many ways, but for you that means (again something simple) providing value in the most authentic, honest and deep way. What skills do you have? Painting, music, programming? What did you do all your life? And even if you have no practical skills, one thing that shines through in this post in your love spiral dynamics and wisdom. Use your life experience of being a hippy to give value to people: make books, blogs, opinion articles, how tos on spirituality, yoga classes, etc heck I don't know what's best for you, but i know it exists. Go find it!

part of my job involves inventing AI algorithms. As part of my job, I discovered this paper that I thought I would share. A personal insight I have gained from reading this paper: human cognition and thought are not a product of neurons but a product of consciousness itself. Indeed the brain is inside consciousness rather than consciousness is inside the brain. Given that fact, psychological tools humans use are not useful (and derived from) the brain but rather are useful and are derived from consciousness. Therefore if we want to make AI smarter, build algorithms around psychological tools human beings use, like the ones in this paper. coolfuckenpaper.pdf

This isn't quite correct, while there may be some correlations between the behaviours of human beings and the properties of mathematical algorithms, and while it may be possible that an algorithm exists for some specific human behaviour, a human's behaviours are not generated or controlled by an algorithm strictly, but moreso by subjective, qualitative states. In other words, people fear death because of the 'feeling' and subjective qualia of death, not because of the laws of some possible algorithm. There is some sort of cause and effect going on (which is a property of algorithms) yet its states are qualia rather than algorithmic statements. There are some nuances here. Nuances that should be seriously considered. Its not possible to encapsulate the feeling of death into a symbol which can be used in an algorithm. I think this is obvious. We do not have a symbol which fully describes the feeling of fear of death. We cannot type into a computer if (feel_fear == true) { run } and expect the computer to know what feel_fear is, because we haven't defined it. Of course we could say if the algorithm is in a state where it could die, then feel fear (like in a video game), but notice that doing this doesn't fully encapsulate the feeling of fear. Human beings feel fear for many more reasons then just when they could die, they also feel fear with rejection from a relationship, etc. And notice that the amount of circumstances that a person could feel fear is infinite. Therefore we will always be infinitely away from fully defining what fear is for a computer. Even if we go the AI way of doing things, and show them scary pictures, and show them non scary pictures, the AI will never ever be 100% accurate, and we will never ever be able to show them an infinite amount of examples. On top of that we would need to do this for every single human feeling that is possible. So fearing that AI is going to take over the world like terminator is simply because people misunderstand what computers are, what human beings are and what psychology is. So as long as we are using algorithms, we will never get a computer which has the capabilities to perform as intelligently as a human being, because simply put, symbols are limited to how we define them, and we can never define a symbol as accurately (and for as many scenarios) as we would need. Next time you meditate, feel the feeling of fear, and notice how that feeling has infinite amount of information in it, and how defining that feeling in terms of if else statements (or alternatively NNs) is simply impossible. Or think about the amount of pictures you would need (or scenarios for a reinforcement learning algorithm) for an AI to understand all of that information which is contained in a subjective qualia like fear. Sure. My argument is that true AI is not possible with computers. Just because an AI generated a set of meaningful patterns on its own does not mean that the AI is in any way intelligent. It simply, strictly meant that it generated meaningful patterns which has solved a hard problem (a problem a human being finds hard to solve). Of course AI in the future has the potential to solve problems at any scale, it could be used to invent a superpowered death ray like the ones in starwars, or even thor's hammer, but still whatever this AI is, it will not exhibit the properties of a brain, but the properties of an engine. You put input in, and it will give you an output. It will generate some phenomena, whether that's a flying car, or a new more powerful nuclear bomb. Its important to be aware of this difference (that is the difference between a brain or an engine). The implications of this is, AI will give human beings dangerously great abilities to invent new things, or generate knowledge but the AI itself will not be an autonomous, self aware entity with a brain on its own and a capacity to do anything beyond what an engine does (put in input, get some predefined, limited, scoped output). The AI will only be dangerous because the people using it are deliberately (or undeliberately in some cases) trying to invent dangerous things. The danger will still be directly caused by humans only, not the AI itself. Nuclear power is a perfect example. The nuclear bomb killed thousands of people, yet it was because the Americans wanted to. In an undelibrate case, just turn to the 2 power plants that have exploded due to mis management or natural disasters. The power plant didn't explode because nuclear energy has a brain and mind and decided to intelligently try and kill humans, it happened because of natural physical laws. AI is no different, and will never be for as long as we are using computers in the conventional sense.

There's also a point to raise though, that a computer is made of hardware which works completely differently to neurons. So the configuration of neurons may not be relevant to computers. neurons are completely different to transistors. Furthermore we also need to acknowledge that human beings (biologists) were the ones to observe neurons in the brain. All humans have biases and distort the truth to a certain extent (and science believe it or not distorts the truth massively) and when biologists/neurologists were theorising about the human brain, they didn't do it in the context of AI but in the context of neurological diseases and previous theories about biology. This perspective may not be useful to AI scientists. But furthermore, what I personally believe is, its impossible for AI to ever be true AI as long as its limited to computers. Computers work on ALGORITHMS. What ever a computer is doing, its doing it an algorithm. Of course the algorithms these days are highly complex, artificial neural networks especially, but whatever it is, its an ALGORITHM. The fundamental philosophy, limits and ideas which are inherent in mathematical algorithms, will be inherent in computer software. And if you study the fundamental mathematical philosophy of algorithms, you will be aware of the limits of them. These limits literally stamp out true AI. We may make a very powerful machine in the future, but it will always be a machine/engine, nothing more, nothing less. Computers are engines, not brains. And we need a wildly different hardware or software platform if we ever want to make a true brain. Actually when I was in freshman university, I built an ai algorithm to control a group/society in minecraft. I tried to get the people in minecraft to mimic the levels of spiral dynamics. Again, this is really where I first discovered my insight about the limits of an AI, the fundamental problem with trying to get the AI to spontaneously evolve, was that the AI had no capacity to invent creative insight. This is because everything in AI is predetermined (it runs off a script/algorithm) and for an AI to truly evolve through those levels, this running off a script thing wasn't good enough to cut it. We need a revolutionary computer system which isn't told what to do (AT ALL! I.E. NOT PROGRAMMED) but is rather influenced. It's thought process needs to begin spontaneously and end spontaneously. I see quantum computers making this opportunity possible. Its interesting that you talk about a totalitarian regime. Yes AI in the context of computers would be algorithmic, so therefore the system we live under would have to be of an algorithmic nature. Honestly, while this is a dominant opinion among AI professionals, I see it as myopic. They are totally blind to the fact that computers are just machines/engines. They aren't some cool new magic spell discovered through an ancient archaic tablet of a race far beyond our universe. Computers are powerful, and AI systems are too, but only in the context of pumping out mathematical patterns, whether that's patterns in images (object detection, image classification, etc) or full decision trees (like AI in video games). There is a massive thick wall to what AI can do, and that wont be solved until we leave this algorithmic perspective. Also we needs to understand that human beings are just pattern pumping engines, or engines for that matter at all. Human beings are actually quite hard to predict, and seem to produce spontaneous insights which are simply not possible to produce on a determined, algorithmic system.

@Aquarius maybe the reason why you feel this way is because you're completely unaware of what karma is? study it. If somebody acts angry at you, its because you made them angry. You are in no way obliged to make someone angry, its only because YOU did something to make them angry. Ramana Maharshi didn't make his father angry when talking about spirituality, Rumi didn't either, so didn't many others. You can say things in a way that makes people angry, and say things in a way which doesn't There's nothing wrong with making people angry, but don't blame that result on the form of the universe, they are angry because YOU made them angry. They would not be angry if YOU didn't make them angry, and you have the potential to do that. You can tell them the truth, and its ok if they get angry, the love and appreciation you will get from god will far outweigh the petty reactions of the people around you. Keep shining that light, and forget about the angry responses it yields. Heck Jesus took this approach so far that he died on the cross.

@kieranperez what you're going through feels like its going to go on forever, that you will be hopeless and lost forever, that is for the next 60 years or so. But try and recognize that this is not a state that you will be in forever, but just a mental phase you are going through. These down periods are apart of life, they really are, not just on an individual level but a societal and planetary level aswell. The entire world was in world war 2 50 or so years ago, now its in a state where barely any wars are happening. And right now you are in an individual world war 2, but just like how world war 2 passed, so will this state that you are in. Life goes in cycles and that's ok, just recognize it and move on.

I'm finding that I'm having trouble being quite productive because I keep zoning out throughout my work. The problem I'm having isn't a result of fear, procrastination or anything like that, its bare bones mental fatigue. I try to push my brain to think about something and it just wont. Its sort of like pushing weights at the gym, but not being able to lift them because they are too heavy. I have tried visualizations, affirmations, self esteem shadow work. These techniques are not the right tool here. I need something else like brain training. What have you done to push your brain to the limits? Also I do suffer from chronic fatigue (both mental and physical) Doctors have no clue as to why I get it, and just blame it on depression. I personally think I have Hypothyroidism or sleep apnea (my symptoms resonate with those 2 problems the most).