Dan502

We may consider it snobbish or foolish not to take a job because of apparent trivial health concerns, however please can we show understanding. The human mind is not entirely rational; none of ours is, especially under stress. More to the point, did we actually go there and see how toxic the place is and can we truly weigh that up against the timeline and subconscious options that may exist within the mind of the decisionmaker who, as I understand it, is not yet completely destitute? We need to meet people where they are at. Being too harsh in our criticisms of that persons' apparently irrational decision-making is also not helpful. As for advice, yes maybe contact any extended family, temporary jobs can also sometimes buy us time, I think it's great that you've reached out to this forum. In my country, registering with recruitment agencies seems to have a slightly higher success rate than applying online to companies directly or through job sites for example, which can take months and require hundreds of applications. My advice would always be to pick up the phone and talk to recruiters regularly, keep a list of their contact numbers, or visit them in person if possible, although this is only based on my own humble experience.

Like the scientists who have found data supporting the benefits of meditation, I see Sapolsky's work as wonderfully complimentary of our contemplation of the self because he has discovered that our experience of being a person with free will is in some sense superficial/just an idea. Also, he has realized that this has implications for the justice system where it only punishes people for the decisions that they make (as though they "could have" made a different decision).

As the living creatures that most of us consider ourselves to be, we tend to think of ourselves as one. If a person considers themselves to be more than one, or less than one, a western doctor might diagnose this as a disorder. As a concept, this might seem to be necessary, at least at some stage of functionality, especially in communication. I'd be interested to hear if any cultures use numbers less or differently. As/if we seem to grow, we may relax the distinction, increasingly recognizing ourselves as, in some sense, "more" than one... perhaps.

I generally like the blog for its mix of videos and updates from Leo. I check it from time to time.

What a long-winded way of saying that knowledge is relative

To me it seems a bit like when a baby sees its reflection in a mirror, and then says to the mirror "Mirror?! Why do you look like a baby!?

Destiny mainly seems to engage in political debates although I'd still like to see Leo talking to him, as he could be a route to talking to someone like Dr. K which I think could be a really interesting conversation although I may be getting ahead of myself.

There's a beautiful parallel between Peterson not listening to Elon and people also not listening to Elon in this thread about Peterson not listening to Elon. When I say "not listening", Peterson himself as an ex-clinical psychologist will be well aware what this means. The interruptions, the judgement. But even he doesn't follow the rules in this interview. In his defense, it is "only" an interview but good interviews also require good conversation which requires good listening. And that's very difficult, for me, for Peterson, for everyone.

The idea that, whatever we create will eventually be destroyed. I read that Zapff was inspired by Schopenhauer and antinatalism.

With Matías De Stefano, the stage orange part of me wants to write him off as deluded because so much of what he says is stuff that seems like fantasy. I would be surprised if Matias' memories took place within what we normally think of as physical reality.

To the mind, everything appears relative.

@Yousif your comment reminds me of the phrase "Time is money". It seems a bit like a currency. We can save it, spend it, buy it and sell it.

The average person imagines multiple potential futures but only one past. This is because our eyes are in the front of our head, metaphorically speaking. This enables the distinction of choice, which gives the person's ego some sense of omnipotence.

Happy birthday

We can make a distinction between being God, which is what we are anyway, and realising that we're God, which is partly what Actualized.org is about. In order to realise that we're God, we must first realise that what we think we are is not God. Most of the time people don't think that they're God so this is fairly straightforward, but it helps to reiterate it here because there are all kinds of people wandering around telling each other that they are God, which can confuse the mind, which is good but people can also latch on to it as a belief, which is not realisation. Actually one thing I hadn't thought of, which is so obvious that I missed it, is that the average person's mind would also have to drop the existing belief that it's not God Huh... interesting.