LordFall

It seems that you retreat straight into dissociative surrealism and word salad. I think you might be at the exact opposite of being post-rational and land in the pre-rational camp my friend.

It just seems like a odd way of writing, I'm curious what you had to say about it. You also completely dodged the question about real-world output: What are you working on in life and what is your life purpose?

@oOo You have some interesting thoughts and creative angles in there, but there’s an obvious tension in how you express them. It feels like a clear flash of Stage Red aggressive ego-inflation and edgy power posturing. Do you recognize that streak in yourself and just lean into it because you find it entertaining and provocative to communicate that way, or do you refute that there's any unintegrated Red driving the bus there? Also what are you working on in life? What's your life purpose?

Phonk is great It connects to my moods so well. I've listened to like 20 of these songs 1000 times each this past year. I feel like it connects to my soul both the aggressive tunes and the more melodic ones.

What do you think stage coral represents and why do you think you embody it?

Right but I gave you a way to build your own reputation so that you aren't just a blob that's part of the collective and you dismissed it as It takes forever to change society, always easier to change yourself. I don't know what ethnicity you are but I'm half white half black. My race was chastised not that long ago and it was mostly irrelevant when I lived in Calgary but it was an asset when I moved to Toronto because Drake paved the way for lightskins to become popular. You can do the same for your people or you can keep complaining about it. Neil Degrasse Tyson is known as an astrophysicist, not as a stereotypical black man. Lebron James is known as one of the best athletes of all time, not as a stereotypical black man. You can wait 50 years from now for race to stop being an issue or take the next 1-2 years to build a strong brand and never have to deal with it again.

Thanks for sharing your similar situation. Losing a parent that young is a brutal crucible, and having compounding stuff on top of it makes it that much harder to crawl out of. Hope things have stabilized for you since. I hope you can connect it to the idea of being antifragile like I did and now are able to draw power from the unfortunate circumstances in your life. I do think that people that have it too easy are usually quite naive and delusional and I hope that works out for them but usually reality has a nasty habit of popping that bubble of fake safety for us.

@something_else You make several fair distinctions, especially regarding delivery. If someone literally argues "I'm Yellow, therefore I win the debate," that’s obviously an empty appeal to authority. But that's not what's happening when people diagnose developmental stages. Pointing out common Stage Green patterns such as egalitarian flattening, conflict-avoidance, or moralistic outrage is a useful diagnostic tool. It’s analyzing the cognitive architecture behind an argument. Where your critique falls into the standard relativist trap is here: Domain expertise (knowing how to build a bridge or perform surgery) is distinct from cognitive development. A Stage Blue engineer might build a flawless bridge. Nobody disputes that. But Spiral Dynamics is explicitly a hierarchical model of cognitive capacity and systemic awareness. Clare Graves and Ken Wilber were clear: Tier 2 is not just "another equal lens to pick from the buffet." Tier 2 represents a massive leap in systemic bandwidth because it is the first tier that can consciously perceive, hold, and integrate all previous stages without being trapped by their dogmas. Stage Green fundamentally cannot understand Stage Yellow mechanics. It reflexively interprets Yellow's functional hierarchies and cold pragmatic calculations as "heartless, selfish Stage Orange." Meanwhile, Stage Yellow understands Stage Green completely, recognizes where its empathy is valuable, but also clearly sees its fatal blind spots: its allergy to competence hierarchies, its economic illiteracy, and its tendency toward spiritual bypassing. I rarely see deep multi-perspectival points based on a deep understanding or even quest to understand the systems of reality being posted here. It happens but is rare. Stage orange are pretty obviously shallow in their points but the format for stage green posts is also pretty basic it goes "my ego dislikes X or Y". Rarely do you see people use systems thinking properly to connect various ideas together and produce unique insights as a result. Do you disagree with this?

Be careful with the wisdom of the crowd, it's rarely a bullet proof methodology I find it useful to take a lot of discussions from the Stage Yellow perspective and point out the ways in which people fall into Stage Green traps. I think it gives them an easy framework to understand and analyze if I'm right or not and how to gain greater insight into the issue we're discussing. For example if we take Donnie Trump From Stage Orange: Great president, will finally fix the economy and stick it to the triggered leftists From Stage Green: Abomination for mankind and gets anxiety thinking about why its possible that such a man holds the greatest position of power in the world. Bastardize his character as being a dumb corrupt person. From Stage Yellow: Finds it curious to examine the systems that lead to his rise to power being possible. For example Donald does not drink. He is an insanely focused man that does not fall to hedonism(at least of the legal kind.) To be overcame he must not be underestimated. Clearly narcissism in terms of wanting to push the limits and finding himself above the restraints of the average person is a weakness of his. From Stage Turquoise: A necessary part of human evolution to showcase the limitations of our government and clearly showcase that rule of law is an illusion of a pedophile can become the US president. If one comes it at solely from the emotional side then highlighting their blindspot towards the situation can help immensely in making sense of reality and how to be most happy and successful while operating in it.

Be careful, you're falling straight into the post modern trap my friend. Which fields of reality can you have a mature discussion about without putting competence and credentials into it? It seems relevant in terms of economics, business, dating, theology, spirituality, nutrition, fitness, energy, politics, etc. Your argument that the point should stand by itself is at first glance good but I don't think holds up. What if I argued that I think the economy of the US is gonna slump next year leading to major layoffs and warn people to look for another job now? Would you take me more seriously if I was a homeless guy saying this in your town's city centre or if I was a member of the Bureau of Labor Statistics? Which POV is most valid even if the words are the exact same? Literally last year I had a homeless guy come up to me and talk to me about crypto. I was pretty amazed that he seemed to know the basics of it but you can bet I did not hire him as a wealth manager. We can chit chat about random topics without the need to think about where the points come from but let's be honest that this is more chit chat and vibing than any sort of serious points being made. I think you're right that it can become an easy way to posture and lead to the argument from authority fallacy but that can also easily be pushed against and the truth will ultimately prevail and conversation elevated from it. If I am in the business section I want to know if I'm talking to a successful business owner or a college student lost with life. Me asking for clarification on their background is not hostile, it elevates the conversation and increases it's value to the whole forum. Some people charge $5000 for a consulting dinner with them and the people paying for that are very happy. It doesn't seem that anybody will pay that to chat with me just yet, perhaps in 10 years. Lets see how credible I manage to become! That's like saying becoming a heroin addict is as valid as any other at the highest level. Sure but it's mostly an irrelevant point IMO.

@Zenterus Seems like you're stuck in subjectivism. If an software engineer identifies as such says he has more understanding of systems architecture than a layman; is that also cringe? A lot of people on this forum do embody clearly identifiable aspects of the lower stages in the spiral. Whether or not you think pointing that out is productive to their development or to valuable conversation is I guess the subject of your post? To which I argue against your conclusion. To put everyone on the same level bastardizes conversation imo and makes it so we can't talk about specific aspects of reality with any amount of credibility and end up having to chit chat about basic shared experience. It is a common trait of Stage Green to want to invalidate any sort of hierarchy to make it fair for everyone. Someone who is truly Stage Yellow could easily understand that tendency and point out it's shortcomings.

Yes, I quite enjoy the feminine and masculine polarity. I like to conquer and become more powerful. If that was the only thing in life we would live in a hellish realm. To redirect that energy towards creating a sanctuary for my future wifes and children to prosper in is quite an enticing idea. I like how childlike in their expression some women are. Very like just enjoying reality and having a good time. It's a form of being that I don't embody often but I like to experience from the 3rd person. This is a good thread where the dichotomy comes up. 80% of solo travellers are women, it's one of the biggest modern discrepancies between the sexes they have found. Women like enjoying reality for its own sake and men usually like building and need a good reason to spend money to travel. Now that I think about it growing up my mom took us travelling across the states and Europe and my dad was like the guy that drove and in the end he was thankful for the experience if even initially skeptical.

I definitely don't delete pictures but blocking for months afterwards to recenter myself is usually my move. I'm glad I still have the pictures and memories from my ex of 5 years ago. We shared a special time and although it's not productive for us to be in contact life with her is still some of the best memories I've had in life so far.

I think transactional relationships are some of the most honest out there. It's not the ideal but read through the sugar dating subreddit and you'll find a level of self-awareness and bluntly honest navigation of human dating dynamics that I find refreshing. https://www.reddit.com/r/sugarlifestyleforum/ The guy that hired me to throw events and build the Velvet Network was a sugar daddy and also took literally 12 RSD bootcamps. He said he found Owen quite deceitful and his game not that good and he thinks their ideology warning guys against money-game was mostly both coping and also just a ploy to market their products. He said when he paid extra for a bootcamp by Owen that his assistants ran it and at like 1 am Owen showed up, gathered everyone that was in the club outside, gave them an inspirational speech on game and then left and that was $1500 USD extra compared to the other bootcamps he took that were ran by Jeffy and Madison. I think he was a bit jaded and there is still a lot that can be learned from RSD but the core fact that they are business an agenda is a good lesson to takeaway from it. Women that specifically look for well off men are also fulfilling their agenda and I don't think should really be shamed for it. Life is about understanding what you want and the best way to get there. If you want to attract the hottest women, working on your business and cashflow is a solid bet.

@yetineti Thanks for opening up and sharing man. I think indeed our defense mechanism rubbed off against each other and stalled out the conversation but I still learned a lot. I don't do these types of live streams often but it's good practice. When I was 10 I moved across the country from Quebec to Alberta and my mom got a teaching job at a french school that I ended up going to for 4 years. My little brother went to that school as well so we were quite close with the community and we lived walking distance from the school. When I was 17 my mom passed away due to health issues and unforeseen complications from a surgery and we never heard from these people again. We barely heard from my mom's side of the family as well. When I researched this phenomenon it seems that my situation is not unique. Humans have about a 72 hour window of tolerance for someone else's grief before it starts to just remind them of their own mortality or just impedes the groups baseline functioning so they shut it down. It's instilled in me a fundamental belief in self-reliance and a deep suspicion for others especially those that have a shallow veneer of selflessness i.e. stage green people. I think ultimately human beings watch out for themselves especially when shit hits the fan so all most notions of community and inter-reliance are quite weak and superficial. Awakening did not solve that for me as it just reinforced the notion that the human realm was for survival and it doesn't really matter if we are all connected since ultimately most of what happens here is dictated by power, value and self-reliance. Of course that leads to me being a bit jaded and combative since I tend to operate through a logical and rhetorical framework as opposed to taking people at face value. You were correct in diagnosing that. It has served me well these past few years and I sometimes discard it to interact with people in an unguarded way and sometimes that works out and sometimes that doesn't. That's why you see if someone antagonizes me on the forum I switch to mostly a hostile form of communication and dismantling their points ruthlessly. That's also the Redditor in me where on an anonymous platform the opportunity for connection is limited and the main goal is to say something clever or invalidate the other person's point and get a bunch of upvotes. If not that then I mostly enjoy high level intellectual conversations that requires qualifying the user on what they're saying otherwise it's hard to assess the information shared and its validity. I'm working to get away from that mindset but then I also run into what seems like a fact to me that the world does indeed operate on value and my time is wasted in engaging outside of that framework. Perhaps in a decade when my business and career are established I can switch to a legacy lifestyle and chill mode but for now if anything I think I will go deeper into that paradigm.

I think what you're looking for is self-esteem. You should not worry about people judging you as long as it does not lead to you judging yourself as a result. Six pillars of self-esteem by Nathaniel Branden is a gem on that topic. If you had rock solid self-esteem and people were looking at you strangely on the street or even worse if random people started laughing at you, you wouldn't judge yourself for 1 second. You would either think they are stupid, be really confused or laugh along with them because fuck it life can be funny why not laugh randomly.

Build a personal brand and a reputation. It's easier than ever to have a unique identity these days.

I appreciate you saying that, Joseph. Leo’s emphasis on deep structural thinking and first-principles deconstruction definitely aligns with how my mind approaches reality. Enjoy the stream, curious to hear your takeaways once you finish it!

If this general sentiment was true we would've never had limits on working hours and other regulation for humane and safe working conditions that we have at least here in the west. I do get your point that we should not give them the benefit of the doubt and ensure it's at the core of AI based policy. Our man Bernie along those lines is working to setup a sovereign wealth fund that would make the public own 50% of US AI companies in order to fund services for the masses. I haven't looked precisely into what the bill entails but it's encouraging to see it already being discussed in policy circles. I agree with the general sentiment of your comment but I'll address this specific part. Do you think most humans are capable of striving for agency and ownership? AI tools are out now, how many people do you know that are up to date with them and using agentic solutions now to secure themselves and their communities against this techno-feudalist dystopia? Your concerns are valid but I want to make sure we avoid this communist pitfall that a lot of people fall into when talking about economic egalitarianism. We need to develop a basic safety net to ensure the survival of the general population but from there competent and already rich people will indeed use AI tools to further enrich themselves. I think that's completely fine and should actually be encouraged. We have tools at our disposal to regulate the inequality that will keep existing as a result; wealth taxes are amongst the simplest and most powerful effective measures for that.

That's fair, I'll work on more pleasant delivery. @JoshB I feel like you are still running away from the point I'm making though. Do you really experience your current reality as fully self-defined? Have you managed to set your own rent? If you own your own property then I guess so. What about your relationship to your local government? Do you define its policies or are you still working towards that and just choosing to ignore it at the moment? I find it easy to use the concept of non-duality to soothe our existential angst but lose in the process our relationship to responsibility. When life doesn't go our way which it's not for me all the time, I also find it soothing to remember spiritual principles to ground myself but I also fear it leads me towards complacency and I also see other forum users go towards that path so I find it valuable to point it out to them.

@Natasha Tori Maru That's right. We could call how one feels about their inherent value 'Self-esteem' which is worth studying and I think ideally should love yourself unconditionally but still push yourself to reach your goals to enhance your own quality of life. Where I don't agree with your earlier point on me invalidating people's life choice is that I don't shame people for wanting a life style that differs from mine. I tend to ask difficult questions that sometimes I think hints at people's blindspots but I don't think that constitutes a pathology. For example in the spirituality section I was asking @Cathal how he feels about his sense of responsibility towards mankind while living as a monk. He answered the first one then seemed to avoid the subsequent questions. It could be because I've touched on deep points about life that he's trying his best to avoid or I could've asked my questions in an uncouth manner that he felt didn't warrant a response. Either way I don't think tiptoeing around sensitive issues is an effective way to live one's life so especially on a forum about self-development and deep truth I tend to err towards the side of uncouthness rather than polite pleasantries. My aim in life is finding the best goals to have and the best way to achieve them. I engage on this forum with that core quest in mind.

It's not a personal attack, it's the easiest way to make the point. An ad hominem bypasses the substance of someone's points to attack their character; I specifically attacked his point. If there is no shared reality then there is nothing that can be good or bad, just what is. If someone can be offended by me saying they make bad points then by itself that proves their point wrong. The consequence for living under false coping premises is low life results as reality doesn't seem to reward surface untested opinions compared to things like deep competence and a deep bullet proof understanding of reality.

Good question, it is the fundamental axiom to base a conversation on value around. I think people have some inherent value by virtue of being a life form but not much. For example if we snapped our finger and doubled the world population, our species wouldn't have double the life quality. It would probably plummet as a matter of fact. Also it seems to be a function of marginal utility where if you don't know many people then each new person that you meet has a lot of value but when you have a wide social circle you can now afford to have more qualifications on who you spend your time with. As for being "worthy"—worthy of what? We can simply talk about the limited time and energy we have in investing in others. We're each gonna have a moderately different standard for who qualifies but we can look at trends to see how we should build our life in order to attract the right people into it. Most of the conversations we have on this dating section are about single men wanting to attract women. A simple principle I share often on this forum is that to become more attractive to women you must offer more value. It's a question that invites further questioning but a lot of times people fight me on this very idea which I find quite funny because it's a pretty easy position to defend. Individual women are gonna have their individual criteria as to what type of man they like to hang around but generally being a guy that's financially independent, can communicate well, has a rich social life, is fun to be around and takes care of his appearance is gonna be a mold that fits what most women want. Then the common objections are usually based in pointing out outliers "But Kyle I know a coke dealer in massive debt that's a dickhead that fucks a bunch of chicks, what you're saying is wrong!" From there we can also simply steer the conversation either in a cultural deconstruction way where we ask ourselves why that coke dealer's dating strategy is working for him or what I find most useful is taking our goals and building an action path from there. I think we can agree that becoming a coke dealer to build a high quality dating life is not the move and one of the simplest arguments against it is that it only offers superficial short term value as opposed to being a man that can offer value on the long term. Then we have the point on validity, same answer valid to who? I personally at this point in my life have big goals and not a lot of time to waste so I only hang out with people with whom we can mutually help each other achieve our goals. That doesn't mean I want society to get rid of people that don't fit that mold but I just don't enjoy spending time with them and I don't think they would enjoy spending time with me also. That's the mark of a solid society, having the diversity to support different lifestyles. I think it's a very important question to have especially in a world looming with AI revolution where we are presented with this question in real time globally as a species. Thankfully it seems that our capacity to produce a massive surplus of value to redistribute around will increase. Perhaps in a few decades we'll be able to take care of every human on earth and the concept of offering economic value to society in order to survive will be a distant memory. Even then I will say that an average AI UBI funded life is still gonna be inferior to a life full of purpose, ambition and adventures. In a world based on scarcity that question is much more poignant though. Fundamentally it's a question about agency and optimization in reaching your goals though. The most valuable life to live is the one where you can accomplish your objectives in the deepest and most efficient way possible. I think what mostly gets in the way of that for men I see are limiting beliefs and lack of optimized strategy. That's mostly what I talk about on this forum.

I am. I never asked for your permission to point out your bad points. You could make the argument that your higher self asked me to do it on your behalf and thus it was your will all along. That's a fine line of belief if you find that it serves your life in general but then you better start addressing me with my proper pronouns. You can call me My Lord or Your Highness. Either is fine. I don't give out insights for free, you should ideally be grateful to have your own foolishness revealed to you!

I find poorly thought-out points shared in a public domain reduce the quality of our communication and thus life. It leads to confusion which leads to spiritual bypassing which leads to a life built around coping as opposed to high quality living.