integral

Self-obscure: To hide one's own weakness behind complexity. Works as a verb. "He self-obscures whenever the topic gets close to something he doesn't actually understand."

Why would anyone who cares about truth play all these games when writing a research paper? Obscuritism 🌈 It blows my mind that most scientist are not conscious that they are partaking in obscuritism. 🤯 The first Insight that that should come to someone's mind when they are exposed to Scientific language is that their intentionally fluffing it all up to make them sound as smart as possible. Which is one of the stupidest things you can do, and lacks intellectual integrity

This is not the statistical worldview from a scientific lens. Statistics is the wrong word to use. You're mixing, probabilistic thinking + a multifactorial thinking + dialectical thinking + holistic thinking It makes more sense to call it probabilistic systems thinking. True scientific statistics is much closer to reductionist thinking method, trying to narrow down a messy world into variables we can measure. And then when you have no epistemic sense or integrity, they write a research paper pawning a correlation for causation

In practice we use statistics to prescribe medication to patients In practice doctors view all correlation as causation. They have no awareness of the difference Huge chunks of societal belief systems are based on false causation from statistical correlation At some point in the 70s it clicked that you could use science to run your scams, and they ran with it for 50 years

it's weird that she choose physics and space/time to push the boundaries on. You can't push the boundaries on these topics if you don't know what a paradigm is. All your imagination is wasted Inside the Box

Yeah so a person uses the word to point to something. So a word won't be meaningful put out the user.

@zurew Does this sum up both of our positions?

Words are sounds/symbols that humans make. If no humans existed, the sound "cult" wouldn't exist. So yes, words depend on users. Is this what you're asking?

No, we use words to describe something real from our direct experience. The word has to accurately model what is true. The point of a word is to create the distinction about reality, we draw a line and we created distinction between the left and the right. And then we give that distinction a "word", it's just a placeholder to help us communicate. Does gravity go up or down? Even a chicken understand this concept and has create that distinction in there mind. There mind understand what a direction is WITHOUT a formal language definition. And Einsteins mind understand that distinction at a far deeper level.

Even if every word Leo's ever said it's completely wrong this is still not a cult.

His survival interests are like everyone else, he just put more work into unraveling it, but he has blind spots like everyone else that will corrupt his insights. We are all like this. There's no Perfection going to happen here there's no Perfection anywhere. We're all corrupt, it's a matter of how conscious you are of it and how much you care about it

Because I verified everything he said independently. If anyone believes anything Leo has ever said to them then they're doing it wrong and they missed the core part of actualized.org. Leo is teaching you how to be Sovereign and independent at the highest level possible through the highest epistemology possible. He's teaching you to think independently and that means independence from him. he's not teaching you to listen or believe anything he says.

Truth has a Direction, it Narrows to the least corrupt state. It's not arbitrary and relative. You're also touching on the blurring of the lines, and that a word could be defined in Any Which Way someone feels like using it. But this is wrong because we have to consciously pick the right way to draw the line. There is a more conscious way to draw a line. Just like there's a more conscious way to do art. Not all art is equal. Quality exists You're using relativity to say that quality doesn't exist. This is wrong The dogs use of the word is less conscious than the humans use of the word. Basically you're saying they're different and therefore they're equal. This is a relativity trap The point of a word is not the sound of it, it's how we draw the line of meaning. There's a strategy to draw a line in a highly conscious way. It's very easy to make a word useless, and politicians are a masters at it, they corrupt the word to serve their interests, create cultural memes with it and so on.

A cult is when the leader warps his followers world view to match his survival interests, knowingly or unknowingly. Leo is not doing that. Normies are self-Paradigm blind, and call every community outside their Paradigm a cult

The proper definition of a word is the least corrupt or uncorrupted version of it while held by the highest perspective, most holistic, most inclusive and highest state of consciousness possible. A dog understand "sit" very differently then a human or an alien.