Cultural beauty norms are.
But Beauty is also an Absolute.
When you fully awaken you will realize that absolutely everything is infinitely and equally beautiful. You will discover Absolute Beauty and it will make you feel so stupid for not seeing it sooner.

He is too cocky for my taste. I don't like these debate lord streamers. They are a bit like the bottom of the intellectual barrel. It's very juvenile designed for juveniles.

I would talk to JP or Sam Harris or the Weinstein's -- the problem is I very much doubt they would be open to it. And I don't know how far the conversations could go. We would get hung up very quickly.
My conversation with Charlie was smooth and we went deep. But that's only because he's got the right kind of mind for this work, which is rare. People like JP, Sam Harris, Weinstein's, etc tend to have a lot of personal agenda clouding their minds. Which makes going deep rather hard. I'd be curious just to see how far it would go. There would be a lot of defense mechanisms triggered very quickly because they have a certain worldview to defend on behalf of their loyal audiences. Then it becomes more like a debate, which isn't good.
What's needed is hosts who don't have a worldview that they are defending/promoting -- because of course their worldview cannot be ultimately true. Because all worldviews are biased and partial.

It's just a mockery of Vedanta that could only impress someone dumb enough to hang on Sadhguru's every word -- which most of his followers do.
Of course those lashes are Maya. That's the point.
Vedanta is not a belief system. It is a path towards realization of Maya and then liberation from it. If you aren't liberated from it then your embodiment and consciousness is weak and you have not actualized Vedanta. This is not Vedanta's fault.
Sadhguru's characterization of Vedanta is very uncharitable. It would be like if I characterized Sahdguru's teachings as a cult of bending oneself into pretzels.

I criticize Zen and Christianity and JP at times. But I don't hold a strawman of Zen or Christianity. I have always acknowledged the core validity of those teachings. Christianity just happens to be exceptionally corrupt.
Imagine if I said that Zen is all just intellectual ideas that do not lead to truth. That would be akin to what Sadhguru said about Vedanta.
Criticizing stuff is not the same as strawmanning it. I can also present a steelman case for JP and conservativism.

The divine joke of self-help:
The entire self-help section is filled with books by others helping themselves by helping you by teaching you how you can help yourself by helping others help themselves to help others help themselves by helping others.
Maybe that's a clue to how Love works

I have also said I am open to investing in stocks.
What I am against is daytrading and using stocks as a get rich quick scheme.
For me stocks are a good inflation hedge. Since the gov is printing so much cash I feel somewhat justified placing my cash in stocks. I don't like my savings just being eaten away.

Yes, it can be dangerous if you spiral downward into madness by yourself.
But don't forget, being social can be very dangerous as you spiral downward into collective madness.
People. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
It is what you make of it. Welcome to life.

That works up to a point, but CBT can only take you so far. Precisely because it's cognitive. And cognition is the whole problem.
A) Sadhguru is highly educated. Which should be obvious from his manner of speech. He has a degree in English Literature.
B) He's 59 years old.

@sgn Tis hard to solve overthinking with more thinking
Rationalists who try to grasp the nature of reality with their intellect alone, often end up going full-insane. Of course. Because the whole project is fatally flawed from the get-go.
The intellect is such a tiny thing.

IQ is the biggest load of bullshit. Such a red herring. Never take those tests. All they do is compare you to some arbitrary standards some rationalist chimps concocted in their infinite ignorance.
Unless you're clinically retarded, you're good.
The highest IQ people are some of the biggest fools around. Just because you can solve a math puzzle quickly, doesn't say anything about your wisdom or level of consciousness.
Self-actualization means you have to stop thinking of yourself as a statistic. Statics are for policy-makers and people who care about measuring the mob. As a self-actualizer, you are going to grow so high above the statistical mob that you will not even fit on the scale. You will be qualitatively beyond all that.
Your true nature is Absolutely Infinite, and you're trying to measure yourself with an IQ test? Lol. You might as well be measuring your dick to see if it's big enough to self-actualize.

The difference between TYT/Vaush/Kyle Kulinski and Ken Wilber.
It's a huge difference.

I like being a higher achiever. And I often worked more than 40 hrs per week. But it has to be carefully balanced out against the higher things in life. It shouldn't become a lifestyle nor its own end. You can do it for short bursts when something important needs to be completed.

Ego is more than a thought, since thoughts come and go all the time, but your sense of self is pretty constant and much more stable than any one thought or belief.
Ego is actually a state of consciousness. Consciousness imagines itself to be a "someone". A human. A living creature. A thing that is conscious . A thing that has experiences. We might call this the egoic or materialistic state of consciousness. Changing that state of consciousness is necessary for the illusion of ego to dissolve.
It is as if you were a child playing a game of cowboys and Indians, and you are imagining yourself as a cowboy. Is the cowboy real? It's a role that's being played, a mask being worn. You feel like a cowboy because you keep imagining that you are one. Until you stop imagining it. Ego is not a thing, it's an imaginary role you've adopted.
For example, you might imagine yourself to be a woman. But right now you're imagining yourself to be a man. Except you tell yourself that you actually ARE a man, whereas being a woman would be imaginary to you. But both are imaginary. What is a man? A man is not a physical object. A man is a role you've adopted.

Not much.
Vegas has cheap rents and you can get into all clubs for free on Sun-Thurs. Now they charge $10 for parking, used to be free. Buying drinks is not needed at all.
Your only expenses are rent and parking.
Living on the Strip is pricey and not needed. A small Strip condo would cost $2k/month. Off the Strip you can find decent apartments for $1000/mo
If you want to go clubbing on Fri and Saturday -- the hottest days -- that will cost you $40/night.

Women are capable of it. But they have little interest in it.
The situation is so bad that I have simply given up on trying to explain attraction to women. It's a pointless effort. I know precisely what attracts them and I simply will embody it. No explanations or discussions.
Women are generally not truthful about what they are attracted to because what they tell themselves is one thing, and what they actually respond to is another.
Women create romanticized versions of attraction which suit their fantasies.
To understand what women are actually attracted to requires attracting lots of women. Attraction is ridiculously counter-intuitive and brutal.

I have no interest in debating female attraction with females.
Female attraction is something a man should learn through direct experience and then keep his mouth shut.

If you were Black, they would’ve called the police on you.

I never said he was awesome per se.
Girls get attracted to narcissistic and sociopathic men who know how to push their emotional buttons and have balls.
As a human being, John is bottom of the barrel. But from the perspective of attracting girls, this is a positive.
I'm not telling you to be like John. I'm telling you to be a good person but adopt some the excitement and charm of a scumbag narcissist.
Bottom line: stop being boring. Girls hate boring. Girls would rather sleep with a murder than a boring dude.

It's harder, but practice more improv.
Asking women questions upon open is terrible. You quickly lose her with your interrogation. Instead, either make funny assumptions about her or talk about yourself. My fave way to open is just telling her about my day or where I traveled recently. Travel stories are the best.
Stop the questions. Make statements. Learn to carry the entire conversation. You should be able to talk for 5 minutes without needing any input from her.

Does a rock have an ego?
Why should a human?
When you realize there is no difference between you and rock, you got it.
The idea that a human should have a self is the dumbest unquestioned idea of all time. It's just so dumb when you think about it. Why would anything have a self?
Obviously nothing has a self.

Don't blame it all on trauma.
Even healthy women are attracted to signals of strength and barbarism. It's a deeply wired thing.
Barbarism can literally make a girl wet. This is not just trauma.

A wise man once said: men are like dogs, women are like cats.
Cats don't like to be chased while dogs do.

The bottom line is: if she isn't horny for you, you've done something wrong somewhere earlier in the process.

Because most guys are so lame. When she finally meets an awesome guy who knows how to stimulate her emotions it will be a no-brainer.
Most guys don't even know how to fuck a girl properly.
When it comes to women, most guys are as interesting as a DMV application.