Danioover9000

@Opo Sure, people need guidelines, but a basic course on using this forum and doing high quality posts is really important, especially for users that don't over browse the interent, and still learning. You're faith in online users is too much! Nowhere in the guidelines teaches me how to post high quality posts ( the old version not the new updated guidelines) and how I use basic features of my user and profile and something basic like that.

@Consept There was some truth in Obama colluding with the UK, but in the other direction: The PM wanted Obama to voice his support for him and to slightly condemn the conservatives for whining about the PM's leanings towards the EU because of his Lib Dem position. The PM even spent a holiday living at Obama's place LOL!

@Gesundheit What this forum needs is a course on basic tutorial of using this website, posting high quality threads and replies, 5-7 hours of content on how to use this forum, post high quality posts and identify low quality posts, and a few hours of clarity on debating versus discussing, I've interacted with some users who admitted to me that they haven't even known an ignore option was available! You can ignore trouble making users here, yet that wasn't taught the first time becoming a member, and other basic online functions here. I was harassed here years back and I could've saved myself the headache if I knew the ignore option was a thing.

@TheSomeBody The blue is referring to the spiral dynamics modal that Leo made a video series on. Go and watch the entire series to get a good overview of other people's psychological development and your own. Conformists, conservatives, republicans, traditionalists, historians, religious fundamentalists, Alt right/left like fascists, extremists, nationalists, virgins and people who tend to think in good/bad extremes have a similar thinking to you. These types of views are constrained views of relationships and sexuality, and their egos are more on their group than their own selves, which is one reason why these types have a more difficult time dating and leading other women. Also, traumas and perceived faults of women can factor in. Using insulting labels onto another person is one of the signs of a mind projecting it's shadow away from itself, so in this case your self identity is likely an Incel or virgin, but admitting that is the last thing your mind will do, so it calls others the things it doesn't like itself to be to not face up and integrate that part.

@99alvarosanchez First of all it's really wrong to go too far into spirituality compared to too little basic self help techniques, NLP and so on, especially if you're still mid 20's and younger and still developing a self concept. The more hardcore spirituality comes later when your ego is fat enough to take it on. Secondly, 'having an ego is wrong' is just like saying 'having a sense of self is wrong'. You're wrong here, because you having a sense of self, thoughts and emotions and being incapable of having other people's sense of existing, thoughts and feelings means you're the only one existing and all places and people to you is a projection of your mind.

That everyone, including you, is a projection of my mind, and I'm the only one existence so far.

If you mean from your physical eyes then no you can't see 100% through eye lids, other than the lighting. If you're referring to mind's eye, absolutely yes you can see beyond your closed eye lids to worlds and things you can't quite explain.

@Hatfort I'm referring to born psychopaths incapable of emotions, and possibly birth trauma related psychopathy as these types struggle with identity the most towards other people, and some cases to themselves. However the people pretending to be psychopathic as a distraction isn't what I'm referring to.. I can't believe I have to explain this.

Psychopaths have it easy these days.

This sounds promising for me, because at some points I still struggle to contemplate. I mostly contemplate using Leo's way, but I sometimes ask my close friend and use the responses as some fuel for generating more questions and answers.

@Hello from Russia Firstly, there's no such thing as a brain reacting, reacting is what people do, because brains only have 'frequencies' and 'neural activity' and are stuck inside heads. Brains are fleshy information collecting things. However, brains are not people, so to quote random ancient artist 'learn to see with your eyes because your brain will make you go blind.'. Secondly, if sex is done properly, gfs and wives would be satisfied deeply. Maybe go fishing next time relaxed, not so tensely.

Nothing could quite compare to real sex, but one night I had a one night stand with a woman that had the right looks and personality particular to me. We chit chatted a bit before, and the whole thing lasted for roughly an hour. The strange thing about this event was the walls, bookshelves and carpet seemed too wavy, and the general lighting a bit wobbly and bright, and suddenly it hit me - I'm dreaming.

@Consept Yes I agree that's not good on his part and I do see the hypocrisy, but I went off topic at Leo's contraction of boiling down Donald Trump's evil as one singular action, which can be an issue when we falsely generalize to another person. If I saw you push away a child, with this contracted mentality I could call you an evil person for harming a child. However, I learn more later that you pushed the child away from an oncoming motorcycle, and intentionally sent him to a grassy area than one with concrete. Do I still come away from that situation maintaining my label of you, from one single action? I don't need to defend Trump here because to me silence is golden, and Trump publicly calling dead soldiers losers is a bit too far instead of keeping his mouth shut. I also think Trump's mistakes is his to defend alone and unfortunately supporters are backed into the corner even more. It's just the false conflation that draft dodging is every evil person characteristic is not cool. Mohammad Ally draft dodged and stood his ground at the face of authority, and indirectly inspired others, for better or worse, to uphold themselves. Nikola Tesla contributed to the world as an amazing engineer, yet before he came to America, he had to draft dodge because of his health, and with the help of his father he went to the hills and rejuvenated some of his body that way. And I agree that this is my problem as I'm the one triggered because I love history, geniuses and hate lazy conflation making, so my observation hopefully will inspire other users to carefully type.

@Roy It's just not honestly an accurate way of showing a person's full character. Mohammad Ally refused to draft, so am I to assume he's a 'bad' character? So did Nickola Tesla draft dodged, yet he's a brilliant engineer.

@Leo Gura Hang on there, Nikola Tesla draft dodged as well. From this, I assume this tells me exactly who Nikola Tesla is? Of course not. We need enough information collected to come to some conclusion about a person. If all the information I need is from one singular action taken by an individual, that's epistemically problematic, and very easy to distort away. Donald Trump's actions on camera/what I'm observing, and testimonials from people who worked before with him, family members, social circle, and multiple views, not just from his side or the democrat's side. This isn't a good use of Occam's razor theory.

@GroovyGuru This is also another strategy to doing dating. It's like sailing a ship with several damaged areas, thinking the locations could be covered in one day without being aware that each damaged area slows down travel. By focusing on fixing up your career, job, financial situation, social circle, health, fitness, environment, new hobbies, spirituality and psychology, then you're in a more powerful position to do dating. With first focusing on resolving major distractions and underlying shadow selves, it's easier to do more dating than to do dating while your life is breaking apart here and there that your focus is further divided and potential partners get intuitively turned off from your outer/inner problems.

@Etherial Cat I'm surprised he's letting loose comments that could be used against him.

And these statements are relative and partial too.

@Consept Yes that's right, especially facts involving human behaviors and each society. I think when most people think objective facts they think of like with rocks. It's objectively true that rocks are subject to nature, so they can be solid or semi solid or more liquid and sometimes gaseous like dust clouds And it's taken as belief and not questioned further and take this view onto other people. Also because time flows at certain ranges, not mentioning objective time but subjective time, that some things appear as static and unchangeable and this can last for generations, until something big happens that alters that assumption.

@Psychic crocodile Time is independent from language, otherwise I'd say "I want some sunshine, okay be noon right now!" and bam it's noon instantly. Flat earth was a fact at that time, until enough data was gathered and a consensus was reached that the sun doesn't circle around the earth, but earth circles around it, and enough data was gathered and we reached a consensus that the earth is round, not flat. Thoughts are also objective in that they occur, yes they are subjective because you can't cross that information to another mind directly as is and reach a consensus there, but it's also objective despite being difficult to measure or quantify or design a modal to teach other people about thoughts in a scientific manner. The best so far is poking at people's brains to stimulate memories, but memories are not thoughts and it's done under materialistic conditions instead of immaterialist conditions like telepathy or Tulpamancy.

@Consept So, if new evidence showed that most rapists were falsely accused, and most victims were lying under oath when testifying against the rape being bad when in the contrary they were enjoying the behavior of the rapist, and a consensus is reached by different groups of people that due to new evidence gathered from both additional sources and review of past history of every crime relevant to rape, that a new law will be passed for softer punishment and eligibility for the accused and harsher laws for the victimized. Just because objectivity is consistent doesn't mean permanence, it's also objective that change can occur at an objective fact or situation, like I've stated above about the whole perpetrator/victim cycle, because this cycle is part of human history, part of a bigger set of actions taken at each other human being, that throughout time is experienced as direct experience, then passed on to outsiders and surviving human beings involved or not involved as second hand knowledge, which is then recorded and taught through some education program or public service facility to educate those that lack direct experience of such traumatic actions that some actions must be kept, some must be thrown away. This we call ethical codes of conduct. I don't really see where we disagree at, because I do agree that facts do change over time, and some facts are treated in an objective manner for sack of usefulness. If you mind telling me where we are disagreeing then I'm better able to understand your take.

@Consept Yes, some facts can change throughout time.

@Consept A consensus is an agreement made by different groups in a society, like social contract found in the justice system, religious texts and other types of ethical codes of conduct. Objectivity is a fact or data that is extremely consistent, measurable, quantifiable, has undergone layers of proofs, like the fact that there's a sun, or rain is water, or the snow is white. Where consensus and objectivity meets is in the gathering of continuous data of human interactions between each other that surviving humans find benefit in keeping and discarding some human behaviors, which triggers designing ethical codes of conduct throughout history in order to continue this filtering process. I'm sorry, the world or people? Because the world's too big, beyond human concerns and is impartial. You're also speaking for a speculative consensus for groups in deciding whether or not that killing jews is acceptable, and whether or not slavery and torture are acceptable. To really know what is or isn't acceptable, means that prior to deciding right from wrong is needed a history of human interactions that involved actions (killing, slavery and torture) done in direct experience by the doer and receivers, and witnessed by other people, recorded as second hand knowledge, and taught in some way by the survivors of the doers/receivers/people that lacked direct experience of such events. In this way, we decrease selfishness over time, or another way is selfishness can evolve away from less cruder forms of actions, and objectivity, whether social or the universe like gravity, is enforced by consistent occurrences. In this way, both of us benefit.

@Carl-Richard @Consept They call it objective because there's a usefulness in gathering consensus among people under objectivity. Yet it's also true that objectivity is relative and dependent on things with consciousness and thinking to exist. Also, the sufferings and harms done to each other in history up to now is a learning process and necessary for a basis of compassion and love, because without strong contrasts it's not that easy to develop morality. When I say morality I mean a 'moral compass', an intuitive right and wrong, not ethicality, the lists of rules by culture themselves.

@Consept I think it's called bio energetics.