aurum

If God is a simulation, what is doing the simulating?

It is not a simulation at all. It is absolute truth. Don’t fall for Joe Rogan internet theories.

That's too simplistic of a human idea. Reality should not be described by anything mechanical like frame rates.

Frame is a term pulled from psychology. It usually refers to the overall assumptions and perspective one is working from. Are cheeseburgers good or bad? You could frame the answer in many different ways. Don't forget though, these terms are somewhat arbitrary and could be changed if you really wanted. You could say state = having a dog. We are just defining them in a particular way here for the purpose of communication. There is not an objective meaning to any word.

The body is mind because everything is consciousness. But consciousness is more fundamental than having a body. So there is a difference. Yes, respecting the body is important.

You don't need to remember everything. Write down what you want, otherwise I'd just enjoy the insight.

@Adrian colby beautiful descriptions, really well done.

High: moving beyond binaries, construct-awareness, multi-faceted thinking

On a deeper level, it's even more profound than that. Having a "physical" body itself is a state of consciousness. Consciousness does not need a body or to be physical at all.

Propaganda and media manipulation favors the right-wing. Progressives will not win at that game.

Conservative, I'd say no. Moderate, yes.

That part doesn't track. You are not more intelligent than God.

Straight to hell

But low perspectives are often hypocritical, fickle and ultimately rationalizations for survival. They are ideological, but they are not ideologically coherent because they do not value truth. They will flip if it benefits their survival. And economics is often the most direct link to survival.

I think you may be underestimating how fickle people can be if the economy gets bad enough. Trump is coasting on the complacency that comes from inheriting a pretty good economy.

What's your alternative suggestion then?

I kind of agree. As much as I like AOC, I'm skittish on her chances of winning a general at this point. We'll see how the next couple years play out.

That's why you need populism and people-power. The corporations and elite aren't going to hand it over nicely, you need to pressure them like FDR. The potential good news is that the economy may be so shit after Trump that people will be clamoring for economic populism. Similar to after the Great Depression.

He's too old for president though. He needs to pass the torch, potentially to AOC.

"Rational" religion sounds just like Jonathan Pageau and Jordan Hall. Now I can get all the benefits of participating in religion, but still be rational

Indeed!

It's corruption. Values and ideologies at lower stages of development are rationalizations for survival. And they are too simplistic / rigid to accommodate the complexities of reality. So the internal contradictions pile up. The key insight is that it's not about what is true at lower stages of development. Of course. Ego 101. How do maximize everything I want and minimize everything I don't?

Guzheng mastery: That she transcribed this from guitar is wild.

I'm specifically looking to counter a common manopshere talking point. Which is that marriage is inherently a bad deal for men because of things like alimony. I find this profoundly hypocritical because these same guys all say they want a traditional woman. But they don't recognize the responsibility that necessarily comes with that choice. If you're going to have a traditional marriage, the woman is taking an asymmetric risk financially. She does not provide for herself. Which means that if the marriage splits, she is in a much more vulnerable position. This asymmetrical dependence is exactly why things like alimony were developed. It's to protect women in these kind of scenarios and allow them to walk away from a toxic relationship. There are benefits to marriage for men, but they tend to be more baked into the cake. Alimony is not supposed to be one of them. So I have some empathy for manosphere guys who maybe have gone through an extremely difficult divorce. But the reality is you have to pick one. Do you want her to depend on you or not? Trying telling a manosphere / MGTOW guy about the importance of alimony and why men should have to pay it. The bias is obvious.

But is she? You're obviously a fan of hers. But from what I can tell, she's mostly just parroting new age things I've heard hundreds of times. Even if she is using unique language or phrasing, that doesn't make it a unique idea. The essence is still standard new age.