TheAlchemist

A Nazi can be a Nietzschean but Nietzsche cannot be a Nazi. Nazism is a later development but a lower perspective.

You seem wise beyond your years Congrats!

This is a perfect illustration of how the same underlying structural driver can lead someone to be both a new age shaman healer and a fundamentalist Christian. For example here is one underlying, usually unquestioned driver: I should be guaranteed permanent satisfaction, I should be secure, I should have a place, fulfillment and a sense of belonging. Being insecure, lacking, questioning, alienated and uprooted is categorically bad and should be avoided. No matter how many gallons of ayahuasca someone drinks, an underlying driver and fantasy such as this may never be uncovered. It requires a different approach and mode to uncover. Even spirituality generally is very accommodating to many fantasies about eternal fulfillment, happiness and belonging. An even when these drivers and fantasies are uncovered they continue to drive behavior, so it could be a massive task to uproot something like that without significant internal turmoil.

Would you say that Infinite Mind imagines through having limits? Is limit necessary for the process of imagination to unfold? Would you agree also that limitation is required for the infinite to realize itself, the infinite having no ground for realization without limit and finitude? I very much like the idea that Hegel also expressed about limit/limitless and finite/infinite being in dialectical relationship. They are necessary conditions for each other to exist and the Absolute Idea is about this eternal self-contradiction.

Beginning of the end

Some Bernardo Kastrup book, or even more grounded and approachable for a materialist would probably be the new Christopher Koch book: "Then I Am Myself the World: What Consciousness Is and How to Expand It". He has his own theory for what consciousness is but still I think he is a genius at opening up the conversation about what consciousness is and the mystery of it, especially for a western materialist mind. This or something similiar would be the most approachable I think, but Bernardo Kastrup goes much deeper into the real interesting stuff imo. It just may seem a bit too strange unless someone is already quite open to the idealism or eastern thought. Towards a more spiritual approach Sam Harris' Waking Up book would probably be also quite good as an intro

The Substance was just insane and also thought provoking. Terence Malick films like Thin Red Line and Days of Heaven. Super contemplative and visually beautiful with existential themes.

I think spiritualist, new age type of beliefs are often just another expression of the same structure that a religious person has adopted. Just a moderate-major shift in life circumstances or having a real love bomb experience from some Christian sect is often enough to cause a conversion. A certain level of insight into epistemology and development of critical thinking and rational capacities is needed to transcend fundamentalist belief systems. Maybe you have developed these capacities to the point that it just wont sink into you anymore in the same way it would for many. This is why I think more traditional philosophy is important to balance out some of the spiritual aspirations. Also, none of this is to say that there isn't validity to having faith or to Christianity. It's just that developing ones rational capacities usually seems to make people immune to those most fundamentalist forms of Christianity. And most spiritual people don't seem to be interested in diving deeply into questions of epistemology or metaphysics (from a philosophy perspective), and those folks are often just one step away from religious conversion. Anyways, I was also raised into religion and I can relate to the confusion and struggle of dealing with that in later life. But ultimately I think it's better to remain questioning and unsure of those things, it's a sign of individuating and coming to terms with ones subjectivity and the anxiety that is quite core to it. It's no wonder many choose to surrender to Jesus, especially with these people who dive really deep and the questions get bigger and bigger and the anxiety often along with it. Jesus comes to the rescue seeming to resolve that struggle. So, it can give a ton, but what is the shadow side of all the joy and glory that is being sold? I think there's always a shadow side to these saviors. But that's for each person to contemplate individually. I think we do have the capacities to live with the uncertainty and I do think it's valuable to question things and to continue to explore and investigate.

Someone like Andrew Tate psychologically lives in the role of a submissive housewife in relation to their favorite paternal superego figure. Think about it, the internalized paternal figure (God, parent, ideological structure) who is always watching and judging them, ready to punish and hurt them lives inside their mind in every moment. So to compensate for the sense of guilt they get from enjoying their slavery to the superego (the enjoyment in itself a kind of coping mechanism), these "alpha males" develop an enjoyment out of the domination and suppression of others. In a male-dominated culture, many women also can get enjoyment out of submitting, but there is an accepted social role for that for women so not as much guilt and much less compensatory behavior is expressed. But fundamentally it's a result of the internalized oppressive superego figure, which is perpetuated by these dynamics. So really, these self-annointed "alpha males" need someone who submits to them to feel like they aren't total worthless pieces of trash. Uncovering this dynamic and reflecting upon it honestly would be so painful that the path of oppressing others is chosen. Once I saw this dynamic I couldn't unsee it. I look at Andrew Tate and I see a sad little boy who is a slave to their superego. So there is and isn't something natural about these dynamics. They are natural in the sense that we all grow into them to some extent without a choice , but not natural in the sense that they aren't somehow inescapable or hard-coded into being human. So about men crying: Crying is just a natural expression of emotion for humans. The gender categories are what cause these interesting situations where crying is allowed for some and not for others. The social identity of being "man" is really just "not-woman". So there are certain qualities and behaviors that have cultural attachment to a certain genders. And of course identity is a source of stability and safety against death. So when a man cries and the culture tells him "men don't cry", he is confronted with a short moment of identity crisis, which is also a moment of confrontation with insecurity and lack. It can feel like a threat to the identity, which then has to be protected against by suppressing that behavior in the future, and telling others who share the same identity to also avoid that behavior. A man telling other men to not cry in public is often coming out of care and love, because one might intuitively know that it might not be received well by the social reality. And even many women might actually be repulsed by a man crying, because ultimately that identity also requires this distinction of being not-man. But still, the systemic and socially negotiated nature of the situation is not brought to light and the same dynamic continues.

You sound quite submissive to these "rules". Men belong here, women belong there. As if there is some higher natural order that we must submit to in exchange for lasting fulfillment. I think that's an illusion and a coping mechanism to stay feeling safe at the expense of others. We can engage with the world with our rational and emotional capacities, then we have some hope of actually moving somewhere instead of remaining stuck in some fantasy of the "good old days". It might be painful and it won't always leave us feeling happy but the alternative is much worse. Oppression, force and control are what are needed for the system you suggest. Because not everyone will ever agree to those rules and roles that you seem to think are somehow divinely assigned. The human striving for individuality and freedom from any definitions, roles or rules are also a productive part of the engine of history.

I agree about the individuation part. It seems a certain sense of alienation can be very fruitful for the development of individuated existence. Not finding a community to belong to, having identity-crises, self-doubt etc. can all be healthy signs of coming into contact with ones (sometimes painful) individual subjectivity. A model that specifically explores the unfoldment of subjectivity would be quite interesting. Although it would need to have a disintegration point where the model must fail, since it can't really account for or model the subjectivity itself once it has unfolded.

My observation is that any discussion about SD must always involve some reference to the problems of stage green Before I though I was becoming yellow. Now I think I am devolving fast towards some pre-human state. My plans for a future as a spiral wizard are doomed! 😁 To beige and beyond!

Looking at this from outside the US, it seems that this is a cathartic response coming from masses of people who have been fcked over by the insurance companies. It's probably very hard for anyone (including me) to fully relate who hasn't been in that situation themselves. Also, I think people are surprised and energized by recognizing how little they care about the death of a health insurance CEO. Maybe there is a conscious or unconscious recognition of the underlying systemic violence that has been killing people and causing suffering to countless people in the name of profits and growth. In that context, if we recognize that systemic forms of violence do exist, they usually go under the radar, and that there are people who are responsible for such violence, then it is more understandable that people would have this kind of reaction. In 100-200 years, if the US healthcare system develops, this act might just seem ethically equivalent to someone killing a slave owner in the 1800's . If that systemic violence truly is so widespread and the rule of law is not capable of recognizing that form of violence and bringing justice, then this is what can happen, as the frustration brews enough. People will resort to beheadings and mass killing if necessary to bring a sense of justice, but it is ugly and likely no good changes will come quickly. It's more about a release of emotions and recognition of injustices, so maybe that can fuel some political changes in the long run. Personally, I have no strong feelings about this. The death of a CEO holds no special significance in my heart compared to anyone else who is murdered or killed any day of the week around the globe. But I also won't celebrate or rejoice in this, maybe because I haven't personally experienced the injustice of the US healthcare system.

A lot of the new-age spiritualist stuff combined with conspiracy theories could easily be integrated into a fascist narrative.

1. As a response to Russia bringing foreign troops to Ukraine 2. To improve Ukraine's position in the coming negotiations Based on these two points alone it seems to me to be a strategically smart choice to make.

I think devotedly following these gurus (or any) can be attractive because it allows the maintaining of the illusion of the existence of the Big Other in Lacanian terms. It's the idea that there is someone out there who really knows what's going on and can provide the answers. The Big Other is a fantasy we manufacture and maintain. Take off the robes, the pedastal, the rhetorical techniques, the charisma, the idealization and all the group dynamics and just look at the words that are left. It may be good stuff or it may be just empty filler in an interesting packaging. Personally I think he made some good points about identity, attachment and the nature of subjectivity. But ultimately I don't think there is anything extra being transmitted there, outside of the words. The sense of serenity and "peace" and stuff is like performing the role of a certain "guru" figure as a kind of actor, although it may not be fully intentional. I would be much more interested if it was the alcoholic homeless guy just rambling something like this down the street.

I don't support disturbing the toad. People argue that it's "higher vibration" because it isn't from a lab, but that just doesn't make much sense to me. These folks who argue for using the natural frog secretions often say so because they see the value of the natural world and see it as highly intelligent. That's all good but I can't imagine the frog spirit or mother gaia or whatever to be very happy about imprisoning and extracting the secretions of these frogs. So, just leave the toad in peace and use the synthetic, cleaner version if anything. Here's Hamilton Morris talking about this, I think he makes a solid argument in favor of the lab-made version.

What does the devil need to make a deal with evangelical Christians? - Despise lgbtq+ people - Pretend to care about unborn babies That's really all that is needed for evangelicals to sign that deal with a passionate sense of duty. Similiar deals are easy to make with different voter bases. Just appeal to their central, heart issues and it wont really matter how much of devil you are outside of that.

This is a super fascinating topic to explore. First of all, I agree, all location is absolutely relative. This is the case with all objects that seem to be distinct and to have a distance from each other. This idea also stretches much further than relation between material objects. Here I wanna take the opportunity to explore the relation between the sense of identity and the sense of subjectivity, which is quite fascinating. This will sound obvious to some but I find its always to explore the fundamental questions of being conscious. Identity wants to locate itself in the symbolic realm in relation to other identities and the social structure. Example: Your name is a a concept that was imposed on you by your parents as a place to locate your identity (relative to other identities). Even if you choose a new name, you are still locating yourself in the symbolic social realm. Concepts like "man" "woman" "plumber" "muslim" "american" "human" "confident" etc. are all way to be distinct and distanced from other identities. This is the way identity aims to localize itself. So just like a pencil or a planet or a star doesn't have a location, neither does our sense of subjectivity. Identity is layered "on top of" subjectivity and provides a sense of location in relation to other identities and symbolic realms of language etc. This is why identity is in a sense important to navigate social reality. At the same time identity causes horrible problems when it is insisted on to relieve us from our subjectivity. In a sense, every object is alien to where it exists, nothing has its own "place". The same applies to us; whoever we think we are is alien to us. These relations between location and identity, subjectivity and space can be used to gain a ton of insight into all sorts of political and cultural situations too. For example, most ideologies appeal to the desire to "be located" in some way, appealing to (and creating) our desire to escape our subjectivity.

I think the lesson of Soviet Communism isn't that Marxism doesn't work, it is that any ideology with an absolute ideal that includes any utopistic idea of "salvation" of the individual from its struggle tends to lead to shit. So the critique of capitalism from Marx is extremely valuable. Yet we shouldn't try to "design" some better system. Even if we fully understand the limitations of capitalism, but then we channel that bubbling uncertainty and unknowing into designing some stupid capitalism 2.0, we will fall into the same traps. We gotta learn to sit with the discomfort of not knowing what we are supposed to do, without grasping for answers the moment we lose our ideological grounding. That's also why all those annoying people with humanities degrees who complain about the problems, present critiques, develop theories and philosophize, but provide no practical solutions are who we need to embrace and start listening to more.

That's not a surprising thing to hear from Leo. My understanding of his stance is that the same applies to money, a coffee table or your dad and so on to infinity. Jesus Christ being a social construct might be a shocking statement for a fundamentalist Christian to hear, but that's the kind of stuff you could expect to hear from Leo any day of the year, not just on Easter Sunday

The pills are known to be often significantly underdosed. Check out reddit r/2cb, there's a lot of important information like that there.

Poland has a large right-wing conservative Christian voter base that is targeted by a lot of populist politicians who can rile them up by stirring up their fears of other cultures. The refugee is the perfect scapegoat for people to blame for their problems and to shift attention away from internal issues. That is not to say there should be open borders or something though. There was also the unique case a couple years ago where immigrants were used as political tools by Belarus, pushing them around on the border. Of course there needs to be some kind of system in place to deal with that kind of situation. But also there is a solid reason for having these international refugee treaties. Who knows, maybe Poland could be in war one day, and they would probably really hope that other countries respect those treaties in that kind of situation. Imagine if ukrainian refugees were treated the way some of these frustrated guys fantasize about treating Syrians or Afghan refugees at the border.

I think none of my answers would be controversial to the average voter here in Finland. I think even some center and slightly right wing party supporters would get somewhat similiar results here. The average republican would basically be far right in my country.

One of my favorite countries to travel, but it's not for those who are looking for a sanitized comfortable experience. Go there to see all sides of humanity, the dark and the light. Talk to locals and be open, it can be very mind expanding. Many western people just like to make jokes about it and feed their prejudice to feel better about themselves, ignore them. You clearly have the curiosity and openness to be able to appreciate it. I can highly recommend it.