JosephKnecht

The moderators are on fire. From my experience, David Hawkins is on point with this statement. Imagine feeling all the joy that you have experienced in your own life all at once. Now Imagine feeling all the joy of all the people that are currently living all at once. Now imagine feeling all the joy of all the people who are living, have lived and will be living in the future all at once. When you experience infinite love for the first time, it feels as if God gathered all the joys of every being, living or dead, and God drowns you in an infinite lake filled with his infinite love. The feeling is so joyful that you can't believe that such thing would even exist.

That is true. But Trump can go on the White House balcony and yell out whatever he wants. Or he could say it in private with world leaders. Who can stop him from doing that? Nobody. Before the last election, Trump told everyone that he will grab you by the pussy. Everyone believed that the pussy were female genitals, but actually it was the whole democratic system. You picked him, now you have to enjoy while he fingers you with his small hands. (figuratively speaking) LOL

Sexuality is highly personal and not sociological. The problem has to be solved on a personal level and then the solution "trickles down" to the level of society. The only thing we can do is help raise awareness of the problem. If a woman wants to be the 77th wife of a wealthy man, it is her right and we shouldn't be forcing her to forcefully love her poor neighbor. At some point, this woman might realize that she can gain more love from a poor man, rather than a rich man who has 77 wives. Also, we have to create a society where we don't have extreme wealth inequality. Eventually, the problem will be resolved. If we share prosperity and love rather than keep it for ourselves, everyone prospers. Jordan Peterson comes from a fairly traditional and conservative view on marriage. Just because its traditional doesn't make it right. You have to decide what works for you.

Thanks for your answer. Can you elaborate on your definition of high consciousness sex? Do all the people involved have to in "high vibrations"? Selfless giving is the answer, but it fails when you are giving to an ego and not a soul.

@kag101 It is irresponsible if you seek sanity. It is responsible if you seek enlightenment. Depends on what you seek. @Jonsey It seems that you have attachments to things that you are not willing to let go at the current moment. That is ok. Take your time. When you are willing to let go of everything, enlightenment will find you.

This will happen in the very distant future. There will be a time when everybody is awakened. However, we will no longer be called humans. We will become something else.

If you can't think for yourself, you need the thoughts of other people. If you disagree with their thoughts, you reject them. If you agree with their thoughts, you call their thoughts your own. When you are starting to understand the thoughts of others, it is best if you start thinking for yourself.

He had good points, but he keeps demonizing people from the lower level on the spiral. The rant against Ayn Rand and Nathaniel Brandon was unnecessary. These people were intellectual giants in their time. They attempted to create an objectivist philosophy of reality and went as far as they could. Why demonize them for their failures? To get higher on the spiral, you must first go through the lower levels. These people are still lifting up people with the books they wrote. The same goes for Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris and whomever else Leo has ranted against. @Leo Gura Just friendly advice to tone down your criticism of others. You are free to point to holes in their arguments, but don't use ad hominem attacks in the manner you spoke today. Some of your listeners have to read Ayn before they can understand your argument. Don't deprive them of that privilege.

Man. I have a treat for you. Enjoy. Its only 4 hours of yelling at you on how you are wrong. The man has a point tho.

People on this forum are more openminded than the general population and thus favor more progressive views. If you were expecting something else, there is a problem with your expectations. The problem with the leftists is that they haven't gone full circle yet. If you go all the way to the left, eventually you will come to the right. But many people, especially on far left hold extremist views against the right because they absolutely believe in their ideology. On one hand, they have moved in the correct direction and they see that going left leads to more progress in society. But what they fail to realize is that once progress has been made, you need people from the right to systematize and democratize the progress. The left is necessary to point to holes in the current system to destabilize it and make it better eventually. But the right is necessary to take over from the left and create the right institutions that will stabilize the progress. The left can create CHAZ countries, but other than guitars and yoga mats they can't bring anything else to the table. They don't know how to create institutions, because that is more in the skillset of the people from the right. So you are right, we need people from the left and the right. As long as there is the freedom to express our opinions in an open debate, there is a chance to align our views. In the long run, we are all wrong anyway. Both left and right. Are you an American living in Germany? I don't think they allow the Germans to vote in American elections. But these days anything is possible.

I think the gays might be into it. He might even win over their votes. The blacks would probably disagree. But jokes aside. If Trump wants to say those sentences, he will say them. He might say them in an interview (shall we ban interviews?), he might say them in news briefing (also ban news briefings?), or god forbid he might say them in an executive order. The Founding Fathers intended for the president to be the highest voice in the Nation. They envisioned the President to be the Father of the nation. We are now in a situation where people are advocating to silence the highest voice, which in the current system should never happen. There are two solutions. Solution 1. Change your constitution and come up with a better way of governance than the current one. Solution 2. Don't elect idiots who say idiotic things. If you elect idiots, it is your vote who put idiots in power and you must suffer your own idiocy.

@Principium Nexus Watch this. I think it might be helpful in your visualization.

No, it would not be awesome. That would mean that a corporation that is only liable to a few shareholders has more power than a democratically elected president who was voted in by millions of people. Few shareholders in tweety company should not be able to silence a person that presides over all the laws of the country. When a few people rule over many, there is always tyranny. Don't silence Trump. Vote him out of office. That would be more awesome.

You can't tell the Truth to a believer. A believer believes in Jesus but doesn't know Jesus. If you tell a Christian fanatic that Jesus didn't exist, they will crucify you. If you tell them the Jesus never died, they will crucify you. Christians have to crucify YOU, to know Jesus.

The difference is syntactic sugar. The latter makes the language "sweeter" for human use. Emotions are the things that set things in motion. Science can't study subjective states since science relies on objective third party validation. Spirituality can't explain objective states since it relies on subjective experience. The most surprising thing is that all emotions can be deconstructed. David Hawkins's scale is a useful approach to deconstruction.

To get to enlightenment, you must first pass through the path of insanity. When you think you are starting to go insane, don't stop. Keep going.

Spirituality is about raising your spirit. The spirit doesn't understand depression, emotions, jobs. Those things are under the control of your ego. You suffer because you misidentify your spirit for your ego. Spirituality can only help you to the extent that you can correctly identify yourself rather than misidentify yourself. If everything that I just mentioned went over your head, remember, you can always get another job. You can always let go of your emotions. You are in control of your life. Nobody can ever know you the way you know yourself.

For-Get. For —used to indicate the place someone or something is going to or toward. Get — succeed in attaining, achieving, or experiencing; obtain. Without the for, you can't get. Without the get, you don't know what for.

I know he knows, but he doesn't want to tell me. Did you enter this state through meditation only or through different methods?

Is doing "low consciousness" activities a good approach for grounding back to reality? Are there any side-effects to re-grounding using these approaches? Can you get to a state when you can willingly modulate your state of consciousness? This would mean not talking psychedelics to achieve high states, nor having sex to achieve ground states? So only using pure will power?

Politics.

That is what I have been trying to say. I do not follow Stefan, and I was unaware of /r/the_donald until they removed it from Reddit. We should not delegate the freedom of speech to large companies that basically have a monopoly on our communication channels. If Youtube could ban Alex Jones, Stefan, and others, what would prevent them from banning Leo from Youtube? I am sure in the hundreds of hours Leo has uploaded, someone might interpret something as hate speech.

What is a statue but the immortalization of human stupidity? A statue is an attempt to solidify the image of a hero who in the times which he/she lived fought for that which society believed to be just. But society changes, and so does justice. Now take a more enlightened perspective. Every statue in a million years will be perceived as a deluded idiot who fought for something that was already perfect in the eyes of God. It was only his Ego that saw imperfections and tried to make it perfect. In the end, we should bring down every statue, not just the confederate ones. Or maybe, we should let them stand as a symbol of human stupidity. If you can't decide who draws the line, then don't draw the line. Sites like Reddit, Youtube, Amazon have gained monopoly power over the way we communicate. If they gain the power to censor communication, eventually they might seek power to control what, how, and when we communicate. One of the reasons why the Internet is so successful and prevalent is because it doesn't censure any communication. The internet protocol allows for complete freedom in human expression. There is no "hate" in bits of information. Every bit is equal to every other bit. The hate is only in our minds that perceive hatred. You can't eradicate hatred by censuring speech but only by changing human perception.

I agree with your points. However, who becomes the arbiter of what is "hate speech"? The one who decides what is hate speech wields all power over free speech. Reddit is a privately owned company. That is true. However, Reddit is hosted on Amazon AWS. What if one day Amazon decides that posting memes about Bezos is hate speech and shuts down Reddit? A company can not be the arbiter of free speech.

It is all fun and games until someone loses an "I".