Origins

@Cosmin_Visan Yeah its a great point, its like talking about someone who loves cars but doesn't know much about the mechanics of it. Albeit with different psychological ramifications with this driving world view, identity structure, relations with others, etc. Once you understand the nature of the beast dissonance ceases and its easier to just let people be unless you can clearly see the worldview is causing them problems in which case maybe an intervention is necessary but still most of the time, at least what I've found, intervention outside of ones immediate social reference frame is certainly not a good idea however opinion, understanding and mild (or more who knows what the right intuition is all the time) direction generally suffice if anything is necessary there. People like us can have a meta-discussion about it to add to one another's reference frames but that's about all we can do, its kind of like two mechanics get together and they say, "do you know about these car enthusiasts saying x, y, z about the Ferrari? I mean c'mon what's going on here they won't see this, this and this", and the other mechanic just aids the other mechanics in validating his own perspective "just let them go, who knows, maybe they'll try it on the Ferrari and the Ferrari will break down and they'll learn their lesson or they'll forget what they were even thinking about and wonder off onto the next subject in 5 minutes time", and the other mechanic goes, "thanks, its good to see I'm not the only one. It's like some of these people think just because they've driven a Ferrari, have sat in a Ferrari or even have just seen another person drive a Ferrari now all of a sudden they know about Ferrari's and what Ferrari's mean in terms of describing the rest of the vehicle industry." and the second mechanic goes, "yeah I know. I get it." It helps to have someone else in the classroom pointing out the same problem otherwise, well, at least I know I'm not this guy haha peace out and I'll check out your link there thanks! I've always been a rebel, learning to round that out as I grow in wisdom:

@Bird Larry You've just done a great job at expressing how you feel about the subject, that's arguably 10X more courageous than actually detailing the things you hope for the future. Wishing you the ability to see the strength, courage and emotional intelligence you already have so you can apply it in the areas your intuition guides you to apply it at any other time in your life .

For me it's a lack of knowing. Know truth, be free. A lack of knowing that one day this physical form will someday end and the essence that gives birth to its consciousness will be transmuted and transformed into something presently unimaginable to me. A lack of knowing of the ever expansive, ever mysterious nature of not just the universe but of existence itself in its most simple form, the leaves falling from the tree, a sea of consciousnesses interacting all simultaneously in different ways across this entire planet and probably many other planets presently unimaginable to most of us. A lack of knowing of the life that existed prior to the memory we have of experiencing this life we have now, that this memory we have is both an individual and collective hypnosis that hides us from viewing the impenetrable depth, horizon line and vastness of the memory of the grand memory of life we're all a part of. Through this, we move on a discovery process with the imagination and the essence of being, beyond the shadows of trouble presented to us in our present life and into the rays that cast a life on all of life. Although aided by the imagination, the understanding that results is beyond imagination, it becomes like an immortal diamond we can carry in our hearts as we carry ourselves with life and its ever unfoldment, and through that process, we don't become immortal, we recognise we're already immortal. Thee who truly understands their immortality cannot suffer, but if we trifle with shallow understanding, this will cause great frustration and pain. So to the depths of canyons we must go, the heights of mountains, the beauty of rainbows, the mystery of rows of trees shifting synchronously from the wind, the surprising awe of a purple glow in the dawn, the brisk rise of sunlight in the morning with birds sounding the busy work of all of nature. This rounds us, grounds us, twists the sounds between our ears into frequencies that help us foresee, believe, perceive beyond the illusion, that there is no conclusion, and if so, nothing is to its exclusion, so to that, there is always home. I know I am immortal. I want everyone to be able to have this understanding as well, but this is for them or anyone else, not for me to decide, just to open the door a little wider than before. And to this, however it is to manifest for them, let them have their dignity and regardless as to what they believe true of themselves, when I look them the eye, I will always see natures symphony.

@flowboy No problem at all I'm a fast typer anyhow glad to say something that helps! Best!

@flowboy This one is super, super simple. You just gotta talk more. About everything. Until it becomes annoying, then you start to find out each others weak points in the relationships and through that process learn how to either navigate through them or... The relationship simply ends. That's what I'm like. I'm straight down the line, I want to learn everything about a potential partner and I want them to learn everything about me and even if I do put up a shield to begin with I'll purposefully create conversational opportunities to test that further and further before the spine snaps back into place so to speak. You can't know the plane's gonna fly if you don't stress test, you can't trust the pilot you never met even if they say they've done thousands of miles, ask him directly, "why are you feeling jittery?", not in a mean way of course, just in a very understanding way, either he'll survive the stress test or he will eventually reveal to me either by micro expressions or directly that he's got a caffeine addiction that could affect his flying, he lost someone close to him recently, he just had an argument with his wife and he's worried she's going to ask for a divorce, and so on and so fourth. We can easily set ourselves up to become disempowered and too afraid to lose someone, instead I focus more on fearing having a relationship not built on a strong foundation. That's how you get to a deep level of trust as quickly and as deeply as possible, otherwise you'll analogously speaking never even ask the girl out that you've always liked in primary school for example, instead you just say hi awkwardly when around her. We can get the same in relationships as well, the question we need to ask ourselves is "am I trying to keep this person in my life or am I trying to have a relationship that is mutually beneficial?", if its the former, its so easy for us to be more selfish as well, if its the latter we're also thinking about the other person, letting them learn about us as soon as possible about a range of different things by being really forward about various topics to talk about. That's how I approach things, my personality is very direct, I get it that its different for other people and if I were in a relationship with someone that was different to that tendency this would be perfectly fine, like maybe they're super sensitive perhaps even neurotic about various things and this would be okay I'd even be highly supportive where I could (because if I'm interested in her it means she's high quality and worth the investment), my goal would be to just discover enough truth signals that I know I can feel comfortable around her and she can feel comfortable around me. Communication forces a person to be either more towards their authenticity or inauthenticity and the more sincere conversational opportunities you engage in the more you both will be forced to discover the truth of that and either build your relationship and therefore dropping the shield and opening up to something greater between you, creating further distance between you both or a bit of both. It takes a lot of emotional intelligence to workout just how much you want to be going with something like that, my advice is to make sure you know why you're in the relationship and what you want to build long term and how you think you both can be a part of creating that together for the benefit of both of you. Peace out and all the best

@Jetam She'd be escorted immediately out of the building of planet Origins if I was in this situation, sounds like she's treating you a bit like a doormat in certain situations. I wish you the best as it concerns putting yourself first, your relationship second and her third. We come together because we meet together in the middle, not so we can play out unhealthy relationship dynamics because we suck at relationships. That's how I approach things anyhow. For me it would never reach this stage though, if it had, I'd be staging a big intervention on the relationship on where the boundaries began and ended. This is a matter of personality and history though, whatever works for you works for you. It sounds like you're way, way too much of a people pleaser. I mean you've got so much information here to process that I could easily do a 1000 word response pretty quickly to give you ideas if you want but I encourage you to really do some soul searching before asking. You might like to check my response made just previous (see my profile history) to get some ideas if you like. Sounds like you're having a really tough time you have my sympathies as you may just not have the experience to navigate beyond these difficulties (believe that you can though), all the best regardless for you and your relationship.

@Marianitozz For me the most important quality a relationship needs to have between two or more (haha polyamory <-- but in most cases not really) people is a growth mindset. Sounds like something Dr. Phil would say but its totally true, either you both grow together or you grow apart. So you both need to be open and honest about what each other want out of the relationship and surrender yourself to having faith in the ability you both have to grow together and develop your relationship overtime. Life is a project not a having, even if we have a mansion eventually its going to require maintenance, so you can have all the ideal things going for you both but eventually you're going to hit a roadblock, a difficulty of some sort, and if you're both not invested in sharing a growth mindset its simply going to turn what seemed like something perfect into something that's turned quite dismal overnight. So if it were me I'd be direct and upfront with myself first and foremost what my goals were, followed by thinking about her goals and how we're going to fulfil those together in the short to long term future. I'd then follow this up with not a text message, not a phone conversation, not a casual remark, not a passive aggressive behaviour but an actual get together where we chose to spend quality time together while talking about how we're going to coordinate with each others lives in the best way that serves one another. This shows her that you've gone out of your way to take not just what you want seriously but also what she wants seriously and that you're seeking some closure about how you can progress forward in a mature way together, not with you just leading the ship or you submitting to her needs but creating a win/win scenario where you can establish stability with one another for the future. All the best , relationships are so much more difficult when we don't have those basic ingredients in the end take some introspective time with yourself about what you personally believe a relationship is about and how this relationship you're having serves the both of you and in the end follow your intuition and overall what you believe to be best.

To add to my comment just above: @Viking and one other empowering mindset I have that I can share is reminding myself to treat every experience as a potential source of creative inspiration, so I'd be asking myself something like, "even though I'd prefer not to repeat this again as I think I've created enough of a first person direct experience to establish a real life narrative out of it, what are all the lessons including unconventional useful ideas I can take away from this experience?". This ties into one another empowering mindset I came up with that involves the gamification of memory (not real life, just memory - for me that creates the ideal balance between direct experience and abstractly orienting towards experience in a creative way), in the sense I'll use memory as a source of information to continually inform the creative possibilities of the present moment while at the same time not taking away from the sentimental aspects of experience itself, because what we create in our imagination can often influence how we interpret direct experience, hence that balance I was referring to before, creative in this sense would be to utility relative to the full expression of the human spirit, for lack of a better way of putting it at present. This (gamification of memory in the way I've described) makes learning from experience a heck of a lot more fun, it literally becomes like conquering a game, discovering new levels, hidden passages, etc to experience so the reward system of your brain just becomes more and more incentivised to come up with more and more creative ways to direct your consciousness to an increasingly more sophisticated level. Peace.

@Viking For what its worth, maybe you're just spiralling based on experimenting with the that negative feedback loop, which I think is perfectly fine as long as you're aware before hand what you're doing and how you're going to mitigate that negative feedback loop once it begins. So I would ask yourself constructive questions: What have I done to prepare myself for reshaping this negative feedback loop I've created when I'm ready to return to baseline? What unconstructive thoughts have I developed as a consequence of beginning this feedback loop and how can I release from their illusion? It's important to explore, be creative, experiment outside the known while at the same time its important to be responsible for the journey before it happens as much as possible. So to this end, its not necessarily a matter of what is bad in a black and white way but rather, what is potentially less constructive and what have I done to mitigate in advance any potential negative side effects. It's like pre-psychedelic work or even pre-work before seeing what could be a dodgy psychologist, its important to not make assumptions about either the authority we have over our future behaviours or the supposed authority that someone else has simply because they have a certificate when we haven't done our prior homework. For example, both for myself in this situation and for a psychologist, I'd be drilling the psychologist with carefully thought out questions to probe them on their capability while at the same time doing an analysis on my own behaviours to ensure that any biases I have don't obstruct my own perception of them as much as I can. On the actual question though, "why should I love myself?, I just feel nothingness for myself (not in a bad way) so I'm not really sure what other peoples experience is like but for me its more a matter of what do I love and for me its life and what are the directions I'm flowing in that I love and that I will do out of love and have faith in out of love. I love consciousness that I experience, that's something I can definitely associate with, and just as much as its important to understand how to answer the preparatory questions we've created for ourselves regarding any exploration into the unknown we might do its important to identify things we at the very least like more than others so we can begin to understand what we love, why and how we can love the direction better as we improve our self knowledge there. So for me as a final response to that question contextualised based on what I've stated so far, because its the most fundamental precondition for my life along with its continuation and advancement. Best

@levani I simply recall negative emotions in various ways and associate that with any behaviour I don't wish to do, i.e. but not limited to: say at this particular time its unhealthy for me to eat a doughnut, I simply remember the last time it was unhealthy for me to eat a doughnut and then associate the negative emotions I felt in that experience with visualising the experience of either actually eating the doughnut not eating it or both. This is what I refer to as leveraging autobiographical emotional memory with visualisation (the latter employed as needed), which in this case, is being applied to the destruction of a behaviour or even habit, thus the inverse is also true in that it can be applied dot the generation of a behaviour and even habit. Sometimes you can just skip the visualisation if you're deprived of energy if you have enough skill. Albeit a double edged sword used with skill it can be highly advantageous to be able to use the imagination to trick your mind into nearly anything and learning to combine that with lived experience (i.e. autobiographical memory) can bring about really powerful results. You can also apply this to the positive end, say remember the positive emotions you experienced the last time you were able to demonstrate self control and apply them to the present experience of either moving towards a behaviour or away from a behaviour.

Although I've appreciated our back and fourth and hope you continue to learn from your own personal psychedelic and spiritual experiences in the way that you wish to I think we're getting a bit off track here though @Adamq8 I don't think we're going to make anymore ground so we should just keep to the initial thread title, though at least for me I think I've revealed enough cracks there as well and I'm intuiting @Cosmin_Visan's is probably at the very least closing in on a similar conclusion to myself regarding the debunked affairs here. Unfortunately this is just human nature Cosmin, it's an uncontrollable dragon when the wind underneath the wings pushing the dragon in the sky is human fallibility. This is just all we have until we have something better. This forum serves a purpose for helping a person where you can (including even yourself) and where they're able to see the benefit but as it concerns generating any cohesive sweeping wind to change the direction of the dragon to an entirely renovated direction seems unlikely, but that's fine. This is just how things are. For this kind of dragon you have to just let people have their cool-aid and even encourage them to drink it because there's no foreseeable way out. It's kind of like watching the national grand final of a football match with some old football friends where you have to pretend to enjoy it because you've out grown it. The pretending is fine, its natural, we're all just adapting to the moment here and we all have to find our own path in the end. Unless there's anything else you seriously wanted to examine here, that'll be all from me Cosmin all the best to you and to @Breakingthewall (by the way I never said explicitly nor implicitly inferred that psychedelic's were at all foolish, its just a matter of the quality of the wine, the occasion in which its going to be had, the manner in which its going to be drunk and the precondition of the persons physical well being).

@Adamq8 I can imagine "infinity like", its not difficult for me. I don't believe psychedelic's are going to do anything for me other than their neuroplastic potential benefit, this is simply because I've been to so many places in my mind imaginatively that you wouldn't believe which is why I really think people who take psychedelic's ought to explore their mind more rather than just put the power of their imagination up for adoption by drug use. Moreover, extensive use hasn't been well documented, so I'll be doing proper clinical studies with my own tools and relevant personnel as it suits proper standards. At present, these are recreationally taken and recreationally documented by most persons which means there's a hyper-indexed sum of information yet to be uncovered regarding psychedelic's to date. Informationally that means we're in the gold rush age of psychedelic's and it doesn't look like that's going to change anytime soon. The quality and degree that people need to improve their standards around their exploration is greater than any infinity they've ever imagined, and that makes sense, if you're saying there's an "infinity" that goes together with the ABC's of psychedelic's that means there's a seemingly inordinate amount of creativity needed to capture said creativity as decisively as possible. I'm not at all amazed by what you or anyone else has stated and I mean that with no offence I just honestly think people have put way too much stock in drugs here because they haven't put enough stock in the capabilities of their own minds, I've experienced all those things you've mentioned without drugs, its pretty ordinary to me now, there's nothing "new under the sun". It's fun and I'm sure the experience will have its kicks, but there wil be nothing new under the sun for me, even any so called "bad trip", the likelihood of any bad trip being bad for me is extremely low. I'll be doing it just for the brain benefits up to the predicted and experimented possibilities there and no further.

@Adamq8 Okay so you're saying you've experienced an infinite amount, wouldn't you still be experiencing them if they were infinite? I have't yet had experience with psychedelic's and I don't plan to until I've organised proper experimental protocols but I will follow through once I'm satisfied I'm adequately strategically setup there. If you say you've experienced what you can perceive as infinite you must have experienced quite a lot, could you be able to list even just 100? This is the problem with describing things in terms of how we subjectively feel when it comes to numbers, its okay to say "like it was infinite" it is not adequate intellectually to say "it is infinite" if we're being precise. Infinite is a fine term for artistic expression, not for when we're trying to make objective statements of reality which is what many people try to do in spirituality, which is also fine, but if the person making the statements wants intelligent people to take their claims seriously they ought to have intelligent reasons for believing so. That seems pretty reasonable to me. For example if I told you that I just had a spiritual awakening 5 seconds ago that told me humanity has to destroy itself right now and that you HAVE to believe me or else you're satan, would you take me seriously if I gave you no intelligent reasons for believing so? I highly doubt it, people are easily swayed by cognitive biases like bandwagon effect and so on when they're not aware to these sorts of things. @Breakingthewall I'm already completely free from all the things that people have claimed psychedelic's offers, all I'm doing here is critiquing peoples perspectives relative to what should be reasonable to accept. There is zero reason for me to equate someone else's experience as something I should go on as it concerns something like the presently unobservable realm of consciousness and existence as a whole just as much as there is zero reason for others to believe in things that I state simply because I put psychedelic experience before I state the experience analogous to the above example I gave. This isn't going anywhere though I can see that and that's because the flaws I've noted speak for themselves just that no bodies picked up the slack to talk about them. I appreciate both of your perspectives regardless.

But @Adamq8 , can you come up with 1 million though? I don't see the sentence that leads on to conclude that you can jump to infinity. If you can just admit this that would be great otherwise don't sweat it. I'm not going to place pressure on you its okay. If you can come up with 1000, I'll even give you $1000, bare in mind that's 999,999 less than what I was asking for before and not even 1/1,000,000,000,000 of what infinity could be. These are basic statements I'm making that if asked about regarding another topic you didn't have a bias towards you'd probably be able to agree with me, there aren't an infinite number of termites eating Fred's home that's why he's at the bar drinking while taking psychedelic's it just looks that way because to Fred "there's just so many!" plus Fred is intoxicated.

@Adamq8 Can you get to 1 million (and prove it - regarding say states of consciousness)? Seriously if you could get to 1 million I'll give you $1000 AUS. But even after the $1000 you have to fathom that 1 million is still separated by 99 more million from 100 million, 900 million more from 1 billion, 999 billion from 1 trillion and that 1 trillion is just 1 tiny spec of quadrillion. So infinity, its a nonsense term if you can't produce the numbers that are its extremely distant cousins (million, trillion billion and up from there), you couldn't even invite them over for a beer to infinity so neither yourself or Leo, well it makes no sense to use words like that if you can't even earn the $1000.

@Adamq8 try listing just 100 before you get to an infinite, when you get to 100 try for 1000, increase the zero's one by one from there (coming up with all the various states up to that number) before you jump intuitively to infinity. Infinity is orders of magnitude more than you've so far shared so far including Leo so neither of you have any credibility as it concerns using that term. I appreciate your perspectives though, its good to see that you're at least trying to conceal them to your own experience, feel free to share your experience as freely as you wish, just be mindful of what I mentioned before regarding anthropomorphism and my implicit statements about the neuroplastic tradeoff of having one state at the cost of another. @Breakingthewall I've encountered no one in the field of spirituality so far that adequately elaborates on their use sufficiently nor on the academic use of the term ego or even if so well enough to be able to have a credible opinion there. When someones building a plane, we tend to really, really care whether they have an engineering degree or at least whether they have built planes before not just successfully but without ANY errors but when it comes to spiritual topics, well, invite Fred from the bar down the road to talk about his psychedelic trip. It makes the whole subject almost completely intellectually corrupt. What are the standards people who think they're experts in the field here follow exactly? This stinks so bad it makes my strawberry jam smell. Strawberry jam as far as I'm aware is never meant to smell, or I've just never encountered such, just add in Fred's toe nail and I'm sure it will. As far as I'm aware, the way the term ego is thrown around these circles is at least a few football stadiums away from any touchdowns of screaming spirituality fans (as it concerns accurately describing and relating to it).

@Adamq8 @Cosmin_Visan @Breakingthewall There's still a lot of points I've got to get to but one very fine point I want to highlight in this moment is the sheer lack of differentiation there is behind elaborating on the constraints of what determines whether a realisation will be made or not made. For any realisation made by any agent, why have I heard no single person describe their experience in the context of the limits of their capacities? Instead many fall for religious quarrying digging up stones of truth that they label as "absolute" when the very experience itself is limited by their capacities whether it be by their brain or whatever else. Just because your insight happened to occur after you consumed psychedelic's doesn't mean you get to call it absolute, your brain runs at a certain speed, processing power, not to mention psychedelic's never showing any credence whatsoever as it concerns their ability to share absolute truths. Just because other people had similar experiences doesn't at all lend it anymore credibility, human collective fallibility has been documented for centuries from Nazi's to determining whether someone is guilty or innocent by whether they float to the top of a river after weighing their body down with stones (if they don't float it means the Lord didn't wish to save them or something to that effect). Their label of absolute truth has just been stuck on like a bumper sticker on a car in front of you as it drives through the red light of reason because somehow after you take a psychedelic you've now been granted special privileges to escape the same battery of questions of credibility that should be placed before anyone making a claim about existence. Let's get more nuanced here then, so what exactly determines who gets to have what kind of insight and why and why can't those insights and overall changes be explained by the limits of their own capacity to experience, experience (as explained above - processing speed, etc, analogously or otherwise)? Why are the limits and subsequent skepticality in human perception about ordinary life, i.e. was that a ghost or a real person, not borrowed when examining what it was that was experienced during a psychedelic experience? Because it feels more real? Well a black and white film feels more real than radio, a colour film feels more real than a black and white film and virtual reality is feeling increasingly more real compared to colour film, so what's your point? Feeling more real has nothing to do with reality, just the ease by which one can be convinced that fantasy is reality. I want to see how intelligence, creativity, personality, past experiences and many more variables can be correlated with the quality of the psychedelic experience before I draw any conclusions. I have no doubt that since all of these are correlated with nearly all things concerning the human experience that they no doubt play a part in the psychedelic experience, as such, it makes the entire process flawed because any limit defies any arguing for infinity. The brain was simply not build to process infinity, if it was, you'd be off building and inventing things we've never imagined before, for with your infinity you could well, do anything, because the relationship between perception and creativity is incredibly high. If you can perceive it you can create it, but only to the extent of your ability to perceive. I won't quote him here even though he may comment but this is something Leo will eventually have to come to terms with if he wants to confront this topic with greater intellectual weight. OR not, he's not obligated to of course, in my opinion he's irresponsible, not for believing what he wants to, but influencing people to believe what he believes. In saying that there's an inordinate amount of absolute holes in peoples belief in their psychedelic absolute truths for anything to be convincing yet so to be trying to aggressively convince others of those absolutes is nothing short of irresponsible and boundary breaking. Have your individual beliefs, its your dream to dream so have your dream there's just no need to interrupt other peoples dreams if you believed so much in your dream just leave other peoples dreams alone. Perception equals misperception to the extent we don't have absolute perception, of which we're an extremely far way off, these perceptions of reality are just as worthy as a duck talking about their mystical experiences. We only put human perception on a pedestal because we're all we have to look up to, but there's orders of magnitude greater to be imagined if we properly look at capability outside the context of present human capabilities. There's no reason to assume that everything perceived as "absolute" along the lines of what people are talking about here may be found to be obsolete in 100 years time just as many other things have found that course. Which is why I'm of the perspective to follow the patterns of history more than the patterns of the present time. Perhaps in 100 years time we'll invent a far superior psychedelic that we take after we have augmented our abilities to far higher levels thus revealing far more accurate insights.

@Cosmin_Visan I'll add some more to this later but as a whole: Many people want to cash in fake cheques into the bank of understanding their own psychology, what they don't realise is that they're just accumulating a load of debt for themselves and others they'll have to pay off for years to come while also creating psychological inflation that'll make their words less and less valuable overtime. That's what happens when people are unwilling to admit or unable to resolve the dissonance that relates to the gap that exists between individual and collective consciousness, they'd rather just put a coat of paint over the former and look morally superior in the latter, morality by many here is seen relativistically when in reality its just been replaced by their "spirituality" that's explained by whatever drawings they want to paint on the blank canvas of life rather than with any proper reasoning, which is fine as an individual route, it becomes problematic though just as government does when you try to take the collectivist route. However the seeds of innocent gullibility are already planted in millions of peoples minds so just as easy it is for government to infringe upon others boundaries people in spirituality do a similar thing towards others. This isn't to create an oil spill in the river of spirituality or the people within it, but rather to describe an emerging demographic in the context of the culture of that word, which is its own subject. Many points you've noted tie into the birth of compensatory spiritual narcissism born out of being a square peg trying to fit into the round whole of society which is its own topic I'll touch on at least briefly, otherwise "the whole world is a dream" is just as useful of an idea as "the whole world is a mystery", it clouds responsibility, deludes the subject and the individual, disengages the perceived need for individual agency and removes the incentive for generating or that you can even create real world change that has any meaning. The only difference between this and nihilism is that dream-fever has a bow on it and some Christmas lights.

Hell noahhh. Why? Reason and evidence brah. Government only knows chains but I got meh brains so I'll go insanes before they make me drink their cooool-aidzzz. Bogus tests some read positive/negative on high profile people, way too many red flags around the whole issue, extremely low mortality rate, the list goes on and on, etc, etc. They superimpose their collectivism because all em peeps have got so much impressionism what they need is to hand out tests to open minds, help em look deep insides so we can revolt against all em lies be the highest intelligence dancing fly inside the room of all them spies, here them cries saying halle-lu-yahhh we've got a braaaa---thaa speaking some truthh----yah! Say no to collectivism and yes to m-e-n-t-a-l-is-m. Holllaaa OUT!

@InterruptReQuest Yeah in psychology (not necessarily my opinion) we call those "introjects" and in some circles those introjects that happen to be negative are often associated as what makes up the "inner critic", some go further to say that the latter is the action of the "superego" in the Freudian sense. You may wish to look into these terms if you haven't already! I could probably write a lot about this subject but I don't have too much time at the moment, will be interesting to see what people say hope mentioning those terms give you a theoretical base to bounce other ideas you may have in your mind about the subject. As a basic thought experiment for yourself, perhaps you might like to imagine you've just appeared in this body for the very first time as this consciousness you have right now [so you have zero prior memories], by trying to act (in the "method acting" sense: its an acting term that you've probably heard of) with behaviour that reflects this truth I'm sure you'll discover that its hard to type a reply, to know just how much you can type, what you will type, how much you can explore those ideas, what you're typing on, and so on and so fourth let alone know just what kind of a reply you might get back! A limit is a descriptive limit of perceived awareness or knowledge about the environment which can be inclusive of being, when we're absent of memory or even just the experience of a new body with the same memories, for the latter we at the very least have to re-explore just what is truly possible and in doing so, add a little bit more knowledge to our perception of what limiting beliefs not only constitute but just experientially feel like. Awesome post great exploration for everyone here!

@Adamq8 I'd be happy to: There are a few different categories we need to consider here, the main category I'd like to raise concerns peoples potential psychological problems in the context of the spiritual ideas raised in the above quote and spirituality in general. The second category I'd like to talk about is the relationship that this site has with psychedelic's in the context of spirituality and the lack of responsibility so far taken as it concerns promoting a shared critical investigation into the nature of the experiences pre, during and post use and the ramifications this has on not only the investigation into the nature of truth but group think and the myriad of biases that can arise from that. These two categories are in large part how I would describe the problematic nature of what Cosmin_Visan has raised here. (1) Many people are attracted to spiritual ideas or rather ideas that have been created from the perspective of spirituality, directly experienced or not, this can be problematic when the people who have had direct experiences are communicating with those that have not, in particular there's boundary issues when said persons they're communicating with may have pre-existing problems. This site has a forum category where people can discuss, and I quote, "Serious Emotional Issues", which means this site not only implicitly but explicitly welcomes people with serious mental issues (as per the description underneath the main title), therefore people who could take spiritual ideas the wrong way, to this site. This makes this site responsible, and dare I say it in this instance when you're trying to communicate your ideas with another person it also makes you as a communicator responsible. We may not be responsible for the site but we're responsible for what we communicate. Spiritual ideas of various kinds like the ones noted in the quote and I'd be happy to elaborate with examples are particularly troublesome with the following mental illnesses: schizophrenia biopolar depersonalisation dissociative identity disorder depression (a spirituality is often used as a form of escapism for many people here --- colloquially terms as spiritual bypassing) identity formation --- for many people, they replace healthy identity formation with an identity around spirituality in order to have the feeling of something say like truth without the actual practice of truth discernment other sorts of problems especially people who have problems distinguishing between self and other ---> Boundary issues Many of the symptoms exhibited in the above disorders can lead people to being highly, highly impressionable, meaning they lack critical thinking so when they take in these ideas they're not going to be able to properly integrate them into their psyche. Meaning, they may actually end up with some of those mental illnesses or just symptoms therein if they don't tread lightly when it comes downloading some of the ideas and or trying to directly experience them themselves. (2) There is also the problem of the manner in which ideas are expressed. I know I have sight for example as I stated before, as well as many other senses, but what is the need to be running around telling everyone I have sight? We all have sight. So what? Okay so I've realised what I'm positing as the truth as, "I have sight", now its about how we can perhaps use the vision we've acquired for more creative purposes in our lives, just as we can for any other direct experience we believe we've had about reality, as opposed to trying to convince blind people that they ought to be trying to see the light. Maybe some people wish to be blind, and I don't mean that critically, there may actually be many benefits to being blind that we take for granted because we have sight, in fact I can elaborate on many instances in which that's the case if you like, scientifically and creatively speaking. Moving on, imagine the thought experiment of a baby being taught to learn a book overtime, maybe a bible of the sorts about god and what not and how they know they've seen the light and now they should kill all them peeps because god told them, and now all they do everyday is jump online and talk about their god realisations in the most perfect of intentions while underneath they have a lot of resentment towards x group of people while on the surface telling themselves "no I love them in this way, no wait I love them in this way, no wait its for the greater good of love that I love them in this way! (whatever way that may be)". This raises the issue of how do we discriminate between genuine direct insights into God, love, existence and so on with those that merely believe they have? Is psychedelic's the sole differentiator? What if someone who took psychedelic's, just as much as anyone else on the planet, and the result for them was merely more belief in their own religion and worse, greater reason for them to commit violence based on said assertions? Every one of us is making assessments about reality based on our experiences, inclusive of direct experience, when they differ, what exactly gives us authority over how another being experiences reality or ought to experience it other than simply proclaiming that we have greater authority, "because we do" or "because we've done psychedelic's", "done more psychedelic's", "done psychedelic's in the right way not their bad way (even though they have no real idea here unless explicitly stated)". I recommend looking into the idea of anthropomorphism. Like I mentioned, just as sight gives many benefits to someone, the sight someone believes they have or anyone has as a direct experience into God may come at many costs to perceiving many other things that a blind person can see, perhaps even an aspect of God they've neglected but remain irrefutably unconvinced of until the end of time because, in this example, they have the book of God written by God, not only that, they've taken all the psychedelic's to prove it, even though, perhaps in many other instances, other spiritual texts were written about God after the taking of psychedelic's of various kinds which revealed other ideas about God which ran contrary to the ideas about God _directly experienced_ as they put it after their psychedelic experience. Can't the commonality between peoples experiences be correlated with potential shared group think about what psychedelic's are meant to produce as well? This is in line with a placebo effect in part being at play with psychedelic's and what to expect, jumping onto someones site who's done a lot of psychedelic's one would assume that said person who thinks about doing or has done psychedelic's is probably psychologically influenced to believe in a similar narrative as the site creator. Given the sheer number of people talking about such it creates a shared group orientated confirmation bias and denial of not only evidence but just basic critical discussion about potential alternative interpretations that may, or may not, exist. This forum in lieu of its name operates under the assumption that it exists to aid the human endeavour towards self actualisation, so wouldn't doing so involve being prudent about having a duty of care as opposed to someone making rigid assessments in relation to what is and isn't about reality? Shouldn't all of us users have, as a consequence of typing on this kind of site, as stated, also have a duty of care when we write what we write, acknowledging the experience and reality of another person before jumping too quickly to conclusions? When you create a wall about what you believe or directly perceive as reality, however you wish to put it, you miss that foresight of empathy that allows you to destroy those walls and open up instead to the story of someone else's perception of existence that may be able to contribute to your own. And even if we don't wish to tear down those walls, we don't, after all we may have spent a great deal of time and intelligence constructing them, but at a minimum to aid our own building, we can at least build a ladder to see over our own walls or if we're super defensive about possible intrusion just build a tower (or see high from a castle) that allows us to see over them and in doing so, allowing us to see potential horizons in the future we may choose or not choose to travel to ourselves. I hope this simple post lays the background foundation to @Cosmin_Visan's good post now. It's not only relevant as it concerns opening up degrees of introspection on the insights and the potential noted psychosocial problems, but also as it concerns expanding outwards from discussion as well, so that the realisation someone had which led them to the direct experience can be opened up again further to discover other direct experiences they can potentially have about reality rather than encouraging the silencing of any further investigation into either the questioning of direct insights or the discovery of further direct insight. Thank you Adam, I'm glad we've been able to progress forward in our discussion now .

@Adamq8 please stop trying to make this about you or about what projections you have about my character and just try to keep this to the points made by Cosmin at the larger scale. This is his thread and you've done a great job at hijacking and derailing what could still be an interesting discussion on how to relay interesting ideas to people of various backgrounds. Otherwise I'm glad you've acknowledged the other points it shows self awareness but again please let's just keep things objective here, this isn't about you, this isn't about me, this is about the points raised and the truth versus falseness of those ideas and what we can do to reinforce either perspective there in the context of its potential problems, the latter here being of social relevance here in this particular situation. I get its how our brains are conditioned as well as inclined towards a negativity bias when it comes to interpreting feedback that runs contrary to our own ideas, so I have no judgement towards you there, I'm just bringing things to your attention so that we can progress forward as productively as possible. This isn't about you or me, its about the discussion. Best Adam .

@Adamq8 the only person I'm noticing going round in circles here is your communication to date. If you can't agree that we can get beyond going round in circles, why on earth would you: (1) post at all, and you've now posted 3 times might in the last 17 minutes (from last post - about). Might I suggest simply taking a step back and reflecting first which is what this whole discussion is all about, Cosmin is calling out people who aren't doing such combined with at least on my end noticing the importance of that to ensure people aren't led astray. (2) post with any intention that contained the belief that I would agree with you (3) try to state your "direct experiences" as you've personally posited them for any reason other than to influence another person towards being at the very least intrigued to explore those ideas? This isn't how to have a healthy discussion, a healthy discussion moves forward, not backwards or around in circles. If you wish to participate in a healthy discussion share such and we can discard the idea of moving around in circles, I for one mastered the art of walking from crawling to hobbling and beyond rather than chasing my own feet and I'm sure you eventually did as well. Progressive discussion by definition operates in a similar way, crawling around on the floor like a toddler at the beginning but then slowly moving towards becoming a marathon runner. This involves thinking, shared understanding and open-mindedness. Here we move slowly, we don't need to shoot quickly at the beast in the bushes which may only be the wind. This is an important point by the way, analogously, direct experience is to say I can see that I'm seeing but to the point of what we're or at least what I'm discussing, I know I'm seeing and I have the direct experience of that but if I never questioned my sight I'd be less probable rather than more probable to become a person that invented something analogous to an fMRI machine or infrared vision. Please, if we can just keep this one post at a time I'd appreciate it. Its a better use of my time and its a better use of your time. Thanks.

@Adamq8 "Look at ur experience and stop mental masturbation to sound clever" this is what I'm talking about. I've arrived at my own conclusion and I also believe that all there is is consciousness, if you actually took a look at my dang signature you'd be able to register this rather than being so stuck in your own head about what you think is and isn't. @Cosmin_Visan never even argued against those ideas, if you re-read his initial post you'll clearly see that he's pointing at the shallowness of peoples thinking not necessarily at the validity of those ideas. Shallow thinking leads people astray. It just comes across as ranting because you're going from one point to the next like a bunch of fortune cookies being thrown into a bowl and unwrapped randomly. What are you trying to prove exactly? You're not proving anything because you've got no reasoning. I have my direct experience of consciousness as the is but I have no desire to go ranting about it on the forum or at anyone, Cosmin has brought up a very valuable perspective here that needs to be thought about deeply if people are going to be properly encouraged to think for themselves.

@Adamq8 If consciousness is all there is Adam, are you conscious of what you do, how you do it and why you do it, including why you believe your ideas? I asked you a question that you never got back to me on regarding my last thread, which was pointed at why you believed what you believe. I asked it matter of factly, skipping over the fact that you never really addressed my thread you just sort of posted randomly but that was okay I just decided to respond with a simple question. How much have you questioned your ideas, do you need others to validate your belief and why do you feel the need to confront others about their beliefs in a passive aggressive and condescending way towards @Cosmin_Visan? If you understood consciousness, which contains an aspect of not knowing, how could you be so confident that the reality you're living in wasn't the opposite to a dream? Lastly, if everything is just simply imaginary, how can you know what the truth is? To me I'm noticing patterns in this narrative where you're highly motivated to contextualise Comin_Visan's initial raising here in both a shallow inclusive "welcome to the community" but dismissive "If you knew what consciousness was you would not post in this thread" way, seeing you know consciousness so much, why are you so motivated to post at all? Honestly, in light of what I've viewed in this thread combined with your response to my thread I'm sensing a lot of disingenuousness, a lot of flag waving without a sincere desire to explore truth, the main point that I believe Cosmin_Visan's created here. Personally I'm of the belief that no one should be allowed to hide behind ideas without introspection if they're operating under the assumption that they're discussing things as openly and critically as possible, however if these last two sentiments are not applicable then there's really no need to address what I've stated here (all good here then) so that things can instead be concluded that you're either discussing things: (1) unopenly and uncritically, (2) unopenly but critically, (3) openly but uncritically. I'd probably go with the last choice combined with only a slight amount of the first. If anything, I'd prefer not to discuss this at all any further because I can tell where this might lead, as is the case with anyone that has passionate beliefs, though maybe there's something to learn here beyond potential dismissal of someones valid perspective (something that I've cited here with respect to what's been directed so far towards Cosmic_visan) For example there are many people that are misled and even if they're on the right path, they're not thinking well enough on that path and need to do greater introspective work, this is the mature perspective and I'm happy to elaborate on that further if needed.