Osaid

Very true. When I first joined the forum, I was surprised to learn that you regularly interacted with the people here. You're much more patient with people than I would be.

Oh, cool. So you're a narcissist using narcissism to label non-narcissists as narcissists in order to perpetuate your own narcissism. I'm actually not that surprised.

Stop making me doubt myself, you narcissistic abuser.

Making people doubt themselves is Narcissistic Abuse. Trivializing the power of words and ideas is Narcissistic Abuse. Making excuses for bad behavior is Narcissistic Abuse. This forum serves as Narcissistic Supply. We've seen what happens when you don't get that supply: Narcissistic Rage. With such broad criteria, you can make anyone look like a narcissistic abuser. How amazingly convenient.

Surrender to the fact that you might submit it late. Who cares? It's not the end of the world. And there's no way in hell you're gonna allow something as stupid as late homework to end your world, right? Are you even gonna remember that this happened 5 years from now? Think long term. You also need some kind of sustainable set of values or goals. Something really deep and authentic. It can't just be money. There should be a hobby or skill or something on the side that you want to perfect, which will make a lot of money as a secondary side effect or something. Of course, money is important, but if you have this goal of getting money, there should be an even deeper goal arching over it which is more personal and authentic to you. Like, for example: "Once I get this money, I will use that money to do this and this". Also, imperfect decisions are the same as perfect decisions, in the sense that in order to reach a "perfect" or optimal decision, you need to make a bunch of imperfect decisions beforehand to reach that decision. So, don't be so perfectionistic, it's a trap. Your job or work doesn't have to be perfect or amazing at first. You test the waters first, and then that tells you what to avoid and not to avoid.

Cool. You know, since AI pulls from real sources and opinions, it kind of is like you're talking to a real person, just very indirectly. At the very least, it is some sort of amalgamation of what is real or authentic.

Yes, it is. I quoted what you were talking about: If you wanna talk about how you think Leo is a narcissist, that's fine, but it's not what we were initially talking about, at least not explicitly.

There is no teaching that does not drive anyone away. People have different interests and motives. Abiding by such a criteria is not an accurate indicator of the compassion or quality of a teaching. A teaching that prioritizes whether it appeals to people will always fall short, because at that point you aren't even prioritizing the teaching itself, but rather how people perceive the teaching. Of course, when it comes to teaching, how people view it should be a secondary value. A teaching that does not drive anyone away will have about 0 depth, for the reasons I mentioned before. It only appeals to the lowest common denominator. It's a mistake to assume that because someone is driven away by a teaching it means the teaching is flawed. Sure, his style has its flaws, if that is what you mean by "toxic".

It's refreshing seeing how open-minded AI are.

There's nothing wrong with imagination. Yes, you do. Otherwise, what is this conversation even about? There is something going on, and this something is what you call "other". It's a very anthropomorphic interpretation to say that others don't exist, because the average person looks at imagination or anything abstract and says "oh, that's not real because I can't physically interact with it!" They do exist, but you have to figure out what they exist as. Recontextualize. That's all.

There was no claim that compassion is disconnected from truth. A lack of interest in something doesn't mean an actual lack of that thing. What Leo is saying is that he values truth over compassion. So, if the truth is something that might not compassionate, he is not gonna let that stop him from pursuing it. He is not saying that he does not like being compassionate or that you shouldn't be compassionate or that compassion isn't related to truth. It's just that compassion is not prioritized over truth. Can you imagine if Leo's mission was instead "I want to figure out how to be as compassionate as possible" or "I want to figure out what is true, but only if I can see that it involves compassion". That would have completely changed his trajectory, because the priorities are different. Furthermore, how do you know what is compassionate? Is Leo making you feel comfortable compassionate? Is Leo reducing his teachings down in such a way so that there is an absolute 0 percent chance of someone going mentally unstable from his teachings compassionate? I don't think so. There's a reason why Sadghuru's public teachings are more mainstream and less in depth than Leo's. When you position yourself in the mainstream, your teachings are limited to a certain depth, because those teachings exist relative to how palatable it is for the mainstream.

His video was at like 800k views with the word "death" in the title. So he already siphoned all the views his videos would normally get without any trouble. I don't see why he would make the change so late if it is ToS. If it is cause of ToS, I don't think the video would get taken down for using that word. At most, it might prevent the video getting promoted in the algorithm or something. There are long-standing videos with many views that use the word "death". Then again, it is odd that he would change the previous title. But, I think his video was much more charitable than the other Leo hit-pieces. I don't find it hard to imagine that he would do it. I think he also had some previous controversy regarding slandering people, so it makes sense that he would be cognizant of such things.

Lol interesting I'm glad he was able to self-reflect and at least take the death part out I guess

I'm not making assumptions. I never said whether shamans are effective or ineffective. The sentiment is that ayahuasca shouldn't be turned into a pill because there is no shaman that comes with a pill. This is not an equitable position. This is gatekeeping because it says that it shouldn't be possible to take ayahuasca without a shamanic ritual.

There is, but it doesn't serve your ego as readily. It's more impartial. It takes more time and effort for it to work. This quality of requiring more time and effort defines the waking state and separates it from the dream state. It also provides the waking state its balance and beauty. It's not something to be daunted by or annoyed by, it's a very intelligent system. In this case, since the waking state contains "outer qualia" in addition to "inner qualia", unlike the dream which is just inner qualia, you have to make your inner qualia (imagination) emulate the outer qualia (physical reality) in order to tap into the creative potential of the "genie". So, in this case, instead of the genie listening in on your imagination, your ego has to listen in on the genie and align itself with the genie's intelligence. This creates an umbilical cord between the ego's intelligence and the genie's intelligence, and they merge together. (In this case, the genie is external reality) The waking state is not always just physical or "outer qualia". It's a synergy between your imagination and the physical world. A lot of the waking state is still your own mental projection. For example, you have to first imagine that there is a glass of water outside of your room in order to make the decision to actually go outside your room and drink a glass of water. And so, taking advantage of that synergy is how the genie works. See, in this case, just like the dream, your imagination about the glass of water came true, but in a somewhat different way. In the dream state, there is only the imaginative qualia, which means there is one qualia. In the waking state, you have to merge your inner imaginative qualia with the physical outer qualia, so that they become "one", similar to the dream state. The intelligence of the inner and outer qualia have to merge with each other. Only in this synergy is when you can create what "you" want. Two people in the waking state can have two different perceptions of the outer world, despite the outer qualia being the same. For example, one person might hate rainy weather, while another person might like rainy weather. Or even simpler, one person might have a positive mindset, and the other person has a negative mindset. People are creating self-fulfilling prophecies in their heads all the time, and it's fueled by how they imagine and contextualize reality. If someone is sad and depressed, their reality reflects it, it's psychosomatic. For example, because of their depression, they might neglect their hygiene. Or, they might neglect their responsibilities and become lazy, thus pushing them into financial distress. See how their inner qualia is creating a more depressing outer qualia? A lot of the waking state is still spent dreaming, literally. Any sort of imagination can easily merge and become one with the "outer qualia". Once they are merged they become the same qualia, and this "merged qualia", so to speak, is like a clay that your ego can mold. Even the idea of physicality itself is only an imagined projection. Or even think about how real the idea that you are a physical human being feels right now. This is exactly how the genie works in the waking state. Your imagination is like a chisel that is constantly sculpting how the outer qualia is perceived. There are certain moments where what you're imagining seems to manifest itself very quickly in the waking state, seemingly by coincidence or chance. Or maybe you start experiencing synchronicities. I can only describe this phenomenon as a gesture from the Universe which is telling you that it is listening in on your mind. It's a reminder of the interconnectedness of your mind and the Universe. The truth is, this model of synergizing with "outer" and "inner" qualia is a bit logical. Another more intuitive way to look at it is this: The Universe, or waking state, is not stupid. It is intimately interfaced with your mind and psychology. If you behave a certain way, the universe will manifest certain things and come up with some story to justify that manifestation, just to further teach you about how your mind works. It's intelligent and alive, and it should be treated as such.

There are many things which are not psychedelics that are constantly changing how you perceive reality. If someone with bad eyesight wears prescription lenses to correct their eyesight, is their perception of reality unreal since it is being augmented? How does using something to change your perception of reality prove that it is unreal? Furthermore, is the perception of a colorblind person "less real" than someone who doesn't have colorblindness? Is colorblindness as a whole "not real" since it is changing how someone perceives colors? Where is the line drawn?

How do psychedelic experiences not fit into this criteria? I also find this distinction interesting: "reality is the universe outside of us which we perceive". Does that mean that you, the perceiver, are not a part of reality, and thus you aren't real?

Tell him to define "real" and watch his worldview crumble in real time

Maybe cause you focus more on them when you're horny. Also, if you have self-deprecating views about fapping, there's a self-esteem boost as well.

Yeah but that's more like how not why. It doesn't really focus on the metaphysical and spiritual aspect. It's like comparing a video on how to drive a car vs a video on why a car works the way it does.

orchid mantis

The problem is your ideas "life is a bitch" "there is no one to complain to" These are very anthropomorphic interpretations. Cling to them if you want, but notice that resistance that appears, it appears because it's super reductionist. You intuitively know that's not what life is, that's not what infinity is, of course. It's like if you asked someone what the meaning of life is and they told you "the meaning of life is for you to become a chef and cook food". Of course you feel trapped. It's too limited and human. You are not human. Which is why it feels so bad clinging to these human ideas. You're contradicting your own existence. You're trying to make life something stupid when it's not stupid.

Firstly, what kind of sugar are you consuming? And how much of it at once? Also, what do you mean it saps your energy? Do you feel mental fog? Jittery? If I had to take a wild guess, you might be consuming too much simple sugars at once, so it gets absorbed really quickly, and so you get a big insulin spike which metabolizes too much sugar and leaves your blood sugar levels unbalanced, which could contribute to bad energy levels. Your insulin sensitivity would have increased after abstaining for so long. As for substituting refined sugars, that's pretty easy:

I'm reminded of when Leo said he couldn't find a proper camera to record his alien transformation. I saw a ghost/spirit thing when I was really young. Now I'm wondering, if I had a camera, would I have been able to record it, or is it just locked into my state of consciousness? I think I finally understand Leo's sentiment about finding a proper camera. Although, the criteria that it should be easy to record or show to other people is pretty arbitrary. Has anyone ever recorded video evidence of a dream? No, but we know it exists.

I also had a similar thought lol