tuckerwphotography

I don't think there's definitive proof yet to be making such claims, on either side.

Some photos speak louder than words.

Beautiful podcast great example of healthy Green. https://player.fm/series/the-emerald/the-revolution-will-not-be-psychologized

Hard to get more Yellow than this. More like Yellow/Turquoise.

He's pointing to the power of words as empty containers that create meanings which alter our perception of reality, in this case, trauma. He deconstructs trauma as a phrase that is loaded with multiple meanings that are often subconsciously programming our meaning making, both individually and societally, and then offers new "constructs" or ways of making sense of the past to reprogram our present moment experience, which ultimately changes our entire reality. Also points to a number of practices about dropping into present moment awareness and being with what is without the labels and trappings of the mind that distort or add filters that may not be serving the very function of the role that they were designed to do: ease suffering. Not saying the entire video is all construct aware, but he dips into this stage of meaning making throughout the video. You can also tell he's critiquing trauma from a later stage by talking about all the ways in which it's important, valid and real from certain perspectives, and from others it's causing more harm than intended.

Construct Aware https://www.circleanywhere.com/The-Beyond-Trauma-Mindset-Course

@asifarahim 1. I was very lucky to have a lot of savings from my job as a film director. 2. Depends on if we're talking about worldview or ego development, which are sometimes separate things. From a worldview perspective, I was in Green in high school, as I grew up with parents who have mostly Green values. From an ego development perspective, my center of gravity moved into Pluralist in 2016. Then Strategist in 2019. Then Construct Aware in 2021. I still have a lot of filling out to do in Strategist and certainly Construct Aware. My development was likely expedited by the fact that from 2018-2022 my "full time job" was focusing on my development, awakening, healing, etc. Most people don't have this privilege. 3. I don't understand your question. If you're asking if I "tried" to get to Construct Aware, the answer is mostly no, though when I learned more about that stage (once I was already partly in it) it certainly catalyzed my development, and that was something I was consciously putting effort into via a whole host of practices, trainings, workshops, contemplation, meditation, psychedelics, etc.

@asifarahim I wrote an essay that covers much of the journey: Ten Awakenings - A Guide Home

Daniel Brown is another example of a Unitive+ teacher. Love this video of his...Construct Aware teachings.

@ValiantSalvatore Hey there, thanks for sharing your reflections. I'm not here to argue or debate. Apologies if my post came off as attacking you in any way - that was certainly not my intention. I'm not familiar with Peter Ralston (have heard his name but don't know his work in depth) so I can't speak to him specifically and should have mentioned that in my original post that quoted your list. Same with Daniel Ingram. I'll try to spend some time with their work this week and get back to you on what I experience from them. I feel very confident that the folks on my list would be assessed at 5.0+ (Construct Aware or later) on a developmental test. If you have specific reasons why someone on that list does not display the characteristics and qualities associated with these later developmental levels, please let me know, and I'll be happy to share my take. If you listen to Roger Walsh's "Deep Transformations" podcast, he often speaks about the Construct Aware stage specifically, which, if you're going through that transition, you may find helpful. I recommend his conversations with Beena Sharma, who likely is another example of someone operating from Construct Aware. As for Shinzen, I've spoken with several of his students who are also familiar with later developmental models and experience him at Transpersonal 5.5, which comes after Construct Aware. He may have access to much higher state experiences and a much larger range and depth of states than the average person at 5.5, but that doesn't necessarily mean he is stabilized at a later stage of ego development. He may be. Neither of us know for sure unless he takes an assessment. I'm sharing the list of folks above as they've been helpful in my own journey of not just understanding but experiencing, integrating and embodying later stage capacities. Again, happy to go into more detail if you'd like, in the spirit of a constructive and thoughtful conversation that is hopefully helpful to both of us and others on the forum. Much love!

Came across this Medium article by a spiritual teacher named Roger Thisdell who maps Leo's God Consciousness claims as Stage 3 out of 4, saying he experienced what Leo is pointing to but is not the end of the journey. Curious what @Leo Gura take on this is. Note that he says he is a fan of Leo and appreciates his content, so his critique appears to be coming from a thoughtful place... https://medium.com/@rogerthis/identity-god-and-open-individualism-88c185258bfc "Experiencing God (and a message to Leo Gura) Stage 3 ‘Big Mind’ is when open individualism is most likely to begin to intuitively feel right. This is also when talks of being God come out of people’s mouths and (as in terms of (1)) they phenomenologically perceive the sense of ‘I’ in everything they experience. While they (in terms of (2)) may conceptually infer there is just one thing, one being, call it ‘God’. “God is everything. I am everything.” Because the understanding of moving from (1)to (2) (from experience to conjecture) is often lost on people, all kinds of wacky metaphysical beliefs come about — supposedly self-validating by higher consciousness or direct cosmic download. While at stage 3, if you inject some metta into your experience space, you come to see what people mean when they say: “God is everywhere and all loving” or even: “God is love”. Having the feeling of being everything in your experience is like you don’t feel separate from anything, thus there is a deep intimacy with the world which construes love. You feel like you are the body, the thoughts, the emotions, the trees, the hills on the horizon, the air in between all of it, the sky and the awareness field which contains all these things. However, going from the experience of feeling identical to everything you are aware of to “I am everything (even that which I’m not currently aware of) and therefore I am God/the universe” requires an unfounded leap — which I admittedly made at some point. I remember an incredibly stark moment I had when I was in stage 3, where ‘being God’ felt like the most real thing (I can sympathise a lot with where Leo Gura is coming from — though I think he’s lacking some phenomenological discernment). Because at stage 3 the sense of ‘I’ is so prevalent, due to it being perceived everywhere in experience, I was investigating this quality a great deal. I was trying to distil the sense of ‘I’down to its rawest form. “Yes, I feel identical to the trees and the sky and other people, but what is that common element that can be found in all these things which I call ‘I’?” After whittling away all the other unnecessary phenomenological baggage piled onto this ‘I’, I arrived at a clear perception of ‘I’ in its rawest form. The ‘I’ I call the epistemic agent, the pure sense of a knower of experience. It became obvious that once the epistemic agent was singled out in experience that this perception of ‘I’ can only manifest in one way. What I mean by this is unlike with milk where the formula can be tainted slightly and result in versions of milk with slightly different colours, or tastes, or smells and yet they are all still versions of milk, it is impossible for the epistemic agent to have a slightly different perceptual ‘flavour’ to it other than it does. This is because the qualia recipe only consists of one ingredient and if that’s missing or different then it’s not the epistemic agent (the rawest sense of ‘I am’). Once I clocked this, I realised that all iterations of ‘I’wherever and whenever, in all beings at all times, experience the sense of ‘I am’ exactly the same way. Then, and I remember this moment so clearly, it hit me: “if God or the universe is self-aware — which it is just by dint of me being of the universe and self-aware — and has an experience of ‘I-ness’, then my experience of ‘I-ness’ in this relative body is the same as God’s and through a sharing of experience there is a direct link and so… Oh my god, I am God!” (I am not suggesting that this line of reasoning is sound. It was simply the series of steps I went through which brought upon this profound experience). Again, the numerically versus qualitatively identical distinction could be parsed, however there is a way to get around this, for when you remove the sense of time and space from the equation then that difference collapses. To say that something is qualitatively identical to something else, but not numerically identical doesn’t make sense if two things can’t be differentiated by existing in separate moments of time or space. So in my “Oh my god, I am God!” epiphany, the sense of time and space had been shunned from attention and numerical identity was presumed. I can imagine that someone has this epiphany moment as I did, but then when they return to a more ‘timey/spacey’ existence they retain credence in the belief that they are God and not just a single, distinct instance of experience of ‘I’ (which would be more of an empty individualist thought). They do this because they are basing their beliefs off of a very profound mind moment, even if the majority of their waking hours don’t suggest the same message. [I want to add a disclaimer before this next part and express appreciation towards Leo Gura and his channel, Actualized.org. I think it’s an amazing channel and I have learnt a lot from him. I highly recommend people check him out. So don’t take this next part as a slight against him. He’s got some great content!] Now, if I could tell Leo Gura one thing it would be this: “Profundity does not equate to truth.” Just because something felt so real and epic, does not mean that experience is giving you the most accurate representation of greater reality. Truth be told at stage 3 I didn’t have anywhere near the attentional clarity, precision of view, and metacognitive abilities that came later; and so while I was having all these profound experiences I was not totally clued into the subtle ways I was manipulating my experience and was biased to certain perspectives while overlooking certain presumptive views that became clearer to me later on."

Are there examples of people, besides for Jordan Peterson, who have an ego developmental level at Pluralist or Strategist while also being classified as a Conservative, according to definition in Leo's latest video?