Gesundheit

And who said if something exists as a concept it doesn't actually exist in reality? Why impose limitations of the human perception on existence?

No. You're assuming that consciousness is the fundamental building block for the layers, but maybe it's not. Maybe it's something outside of your consciousness to comprehend. Have you considered that possibility? Maybe consciousness is not so efficient after all. I disagree with the myth that being or God or reality is consciousness. To me, consciousness is a human projection onto reality, not reality itself. I don't make the mistake and confuse my projections for reality. I recognize my projections as projections. And I don't feel bad for not-knowing.

In other words, you can only be conscious of things you're already conscious of. Wow! Thanks for that dude. Isn't infinity infinitely infinite, which means it's outside of itself? Paradoxical, but would you consider that proof of materialism?

Cannot absolute truth be a concept? Why impose that limitation?

You don't know your destiny, but it's inevitable. So live in the moment and don't try to control life.

@Carl-Richard Generally what you're saying is that I should learn to conform to my society, at least to a certain degree? Am I getting this part right? If that's the case, I fundamentally disagree. Because it doesn't matter the culture/content I have, since I influence the people around me too. It's a two-way highway. Society can influence me, and I can influence it too. And as a matter of fact, the most confident and self-loving people are generally the ones who set the trends, regardless of the actual content of the trends. Notice how radically culture has changed over time and in different places. It does not make sense to say that culture is changing by itself or by conformists, or by fake people. The people who set the trends are not the socially awkward ones, obviously. They're the most authentic to themselves. But maybe it's kind of paradoxical because being authentic implies a certain level of conformity, although it would be authentic unlike just being a conformist for the sake of being a conformist, or simply out of fear. It could be. But it's one thing to learn and practise spirituality by yourself (more authenticity), and it's another thing to cram knowledge from others (more inauthanticity). That's why the inwards path would work while forcing it through reading books and watching videos wouldn't. Most people don't go into caves. Most people are naturally socially gifted. It's the minority that find their way to self-help. Most people never think about anything consciously, and yet generally, things work decently for them. Ramana wouldn't need moves in order to get laid, he had enough status to speak for him

In my experience, confidence alone is more than enough (assuming you have enough levels self-love/self-esteem). If you don't have those things, you're not likely gonna be happy with yourself in the first place and therefore you will likely project that unhappiness outwards onto your personality (or society if you're a victim). That will make you want to change. The change you're seeking is not actually in the content of your personality. It is more in its structure. Confidence and self-esteem are of personality structure, not content. Once the changes are made, your vibe will change, and you will start attracting people to you effortlessly. The alternative scenario I see is to spend like 5 years doing personal development and eventually succeed at creating a fake identity, or personality, which seems solid on the outside, but is fragile on the inside. To put yourself out there and socialize is good because it fixes the problem automatically. Your subconscious will connect the dots from the data you'll collect, and you'll know how to interact properly. It's as good as going inwards. But imo, self-help alone will never be helpful. Will self-help turn a horse into a human? This does not really matter. Since it's relative, your value is not set in stones. Maybe your mismatch will cause your peers to be more attracted to you instead of being turned off. There are no specific rules for attraction. You just gotta be authentic (love yourself and be confident), the rest is not up to you. I'm severely underestimating the belief that you need to become something else other than your own self. Otherwise, I acknowledge the fact that some people have it easier than others. In which case, improvements may be required in order to climb up the social ladder. However, I would still say that confidence and self-esteem are the biggest factors, your levels of development in all other areas come next.

Without enough awareness, anything can become a distraction that has a big potential for abuse. If one is aware enough, they will know what they want and need.

@Carl-Richard You're assuming a certain standard for you to be accepted within society. That's the general trend for the people in self-help because they lack confidence and therefore resort to self-help as a way to improve. I have been there myself. But the reality is that you don't need anything to blend in except the confidence and faith that you belong. Everything else will automatically fall into place if you just be. Your true self will shine through and place you exactly where you should be. You will fit like a piece of a puzzle effortlessly. Also, it could simply be an ego-complex issue where you don't accept being anything less than the leader. In which case, it's on you to dissolve your ego or keep improving it until you become a good leader.

You seem precise about everything except enlightenment itself. Define enlightenment. Try to put that goal in words. Maybe that'll help you navigate towards it.

Since everything is limited, perhaps you should try talking about the cons of being hyper-rational and over-scientific instead of pointing out the limitations of science. Imo, that would make much more sense to people. Because yeah, you're telling us that science is limited, and a lot of your viewers will resonate and agree, but then what's the alternative? And what are the limitations of the alternatives? Because any alternative would have certain limitations too.

Not really sure about that.

@Adodd You don't need a purpose or a passion. Your life is already abundant and you have a lot of gifts to appreciate and be grateful for. Purpose or passion equals thirst or hunger. The only reason you will ever have a purpose/passion is if you desire something that you don't currently have. If you have passions that means you don't have enough, or at least you don't think you have enough. Not having enough (or thinking so) creates desire which manifests in two different ways; the first is passion, and the second is dissatisfaction, like you're currently experiencing (probably because you're unable to find something to do about your desire). Imo, you should stop seeking what you don't have and be happy with what you have because it really seems like you have wonderful blessings that you're not appreciating well enough.

Well, at least you've given me something I can work with instead of unconsciously trying to sell ideology like @Thestarguitarist14 did. I appreciate and value direct experience and contemplation based insights much more than just ideas. And I stand by my dismissal of his perspective because it's a deluded one. The thing I said about conflict of interest is very real. It's like trusting the fox to guard your chickens. It'll say of course you can trust me. Why would I eat your chickens? As a matter of fact, I'm vegan too, you know. Or like asking a self-help teacher whether or not the course they've made is worth it. They'll tell you, of course it's worth it. Just buy this one course and your whole life will change. They won't tell you that they're biased or that they're simply sharing their opinions or expertise because that won't be enough deception. They'd have to have a certain level of self-deception to be able to infect you with it. That is if you forget and let your guard down, even for a moment. Now to your post, you're conflating higher states (or more accurately different states) of consciousness with entertainment. And that is a big misconception. This creates a confusion about entertainment, which can happen in any state of consciousness. The states aren't really a factor. They're like the ground or base or environment that allow entertainment and all other experiences to occur. Drugs only alter your state of consciousness, like you can change your equalizer settings. They change the original preset but they don't create the drum beats (entertainment) of the music that's being played (your life). The music is already playing, and the drum beats occur every now and then. On different presets you can experience different effects. That doesn't mean the presets create the effects, but only make them more audible so to speak. Also, another parameter to consider here is sensitivity instead of quantity. Drugs, like LSD, alter your consciousness in a way that brings perception to the front and thoughts to the background, so that a few stimulants can create more depth in your experience than a lot more in your ordinary state. They lower the threshold required for a stimulus in order to deepen the experiences. So you don't actually need to have a lot of stimuli to get overwhelmed. A few can overwhelm you on drugs because of their depth. You can eat one cupcake, or you can eat 4 bananas. The same amount of calories. Pretty logical, huh?

Not necessarily. a) Not necessarily. They could be stating an objective fact. Or if they're being biased, to call themselves smart makes them even smarter, because then some people will likely buy it and become objects of control for that claiming-to-be-smart person. b) Smart compared to the people known by both the speaker and the audience. The details don't matter much. Smartness is not a focused concept. It is rather fluid/gelatinous and slippery. The whole point of the concept is that you can't measure it because if you try to, it will cease to have value. And what's the point of a concept with no value?

Yeah sorry, but that does not necessarily mean you will have similar chances as your friends. You'd have to double, maybe triple up the number. There are many things you can do at university that can ramp up your chances. Having a certain gig unique for yourself is one example. Joining a band or a volunteer group or a club of any kind is another one. Anything that makes you special, that makes you stand out against other competitors. Anything that not many of your peers have, can work. A lot of women are attracted to shiny objects lol. Be one. Looks aren't really that important if you take a good care of yourself. However, fashion, hygiene, perfume, etc... are important and may be costing you points. Not all women are attracted to "jerks". But the more feminine a girl is, the more she is attracted to higher masculinity. So keep that in mind.

More like your projecting middle-aged lesbian healing. No offence and good luck.

Being unaware does not excuse you. You're on a personal development forum. Take feedback, expand your awareness, and learn.

What do your friends have/do which you lack? (or maybe they lack and you don't). It could be the case that you have a rare personality that doesn't attract a lot of people. Social connections. They ramp up your chances by a two figures factor. I was guessing you were doing pick-up at that rate.

I would say that's stereotyping. And I wouldn't recommend changing your authentic personality to attract other people because then you will attract people who aren't compatible with you. @ColeMC01 100 women over 2 years is not a big number. People at pick-up do a 100 approaches per week, and their lay counts aren't that impressive. How do you expect that number to work? Unless you get lucky, I don't see it coming.

Any practice done extensively can induce a mystical experience. Do what you're most comfortable and experienced with.

What are you even talking about?

@ColeMC01 Think of attraction like a tug of war that you have to keep going forever. You don't pull nor push too much, because you don't want to win or lose. You want to keep playing forever. You have to keep the tension medium so that others will be able to stay interested. If you win or lose, the attraction dies. You have to stay within their range. The two extremes you could possibly be demonstrating: Too much care and attention. Being too good/nice. Being too generous. Lacking boundaries. No attention at all. Being toxic. Being bad. Closing off all doors for connections. It could be that either of these extremes is causing women to lose their interest in you. My guess is that it's probably the first one. What do you think?

Tell me something I don't know, yo.

Absolutely ??