jakee

@integration journeyYeah, it's a must read if you are serious about spirituality - especially mysticism. There's a lot of important details of the dysfunctions and pathologies of the higher states/stages.

Text for sure! Or both, especially if there's some of your juicy insights along with the video.

Yeah... fair enough.

According to Jamie Wheal, there are bunch of silicon valley entrepreneurs and such who use psychedelics and meditative practices to enhance creativity and productivity etc. While this isn't mystical in any metaphysical sense, could this be concidered something like Orange mysticism? At Orange, one could see creative business operations as a spiritual practice, I suppose.

Stage Red "strongman" could be a legitimate leader in a specific chaotic Stage Red society, but that's not something suited in the context of American- or international political contexts. That's just pure regression. Majority of people globally and in America are somewhere between Blue and Orange, not Red. And again, like Leo said above, Trump would not even be an effective Stage Red dictator, even if there was a legitimacy for that in American context. I think USA, and in large part, the whole world is having a some sort of legitimation crisis. What America (and world) needs is a political transformation - more authentic (developed) leaders and cultural meaning-making systems. The world is chaotic right now, there are conflicts and environmental issues etc., but Trump is not the one who can provide wholeness to that chaos. Trump is just a ego-backlash to that legitimation crisis.

Yeah, thats why I said "is this a good way to conceptualize it", not "is this the correct explanation" of said phenomena.

Would Bernardo Kastrup's filter hypothesis be a good way to conceptualize this? So the brain/body is a filtering or localisation mechanism inside the mind at large (God). The brain localizes Infinite consciousness, leading to a finite and specific perspective or form/structure of consciousness. So according to this, the genes do have a derivative relationship with intelligence and potential for development of the individual filtered mind, but they are still a construction of the "mind at large".

What are the positive and negative consequences, or virtues and pathologies of pomo. Not just philosophically or epistemicly, but in a cultural space (cinema, media, art, architecture, science, political movements etc.) Is postmodern art just self-aware, pretentious, taping banana to the wall type of business, or is there something more profound and beautiful going on? Is pomo able to integrate authentic spirituality into culture? Is it holistic and meta enough to do that, or is something like integral or metamodernity needed here?

Could we all as a human race just watch this video right here and contemplate it for 10 years, and then come back to solve this mess with a multiperspectival, turquoise, meta-interprative, holistic God consciousness? Thanks!

Hanzi Freinacht: Nordic Ideology (Politics) Jamie Wheal: Recapture the Fracture (Spirituality, Culture/Meaning Crisis, Self-Help) Keith Witt: Loving Completely (Relationships, Dating) Ken Wilber: Any

How it "actually" is, I'd say, is the integration or inclusion of everything you ultimately are, which some might say is Infinity. (or negation of everything you aren't, which is also Infinity) But I'm not really qualified to talk about that. But in the relative domain, no symbol or concept represents how/what anything actually is. So there is no escaping the relative nature of defining sex & gender.

IMO the line drawing has to do with some kind of integration of different perspectives. Green/postmodernism tends to just dissociate "objective" or biological dimensions in reaction against (pre)modernist tendency to reduce and ground everything to external dimensions or harmful hierarchical social regimes. Integrative way would be to see and accept all perspectives (subjective, objective, intersubjective & interobjective etc.) contextually as a valid and important domains. There are areas in which exterior features matter more than the interior ones, and vice versa. It remains open to discussion that what perspective(s) should be privileged and in which context. I don't think there are clear lines in this matter. The adequacy of notions of gender/identity/sex are dependent on the cultural and developmental context.

John Vervaeke The Integral Stage (Layman Pascal) ZDoggMD André Duqum Before Skool Alex O'Connor Dr Iain McGilchrist Guru Viking Dr. James Cooke BuddhaAtTheGasPump Aubrey Marcus

Very Red of you to demonize Green this much

He talks about this alot: