nitramadas

Seems like a GreenTrap. This is precisely why I said what I said. Tier 2 ideas cannot be understood at Tier 1, no matter what. If I say "Hitler had some good ideas", Green's gonna think I'm evil, and I'm gonna have to make a lengthy explanation for every little thing like that. Green is concerned about appearances and seeming "agreeable" & "uncontroversial". Tier 2 only cares about education. If a lower stage looks at my speech, they can only interpret it from a "If I said what he said, what would be the motivation behind me saying that?" perspective. This is just like if a stage Red sees a Green being nice to people, they might become 100% convinced that the Green is just trying to manipulate people to get what they want. No matter how hard the Red tries, he won't be able to comprehend selflessness. This applies to every Tier 1 stage (Tier 2 somehow tends to be able to even see above itself).

I used to microdose it daily with a vaporize. Been out of weed for about a year now.. But getting high is a good way of dealing with any sort of acid anxiety, high is kind of the opposite of anxious. There's thousands of different strains. Maybe you did a sativa? Higher CBD weed would definitely not cause that.

People really like to confuse this and fall into beliefs of what it is. Awakening: Definition: "A broad term for progressing to a new stage of development which brings on a new perspective so radically different it's as if seeing [the truth] for the first time; hence the 'opening eyes' / 'waking up' analogy." "Awakening does not refer to any specific awakening; any such implication is not official." Intended meaning (by prevalence of usage) (ime): Orange → Green. Blue → Orange. Yellow → Turquoise. Green → Yellow. (Those who've recently turned green tend to use this term a lot. It's pretty much gained a second unofficial definition of "stage Green", whether the users of it are aware of Spiral Dynamics or not. That's just how Greens use it..) Enlightenment Strictest Interpretation (Limited Data): "Unprecedented transcendence of reality." Far beyond stage Turquoise. Likely beyond Jesus/Buddha level. Not just death of ego, but consciousness at this point is so vast & advanced that the very rules of reality are "negotiable". Technology is no-longer needed at this point as something like that would require consciously creating limitations (e.g. energy/speed) for technology to just solve them automatically.. WE benefit from learning by making tech to solve problems, but eventually it's nothing but a toy. It's not even that at some point some admins say "you know what.. here.. we're promoting you to admin status", it does work like that to an extent for system wide changes, but mostly you just realize you're already an admin ..eventually, when the others have caught up. This reality manipulation ability is just the natural progression of what Yellow/Turquoise often point out: "intent affects future probability" and the Green: "you create your reality". Just between tens to hundreds of thousands of years in the future (..why you've never of this and never will again ..don't ask.) Strictest Practical Interpretation / Most Accurate (imo): "The upper end of stage Turquoise. Complete emotional mastery; complete lack of attachment to anything, including the self." Stage Green/Turquoise: Greens often assume there is only one Enlightenment so when they turn Green, they think they've made it. They see anyone Turquoise as Green. Mini-Enlightenment / Enlightenment-Experience: "Something almost anyone can experience. Often marked by experiences of sudden expanded-awareness. These can sometimes trigger actual permanent changes."

I'm either the most active guy on the entire forum for a chunk of the day or don't come on here for days/weeks. Depends if I have my intellect engaged or not. If I'm here, I'm probably in YellowMode. Still trying to decide if it's worth coming here, mixed feelings.

lol, I've done acid dozens of times, all sorts of doses.. w/ weed every time. It just brings out the positive aspects of acid for me.

You mean.. if you stay still, and people move away from you, that might create distance? If you have trouble understanding, just relate it to a video game (aka a reality within our own, as it's easier to see the mechanics of reality contained within your own than to look outside of your own). Virtual objects don't exist, but if you're playing within the rules of that reality then those virtual objects are as real as real gets. (This is why I say this is too advanced for this forum. I can dumb it down, but then it gets very word heavy and confusing. The ENTIRE contents of the Actualized YouTube channel should first be understood like it's common sense, as a bare minimum. Or, at the very least, threads should be marked with stages (as I keep suggesting). As the only forum in existence for Tier 2 SD talk, it would be nice if it was taken a bit more seriously.. But that's my Yellowness speaking, I don't really care, I just like optimally designed systems. Rant over : )

Well, that's quite the question you've got there..

I'd like to know too. But this forum is, roughly: 50% Orange; 20% Green; 15% Blue; 10% Yellow; 5% Turquoise. The majority of threads are 'by Orange, for Orange'. I mean, I wouldn't mind helping Orange, but it's not the same as "a difference of opinion" or "just taking the teacher role" or anything like that. Orange, by definition, carries with it connotations that will be present in all 99% of Orange. Sure, you can have Orange level conversations with them, but then why come to this forum? Facebook/YouTube/twitter would be fine for that. "b-but how can this be?!" This forum was (and still is) primarily a "self-help/success/motivation" "support" forum. Now who does that attract? Yep. There kind of are some more advanced ones, but they're esoteric and not as active. And there probably aren't any other forums that discuss Spiral Dynamics. It's baffling. This is the only forum in all of existence that's even familiar with it.

Sounds like semantics. It's pretty simple: You get the data you ask for. That's it. You get distance if you need it, otherwise you don't. You say "actual distance" but there is no such "actual" reference point anywhere. It's not that it exists or not, you just get whatever you need. It both does and doesn't exist from out POV, but objectively speaking it's a bit more complicated. Objectively, distance exists in the way that it does in video games. If you're following the rules of the video game reality, then yes, distance objectively exists within that game for you, the experiencer of that reality. See, it's all dependent on the observer. If you want to experience reality is ANY way, then you'll have to adhere to some of its rules. So, really, it doesn't exist. But you'll have to make it exist in some form. Aaaaaaaaaand I've gone too abstract..

I sometimes had that while MDing. It feels a lot like amphetamine on lower doses, weirdly.. It often helps to smoke some weed. Weed is like made for acid. Any negative side effects of acid can often be attributed to dehydration, otherwise think about food, blood sugar, and caffeine. I also find acid + weed make food SO good, like nothing else. (Especially grapes with cheese.. It's worth MDing weed on top of acid just for that.)

I think this may be too advanced a concept for this forum.. But yeah, you're right. From our perspective, there is no distance by default as only that which you experience exists. If you can't see the air then it doesn't exist, it's only the "logic" of the process that needs to exist. That said, you CAN see distance if you just change the distance at which your eyes focus. I can see halfway between me and the wall or 90% to the wall or 10% to the wall, etc.

@tuckerwphotography "Baraka is my number one favorite film" Wow, that's unusual to hear. Guess it was worth staying on this forum.. (I've never known anyone with even the slightest interest in this type of content). "I disagree that you need to be on drugs to get it." I expected this response. There's no way of communicating the importance of drugs, you literally die (as a part of the ego). Forever. It's never coming back. Perspective is changed forver. I'm not saying you lose the whole ego, but a part of it. But you also gain far more than just losing ego. It's not unlikely I will never EVER experience the happiness I did while watching some of the stuff I did on drugs. You could say I wasn't human while watching it. I didn't at all identify with my human self. Had I done the "right thing" (had I asked any Blue about taking drugs and followed their advice) I would've lost out on the greatest experience I've ever had, and maybe ever will (in waking consciousness). One of the most important things I've learned is to give zero weight to the opinions of those at a lower stage to me. Including my parents/teachers/almost-everyone-I-know. Might sound mean/arrogant/illogical/"surely there's something valuable you could learn from from?", but nope. There's SUCH a massive difference between Yellow and Blue, for example, that any influence whatsoever from Blue would be counter-productive. Sure, challenges are good here and there, but you generally want the "best man for the job" in everything. You want the best engineer to work as an engineer, best designer to work as a designer, etc. When it comes to the stages, it's like: "You want the highest stage". That's it. A higher stage human is a higher stage human, higher is always better in every way. Taking advice from Blue, unless it's something specific, is generally a bad idea. The stages "transcend & include", so even if the Blues have an overwhelming consensus for what you should do, if you disagree, *as long as your intuition tells you you're right*, you should ignore the Blues almost entirely. (Note: This going against the forum's consensus.. lol) "It's truly a breathtaking piece of art that clearly has the ability to transcend even the Spiral Dynamics' lens through which we normally view the world" Yeah, though I think "Turquoise" is pretty much the optimal/intended "big picture" lens, anything lower would be skewing things in some way. I'd say Turquoise is like the intended "mode", but mapping all the subtle perspectives you can find in a film like Baraka would be like trying to create mental distinctions between 16.7 million colors. There's too much complexity to ever properly map, but Turquoise is enough to just say you'll experience "it" without too much projection/unwanted-bias. 'Perspectives Within Turquoise' would be a fun topic though, I've actually been thinking about it for a while now. What's the difference between someone who turns Turquoise at 50, and someone who turns Turquoise at 20? Does one have a more "solid" Turquoise? Well, most Turquoists that I know of have been Turquoise since a young age, they never went through a period of intellectual development (that often accompanies Yellow) as they go through it so fast. Their "flavor" of Turquoise is very different as a result. They are never/almost-never artistic/ambitious/theoretical/up-to-date/etc. As far as I know, there's noone who's ever spoken on this. Although you can see some clouds in Samsara through a million different perspectives, there should be some number of Types-of-Turquoise. I've also noticed that people often fall into an 'inbetween stage' eg. "an orange green" or "a yellow turquoise". All this indicates to me that SD is incomplete and should be between 4x to 16x higher in resolution (just additional subdivisions). "I'm going to rewatch it now from a mostly Stage Yellow perspective and see how the experience plays out." I really love the introduction to it. youtu.be/MRWZ7-M4gCg I get so overwhelmed with emotion every single time.. I can't really imagine watching this at Yellow though. You're either "there" or you're not. I just get glimpses of memories of my times at TotalTurquoise (or whatever you'd call it). It's the radical emotional openness that you want on TOP of plain old Turquoise (you could say a "hyperactive heart chakra"). But most important of all, you can't watch it with "human conditioning". E.g. A car is a car, right? Nothing crazy here. But then you take psychedellics and ..suddenly, a car isn't a car. It's like you're seeing it for the first time EVER! Realizing that you have a human body! Thinking "holy shit! I'm really inside this thing!" But only when the normalization has worn off do you experience this.. "Another film series I'd recommend is HUMANS vol 1-3. " Woah, that's some trippy shit, will definitely watch this. All those face close ups though.. Going TOO far is also a concern, I've frequently gone too far and.. it's not always worth it. There was I time when I was in search for the objective/definitive perspective "maybe if I understand everything I'll come up with the ULTIMATE perspective!" (this was back in my YoungYellow days). But then I started going deep ..too deep, and gained some OTT insane post-post-post-post-radical perspectives which were usually cool AF, but since I wanted the objective truth, and I wanted to solve the "problem" of "existence" once and for all, shit got weird very often ..for weeks. And it was usually due to stuff like.. that. Scenery/culture/positive-emotion are safer and the most enjoyable. It's like they made it for acid, but have never actually used it themselves. I'll still probably watch it. "Another good one on a lighter note is the documentary Babies" Uhh, ok that's certainly very Green. Might be a bit too "happy" for me, though. I need a certain amount of "depth". It seems to be a "heart chakra simulator" or something. I'm sure it's very effective at opening one's heart chakra but.. it's like I've already completed that level. At least that's how it feels. I guess I feel it wouldn't engage all my senses and wouldn't be inspirational enough (I love the depth in the volcano clouds in the Samsara intro, I see a thousand 3D skulls in the smoke : )

People seem to be posting intellectually stimulating films, but for an emotional (or even transcendental) experience that's the opposite of what you want. So, off the top of my head, here's my Top 11 films for emotional-fascination/stimulation: Samsara; Baraka; Yellow Submarine (1968); Land of the Lustrous; Mushishi; Avatar the Last Airbender; Enter the Void (do NOT watch on acid); Elfen Lied; Kino no Tabi; Shoujo Shuumatsu Ryokou; Cardcaptor Sakura Note: The first 5 (esp. the first 3) are not really suitable for sober-watching (imo). The intellect must be properly turned off first and foremost. Some all of these may seem weird, but that's because, the way I see it, they're not intended for human consumption. They require the right kind of altered state of consciousness or you won't truly "get" it. This is the shortcut to Turquoisehood and I would recommend. Can't be bothered to list normal films (people still watch those? lol) In regards to Samsara, I think I now see what's going on. I've watched it a few times, yet other people tend to always perceive it differently to me. It seems it can be viewed from 3 main perspectives: Green, Yellow, Turquoise (partly as noone else would watch it, lol). Greens tend to see it as "The Poor Starving Kids in Africa, the Movie", or "Humans, the Shocking Truth.. Uncovered!". Before I knew of SD, such views always struck me as odd; but they make perfect sense now in context. Yellow would say "Samsara is such an amazing project, I'm astonished such beautiful minds exist. That said, I couldn't help feeling they tried too hard pushing their own agenda. Still, endeavouring to gift others with direct experience of radically different perspectives of life.. this is a form of entertainment far ahead of its time. If only I could share this and help others understand.. I would love nothing more than to get others up to the point where they can see the beauty in existence itself". Turquoise: "I could stare at those clouds for all eternity; they are so blissful. Samsara/Baraka are films with the personality of a Turquose monk. Wise enough to know that the only way to teach is indirectly, through example; through presence; through pure, unspoken intention. Just being there, so others learn to do the same. You need efficient teachers to make efficient teachers; you need calm teachers to make calm teachers. Samsara demonstrates an understanding of this and sees no need to say anything. Even if there was an agenda, it's a work of art nonetheless." I've only experienced it from Turquoise (as I didn't want to taint my experiences with it), but I think my analysis is pretty accurate. To conclude: It's a Turquoise level film and the current consensus of it is skewed towards a Green perspective due to Green's overwhelming prevalence, in comparison to T2 stages. (Just a quick, objective analysis).

This sounds familiar. This is definitely caused by a blockage of some kind. Relatable (Skip if you just want the answer. I can't stop myself from writing..) (I actually experience something similar sometimes, though not a blockage or anything negative. A sudden intense euphoria at the back of my mouth or around where the head meets the neck. But I quite like my euphoria w/ its accompanying expanded awareness and love, so may be unrelated..) (I've also gone through a period of complete human-disassociation. Eg. I would watch myself playing piano..; watch myself having conversations with people.. existing mostly as just an objective observer and thinking "hmm, they seem to want an ego-to-ego chat, what would be an appropriate response here?". It made interactions awkward and inauthentic, especially when, eg., someone's trying to be nice, is complimenting me on something, and I have to act uplifted/happy about that. In such a state, what can you talk about with people? Talk about them out of caring? That's just not how it works. All you can do is give as much love as you have and lead by example, even if it seems stupid/irrational to everyone else. Unless they're stage yellow, lol. I don' think people like it when I say that 'round here..) Basically, I think disassociation is great! Don't worry about it, that's technically what enlightenment is! : ) Unenlightenment = "a state of association with problems of the ego and/or the human mind". So what's disassociation then? It's that thing you've been constantly hearing Buddhists talk about: Non-attachment, aka disassociation, aka enlightenment. (Though there are many Enlightenments..) Explanation You don't say what caused it, but in most cases it's due to flowing energy up (intentionally or not), and getting it stuck in a blockage; causing pressure and potentially pain. Ever notice how there's a distinct physical feeling in your body when you emotions? Ever notice how anger has an exact physical location somewhere inside the head? That's because anger is a blockage you subconsciously create. If you don't deal with it, it will remain. Even if it loses all energy and you can't feel it anymore, it will remain. (Maybe that's why some say "you must build up the ego before you can try to get rid of it"). Ideally, you should dissolve everything as soon as you notice you're experiencing it, but that's the long term solution. To fix your immediate problem I would guesstimate would take around 2–14 days, depending on you. Here's how: Solution Consciously relax every part of your body, starting with the head. (Different parts of the brain link to different parts of the body. If a body part is tense, a brain part is tense, ie. part of the blockage is still blocking.) Become intimately aware of every sensation you feel in the problem area, curiously "discovering" everything there is to it. Notice how it's a finite, distinct object. Separate from you. Then do one of these: Approach 1: Just keep watching it; meditating on it. Do nothing, you're merely allowing your attention to rest there. "Awareness alone is curative". Approach 2: Mentally identify 2 points: Your throat + the problem sensation in your head. Feel & mentally establish their connection. Feel that head sensation being "sucked down" by your throat. Just feel it happening. Don't think how. Should be intuitive. Experiment with pulling at the front or the back side of the neck/head. (Pros/cons to each but that gets technical) Feeling the downwards flow is priority, w/ that in mind, experiment with: Tying it to deep breathing. Feel it moving WITH the breath. Approach 3: Identify 2 points: Your hands + that head sensation. (As before). On inhale: Feel the head sensation being strongly drawn by the hands (and leaving through them). OR being drawn by the earth itself, through the hands. On exhale: Notice & enjoy the refreshing energy relaxing and purifying as it flows. (Experiment with reversing the actions). (Note: I don't just say things like "enjoy" arbitrarily. You're defining/creating this energy as you're receiving it).

Hope I mostly stayed on topic. The "science" in your videos to which I could object are only "science" in a broad sense.. Are Spiral Dynamics / political sciences / soft-sciences included? Some general questions/ideas to address: Mathematics is not fundamental. Constants/relationships can be observed, but that doesn't mean they're an intrinsic part of reality. Math is about as real as the color turquoise, without humans, it doesn't exist. Reality itself doesn't "know" any maths, it has no "rules". If it's able to exist it does so, unknowing of how. Something from nothing. You've already covered this, but should probably be included in a video aimed at materialists. Given the current level of human development, how likely is the current paradigm to be accurate? Being a civilization not even 10% in our development, is it wise to assume our understanding is ~90%~95%? "Lets just do a bit more of the same, figure out quantum mechanics and we'll get to 100%!". If people from the year 500 000 were looking back to the year 2020, how close would they say we were? Without even taking a poll, you know what the consensus would be. It's intuitive, yet most still choose to believe what they're intellectually comfortable with. How well is modern science/physics able to answer the big picture questions? If it's THIS incompetent at answering ANY of the most important questions, how much weight should you give its claims? Science is only as good as the people who do it. The science community is toxic and unscientific. New thinking is disallowed. Egos, social hierarchies, and unhealthy capitalism limit science. "science progresses one funeral at a time". Science fails to address massive chunks of existence due to its bias. (e.g. Ken Wilber's Quadrants). Science tends to dismiss the subjective. Science ignores the WHY. Being primarily concerned with the HOW. Objections: "it's pseudoscience! Who's gonna trust the baseless claims of some arrogant, self-proclaimed god, cult leader? If you ain't tens of thousands in debt, you ain't qualified to speak!" "What makes you so sure of your ideas that you present them as facts? How much of this is arrogance? How much of that is egoistic arrogance?" Simulation/VR theory. You seem to have heard someone's poor interpretation of it and assumed that's what it is. Simulation theory, at its core, basically suggests that nothing is real, it's all data, and the goal is solely to survive by becoming more ordered / efficient as a system through evolution. This, however, does NOT, necessarily, imply a physical computer behind the scenes with a potentially infinite loop of aliens having us in their computer.. That's nothing but a moronic "what if" bastardisation of the concept. It's more like: Consciousness starts out the same as in Guraian ideology, but instead of going from "infinity" to "human awareness" with no inbetween and nothing actually being evolved, proponents of simulation theory suggest that there is a layer between the two extremes, a division of original consciousness to make interactions possible. Interactions within a simulation are what lower entropy. The human experience is just a means for those divisions to lose themselves in the experience, to start believing that death = death & consequences are real. Otherwise, choices wouldn't feel important, and noone would learn. Selfless behavior / love is most constructive, and that's what the system is set up to reward. That third layer learns, expands, and maybe divides again once its entropy is low enough, that's how it grows. Like a fractal. Consciousness is like a virtual computer, it can receive/send/process data. A Gura-ist may say "there is consciousness, and its imagination, nothing else. No computers or anything else in the void." But the thing is, imagination = data. What is sight? Visual information, right? Visual data..in..formation. Data in- visual formation. In the same way you wouldn't go directly from CPU to YouTube, you wouldn't suddenly go from "infinity" to "human awareness". You see hierarchical structures like this EVERYWHERE, it would be questionable for one to assume consciousness is the one exception and that what you are right now is "infinite awareness aware of a human experience". That would mean that evolution is an exclusively physical feature (as you're not gonna be evolving pure, top level awareness into more pure). That's just too big of a jump. (Would be nice seeing Gura-ists exploring new ideas..) Libertarianism. While I agree completely.. like with simulation theory, you seem to be a bit inflexible and don't see the potential; the positive vision of the concept. If you do enough mental gymnastics, you can turn any shit concept into a great one. I mean, I fully support Hitler's vision, he was absolutely right. *Queue Tier 1 gasps*. If you take something like CRISPR-Cas9 and NeuraLink, add a few more decades of research.. "h-hey! You can't be enhancing humans! That's.. f-frowned upon! There's no precedent.. y-you're just making Hitler happy!" 4 parts!?!? idk what you're thinking but.. that's a lot for this "hard to clickbait" topic. (wish "Stage Turquoise" got that many parts.. lol). If your goal is to educate the masses, it's gonna be hard getting them to watch 4x 2 hour videos on technical esoteric topics like e.g.: implications of the triple blind delayed-choice double slit quantum eraser experiment or something.. I know it's a bit short, didn't have my ideas at the ready.. Surprisingly didn't have any real objections, guess as it's is an unusual/vague topic. Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this post are intended for educational/informative purposes only and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the author(s). Any examples of analysis performed within this post serve only as such, and are not intended to cause any significant emotional distraught. Assumptions made within any analyses are not necessarily reflective of the position/stance of the, aforementioned, author(s).

He's a bit more difficult to figure out than most, but probably an ISTP (or possibly ESTP). He definitely enjoys being the main talker in group, and being the centre of attention. Being on stage I imagine gives him energy. Though he's not the type who would go to others for help, he'd try to figure it out himself. So overall likely more I than E. Definitely S as he's not at all the intellectual type and has difficulty seeing the big picture intellectually. T as he tries to be more objective and informative than careful not to offend. Lastly, P is probably more likely than J given his "carefree" and "accepting" nature. Though he's definitely judging and full of irrational beliefs. Like.. so many beliefs that you'd think he's stage green, it's just that, due to advancing up the stages so fast, he doesn't display them (i.e. didn't spend long enough in orange or yellow to still be interested in learning/models/systems, as is often the case with celebrity Turquoists..). (I wouldn't be surprised if he DIDN'T need to become rich and successful when he went past orange.)

This is, ultimately, the question of "is reality deterministic or probabilistic?". Consciousness provides us freedom within the choices we have. Could consciousness even exist within a deterministic reality? What's more likely to be fundamental, consciousness or reality? Could reality exist without consciousness? Could consciousness exist without reality? What would be the point in a reality without consciousness? If the outcome is already known you're, essentially, in the past. Looking through memories. The present would be at "simulation complete". Lastly, assuming reality exists for a reason, that there's an objective of some kind. Would efficiency be at all important? A probabilistic model is more efficient by many many orders of magnitude.

"awakening" By this you mean Green, I presume? You're leaving Orange? That's what "new agers" lol usually mean when they say that. ..wait, reading your post, that's not so clear now. Normally with green you start to really feel love and want to connect with others. Did you ever go through that? If not, it's possible you're awakening... INTO orange OR blue, lol, but that would be a mean thing to suggest. I'd be surprised seeing a blue here. They're usually less annoying than orange, but also more boring.

I think you're partly right. Humanity and ego get in the way, and for spiritual growth letting go is probably all that's needed. But it that was the only thing that mattered, there'd be no reason to stay alive. I think if there's one single thing that matters, it's awareness. it automatically helps spiritual growth, but also enhances quality of life. Letting go naturally happens when you're aware enough that you don't need anything.

Ahhh, I was just about to compliment you, and then you go and forcibly destroy my post.. If only this forum could make distinctions between serious posts and comments.. JUST SAYING ummm, when you die, you go to heaven or hell. (Now you can't delete this post..) You.. didn't delete any of my actual posts, right?

Uhhhh, have you not seen Leo's videos? That should be enough. This is "post-rational" stuff, if you're not Yellow, which you're not, it will just seem like some distant, abstract philosophy. Knowledge at this point is vague; based on many vague connections; and becomes increasingly more reliant on intuition. I have to say, you didn't understand my ~2k word essay, and what I'm talking about here touches on things that all need essays of their own . You can get the majority of the prerequisite knowledge from Leo's videos. But even then, you're not Yellow. That's kind of a big deal. It's like being a different species. I promise I mean no offence. Though it might be difficult for you to see that. Luckily, I've saved probably around a million words in essays I've written this year. Here's one that seems relevant. This is a summary I wrote to my introduction to virtual reality. It takes you step by step using logical derivations to show how there is no reason to assume matter exists. Designed to even be compatible with Blue. Note: Originally formatted for YouTube comments. Haven't proofread this. idk what this summary left out.. But it should provide the backbone for the abstract concepts you're struggling with. Had I known you're unfamiliar with Actualized, I would've started at a lower level. With this, you should be able to understand most of the common concepts talked about in Actualized, which should, hopefully, enable you to understand what I've been saying. Maybe this model alone will suffice.. Enjoy! 1. *Your entire reality is just your mind tell you what's "there".* If an object is small, the brain uses memory and other visual data to make you believe it's 'far away'. You decide to move forward, and you "feel" what you've "learned" to be your leg sensations, again just data. Seeing visual information update as you move just cements the illusion. If this is too abstract, just remember what video games are _currently_ : A. Updating visuals that form the illusion of space through visual consistencies. Is something far away in a video game actually far away? No, just made to look smaller based on your "distance" from it. There aren't that many ways to create "space", so of course video games are gonna copy RL, RL is like this for a reason, it works B. Controller vibrations. C. Audio D. Spatial audio. E. Pathfinding. What do you think's gonna happen when neuralink comes out? 2. *Things mostly seem consistent, so you treat reality as physical / actually being there.* You always get the data you expect, you've always believed you're in the physical, and since nothing changes, you cling to those old, ungrounded childhood beliefs. 3. *Life happens in the mind & you can't fully trust the brain's interpretation of anything* (as seen with how easily it can be skewed with psychedellics or simply your mental state) 4. *Since life happens ENTIRELY in the mind, even if there was a physical matter reality, noone's _ever_ been there & you will never experience it* . In life, you can only experience what your brain allows. (To experience a "physical reality" you'd have to stop processing all the sense inputs coming to your brain. That would, technically, be the "physical", but it wouldn't be a "physical matter reality", you wouldn't find life there. It would be a void. That's what happens when you "turn off the lights, all of them". Life does not exist physically, never has, never will. ) 5. *The brain is a creation of consciousness to define limitation* Imagine if humans started out with an average of 1000IQ, think they wouldn't have nuked themselved long ago? It's not the intellect we're developing here. This is the evolution of consciousness—but that's a topic for another time. 6. *Physical reality is not only unnecessary, but also theoretically inaccessible and, therefore, could not exist in any capacity* Reality is non-physical. Physicality can only ever be an illusion. Hopefully you understand by now that "Feeling and seeing" is not enough reason to consider reality physical. 7. *What did reality come from?* If you say _something_ , if you say _the big bang_ , you then have to explain where those came from, and so on.. *What did reality come from?* *What is reality made of?* Should be obvious by now. The answer is: Nothing. No matter what theories anyone has, it _has_ to always start and end with nothing. Everything else would require structures and explanations requiring more explanations. Nothingness is not to be confused with non-existence, however. Nothing is the only "thing" than can be "anything".

This agenda you think I have.. uhhhhhhhhhhh "how ignorant everyone is except you. " Did I say that? Is that projection again? I don't intend on sounding arrogant, I just provide relevant information. Someone didn't get it, so I elaborated, since I elaborated, you, for some reason, think I'm trying to impress someone or something. huh?!? Are you under the impression that anything you don't already know is BS? Are you expecting me to provide you with empirical evidence for the most abstract, subjective concepts in existence? I thought I did a good job refraining from speaking about the more advanced concepts which I'd have no chance of adequately explaining. The thing is, if Leo does a 4 hour talk on Libertarianism, do you think he's arrogant? What makes his qualified to speak about anything? Have you seen his qualifications? No, you don't need to, he just gives great insights, and if you gain something from that, then great. Yet you're insisting on seeing me as somehow inherently different. I've been doing this stuff for about as long as him, he's been doing self-enquiry; enlightenment; non-duality work for longer than me, I've been doing practical, intellectual, and "deep dive" work for longer than him. He also had a slight head start on personal development. We just started from different approaches. I can see problems in him, if positions were reversed, he could see problems in me. Here's some common sense: Every source is biased. Even the best ones. Every teacher WANTS you to challenge their models, to go and explore, to expand your understanding and seeing from new perspectives. What you're doing is the opposite of helping anyone, what you seem to be concerned with is NOT growth, but something else, maybe your social standing or your imaginary status or value within some group. Considering the nature of Leo's channel, I assumed his forum would have people like him, I guess I was wrong.

Some great insights you have there. Though I hope you like critique. That's what I do : ) "The color green, is existing without a perceiver. It’s just existing for itself" This I have to disagree with. Subject = Object. Whatever you experience, that IS you. If you see the color green, you're the generator AND the observer of that color, as well as the observer of the observer of the generator of the generator.. Without your awareness, who would the concept of "green" exist for? You realize the very idea of color is something man-made? In Japan, for the longest time they had the same word for blue and green, "aoi". The concept of color is a very human and advanced idea. If humans had never existed, there would be no such concept. Could any object or color even exist without your awareness? Could a table exist as a table? Table is, again, a human idea. It's just a set of ideas about something that matches a certain pattern, it could not exist in and of itself. A cat may not be able to make any sort of distinction between a table, a desk, a cupboard, a coffee table, a plank, a large carboard box, metal, wood, plastic, glass. A cat may notice a difference, but that's very different from making a distinction. "field of consciousness" This is a new-age term I often hear. It's not based on logic or science or intuition or anything really. It's just a common belief used by materialists to try to keep everything "physical" and within the paradigm which they're unwilling to let go of. "I affected probability with my intent? Oh, then there must be some sort of force field surrounding me that extends to as far as I need, and does something to make it happen" This idea exists for the same reason the "ether" was thought to exist. It's just a limitation people put on themselves when they have beliefs about how reality works. "Reality is a self feeding loop of consciousness that is never ending" That's about how I see it too. "not matter, but complete magic or being" Yes! Though I prefer the term "data". Data is "stuff" which, when put together in a meaningful way conveys information. The senses are just information, and information is data-in-formation.

Ever heard of non-duality? I made a lengthier post since someone needed clarification . But, really, I'm kind of shocked you "don't know what are you talking about" Are you familiar with Actualized? I guess I could've written it a bit more clearly, but anyone with any kind of basic familiarity with these concepts should be able to work out what I meant by saying that death isn't a physical phenomenon, and that the distinction between life and death is purely mental. I'm sorry, but if even that doesn't make sense, I have no idea why you're posting. No offence, really, just kind of disappointed.. You and the other guy don't seem to be native English speakers, maybe my structure was too confusing. I can understand, being a non-native speaker myself.