Natasha Tori Maru

Do we have one? Rolling. Post that shit. Shorts, reels, tick-tock turds. Do your worst short format. Boomer cringe. I love the spittle on the guys mouth 🤮🤢 https://vt.tiktok.com/ZS45V1Enf/

This is the sort of place my mind went to... GOD please. NO. But if it was the difference between Leo's endurance in this space and not... HARVEST MY DATA AND SELL IT 😅

I read the post as putting ads on actualized.org

Usually this means the correct questions are not being asked, or the line of questioning is not understood or not clear enough. We are asking questions to assist you/prompt self enquiry - why would discarding the questions, or trying to ask us where they arise from, assist you? Other than to appear to outsiders to avoid asking yourself? Actually asking yourself and deeply questioning (not necessarily answering us, that isn't needed, it is for you to answer for you) is the only aim. Your answers seem to side step. Consistently. So I am more inclined to think there is an issue with the phrasing or how the questions are asked that is imprecise. My typical line of questioning goes beneath the surface claims of "I need people/am extraverted" to the source. I do this with all kinds of enquiry. The point might not be initially apparent. Maybe this type of enquiry just doesn't work for you?

No one said it was unfair. Or not allowed. But users notice the repeated rhetoric and story you tell. It is the one you appear to dislike inspecting as resistance comes up when it is approached. Resistance is observed in avoidance of inspecting the apparent egoic attachment to reported elevated status. There may not be any, true. But it appears this way from outsiders. The narrative repeated is serving some purpose for you. As narratives often do for us all. The stories I tell myself often help me avoid or cope. We don't mean this as an attack. It's an observation of what is seen. Without any interpretation - you repeat your consciousness status as a theme. I've asked similar questions as @Valachto you previously. What you answered him with doesn't address the questions, but avoids them. Similarly to my lines of enquiry - you avoided these prevously, also. I apologise if these words hurt. I am trying to remove any interpretation and just illustrate what is seen and observed. I want to try to avoid explaining you as this is a disservice to what you may mean or experience. Just observe patterns.

Yes! Exactly. I have thought on this a lot. Seek and you shall find.... My first experience was spontaneous - which prompted hardcore spirituality seeking in myself, in an endeavour to explain what happened.

@Jirh I agree. I've seen it happen (in my personal life) with individuals for a predilection toward all-or-nothing black and white thinking. Also women taking on the beliefs of their husbands. I might suppose that these individuals perceive this switch as progression rather than regression.

In my experience the human brain is obsessed with certainty as a result of survival. Ambiguity and remaining in a state of not knowing really seems to cause most individuals anxiety. People want a nice, closed loop. A clean narrative. Explanation. Meaning is a huge driver. It takes an unusual thinker to rest in not knowing. Wonder. Most treat it as a provisional space that must be filled as soon as possible...

Do you think there is a possibility the individuals you reference only ever held spiritual beliefs - and they simply morphed back (or into new), religious ones?

Even if it's just a matter of prompting the right questions for contemplation 🥰

Haha, you caught me though - trap was too obvious 🥹 ... Or maybe my deviousness is becoming too easy to predict

The desire would need to be precisely defined and the test genuinely precommitted. Something like : "This is the exact impossible event and these are the conditions and deadline. If it doesn't happen, I will regard that as evidence that my manifestation hypothesis is false." Written on a post-it somewhere, or noted on phone or document. As a definitive marker to measure against.

What would count as a result against manifestation for you?

Why would you do this to yourself? Masochist

I personally do not require all (or most) of my needs across domains to be met by one person. I do not have to lower my standards per se. I spread them out within agreed upon relationship boundaries. This can be an option, also. For example, I do not seek necessarily to share my creative/artistic endeavours with my partner as a requirement. I have other networks of people for that need. It is nice when they are interested or want to engage, though!

@Olaf This is your homework

Perhaps it is a question of our ability to detect “higher consciousness” and what metrics we use to measure it against. As we develop, what we consider to be markers of higher consciousness can change. But how are we refining, learning and accumulating genuinely new methods of connecting relationally so that we can accurately assess “higher consciousness” in another person? There is always a risk that we THINK we know what markers to look for when identifying elevated levels of consciousness. The filter itself can become the block. And the filter changes as we grow. The problem is that the filter can become a fail mode: it can cause us to stop connecting with someone because they don't exhibit the particular markers we currently associate with higher consciousness. You run the risk of the frame itself being flawed when the question is framed as higher/lower, because ego can obviously sneak in: “I am above.” But that isn't the only possible block (that I am "above" and you are "below:). What we currently look for as markers of “higher consciousness” in another person might itself be outdated. Perhaps @Miguel1 is growing out of previous filters and trying to learn a new way? It could be what he is looking for as a marker is wrong - not that he automatically thinks he is above. My discernment may be flawed ≠ I am judging you as inferior

Do you think you have to have all of these needs fulfilled from one person?

Oh my gosh I had forgotten about him until now 🤮🤢

I always feel like simps are.... The male equivalent to sluts. I feel bad for this thought 😬

Oh shit! Thanks for sharing that one @Leo Gura Trivializing Spirituality When I originally came across it, I thought she was a good example for the deconstructing rationality series. While she pokes some series holes in channelling in the video, she has some huge drawbacks in the base assumptions she works from that lead to many of her questions failing due to poor framing. She alos has a serious bias toward explaining everything from a psychological lense. She is so allergic to religion from being an ex Mormon, she has ended up nestled so far up the arsehole of rationality she has looped into a weird failure mode of endless lack of closure. Unless of course it's a psychological analysis - then it's all explained neatly! Brit is a fantastic case of deep, deep self deception. But very sophisticated in that deception. The more interesting ones are the sophisticated thinkers as the steel trap of the mind is so elaborate and well crafted. SNAP I enjoyed your breakdown

In really enriched, healthy long term relationships: It's fucken normal to have a life purpose AND want to make your partners day awesome. It's not one or the other. Half the time it ends up being as simple as finding something to do from them in their love language. Both partners do this for each other... It comes from a place of abundance. It almost feels like some users haven't experienced this. Or don't know this is a thing. The issue with doing shit for your partner to make their day better creeps in when it comes from a place of lack, unclear commitment or shitty transactional tallying where you think you are owed something for the gesture. If there is balance. Secure commitment. It is enriching.

Locked. This is just a distraction from the work.

With George Knapp - I think he is a good investigative journalist following the UFO movement also