Natasha Tori Maru

https://youtu.be/RuinHdlpXvE?si=VrOAKccmz1ysFhM4

So you base the original claim on the fact woman want a guy who's above them and leads them? How did you come to this thought? Based on what exactly? I don't want to know how Leo thinks, what he says. I want you know how YOU got to this statement. The logical chain. Where this "women want men who are above them" is derived from. What mechanisms? Sorry but you went straight to a fallacy in logic - appeal to authority. I'm asking YOU 😁

I do shit (shit#1) - then shit (shit#2) occurs afterwards. Shit#1 and Shit#2 appear to be associated. But in reality, all I can say is one shit is happening then another. I am making a connection between the two shits - via inference - up in my head? I got to this based on determinism / free will and reviewing this thread: Confused with free will I don't think I can say anything else other than "I observe some pattern of shit, some regularities of said shit, and some sequences of shit" Correct me if I am wrong - but I am making this connection up?

Explain to us your logic here and how you came to this conclusion?

https://isaiprofitable.com/ We are the product. Our data. Our words. Our art. Stolen.

"Produces" is the inference portion to me.

@LordFall Gotcha, cheers for the elaboration

Agree. It signals to me the person is underdeveloped and immature.

@LordFall Do you really think women's standards are why communism doesn't work? How are you accounting for other factors? Wouldn't it be more true to claim "if humans had much weaker status competition, communism would have a better chance at working?" I do not understand what it has to do with women. It is a human issue.

Sorry? I don't understand this

AI cannot answer this.

I think the surface appearance of the conversation is almost a red herring - as you get down to it, it is more a comment and reflection on each persons life stages and psychology / philosophy.

Actually try to understand each other with questions instead of strawmaning (well not strawmaning as I think it is unintentional, so more misunderstanding than anything)

Did he state the bolded, or is that your assumption? I just see a lot of assumptions in how you address others points that questioning would reveal could be wrong. I think you tried to understand his perspective from your frame, but didn't openly enquire and seriously consider there may be other valid perspectives. Again, this is just how it looks to me. If you say it is not so, then for you, it is not so.

@Leo Gura That is also a solid possibility. Not enough data to avoid simple speculation - could be both explanations.

I mean, this comes off as really condescending. You genuinely come across to me as insisting on your worldview while not truly exploring the experience of others to understand them. I could be wrong. Just how it appears.

This is not a correct framing. No stages of the spiral are transcended. They are integrated. So there would be no "pretending" or "transension". There would simply be unintegrated elements.

Shaving my head was one of the most freeing and changing experiences for me. And while I actively had a choice (IE I knew my hair would grow back, and I wasn't suffering from hairloss), it revealed how deeply attached I was to my appearance. It was key in dissolving that attachment and misplaced self worth. It also stopped me self-objectifying and leveraging off my looks as much as I did previously (not that I am some stunner, but I didn't get shit carded genetics wise). Shaved it at 12, 22 and 31. Got bullied relentlessly for it also. I learned to not give fucks. When I first got diagnosed with Hashimoto's and my thyroid was out of control, I lost most of my eyebrows and suffered a lot of hair thinning. I've since had the worst of it in remission (hence the helmet hair images in the facecard thread where its gown back with a vengeance of babyhairs). Attending too much to appearance has the drawback of potentially increasing attachment and investing our self worth in something that will fade. Immaterial. I feel it can run counter to consciousness work. This is another reason I am not for the looksmaxxing rubbish.

My inference is that he knew, but wants to avoid responsibility for not attending to potential downsides of the drugs. I suspect to cover for potential physical and emotional addiction to them. Essentially, shame. He is a strong proponent of hard work, integrity and cultivating strong beneficial habits. Peterson built much of his public reputation around personal responsibility, self-discipline, and confronting suffering consciously. Being addicted to a substance is a form of cope he may be unwilling to reconcile with his worldview. So to avoid the cognitive dissonance, he professes innocence regarding knowing how bad the drugs are. The whole 'demons' or 'devils' after him is another cognitive dissonance cope narrative in my reading. Just my guesses, not founded on anything other that piecemeal data. Armchair psychological hypothesis.

My stepdad had a permanent benzo script. Violent bpd and schizophrenia. Sometimes meds are needed, but they are over prescribed imo. The ICA wards I did work on.... Those poor souls. Without medication the nurses would be assaulted a lot more.

@integral how is Bryan working out what is causing what effect exactly - all the things he takes. How does he know what is doing what if he is taking and doing so much?

@Carl-Richard NOM

How is he working out what is doing what?

@Zenterus @Valach Just ducking in to say I really appreciate the dialogue here. I agree with much of Zenterus' conclusions.

It points to the substance of time not existing. That I am possibly creating that entire thing in order to make sense of reality. Amazing that my mind can do that. Fascinating