Natasha Tori Maru

This victim mindset is half the problem. I speak to lots of members individually like this. You aren't special. Peace

This sort of thing isn't unique to science.

My brain is rubbing your brain with this one

Start every day with high tempo or interval based cardo (160bpm+) 1hr 2 weight sessions a week Min 10k steps a day, no sitting for more than 30minutes unless winding down to sleep Wholefoods plant based diet with extra EVOO. No farmed meat. No artificial sweeteners. 4 small meals a day, one larger. No flour, no wheat. Basically veggies, meat, dairy. No sauces. Spices & seasoning all good. No food 3hrs prior to sleep - minimum 7 1/2hrs sleep, ideal 8-9hrs Water, coffee, tea - that's it. Sip water through the day. Don't skol it - it flushes out electrolytes. I am pretty austere due to low food interest and high quality of life priority. And prioritizing a minimalistic routine & way of life. This setup means I rarely experience unexplained low moods, have good energy and never have crashes in focus, and get the most enjoyment out of all moments. Even answering emails, writing lists, folding the laundry. It's all fun fun fun! I try to ensure what I do now, is not robbing future me of the pleasure of just being in the moment.

Responsibility is on us all, regardless of fault. The same could be said for yourself. Don't get all confused. This isn't about content and more about how you communicate. On a wider note - my comments around communication style play into how this thread has evolved. I have no issue steering any thread back on topic, but users who are entrenched in bias shoot themselves in the foot when they cannot have a good faith, cohesive & wholistic view of a topic. This ends up causing the derailing again and again. This is a common pattern for these types of threads on the forum, and my advice is to prevent this. Even if it falls of deaf ears. This goes for all users - not singling you out @Lila9

@No1Here2c So you claim it should be possible through intuition?

So you claim it is possible to hold every single possible context of a definition as a knowing, simultaneously? This appears like an impossible ideal limit. Definitions simply do not operate in a fixed way. It is a compression of usage across contexts. I don't think steering toward "Can humans hold every context simultaneously?" And proposing it is possible, with no case, is as useful as asking “Which distinctions are most useful, precise, and experientially honest in this conversation?”

What is this highest potential definition defined? What do you mean precisely by this term? Accuracy? Context illustrates that accuracy. Context changes all meaning.

There very few proper definitions of words in isolation without context. Light weight. Turn off the light. Light sleeper Light colour.

You participated in derailing it. Feel free to bring it back in line. Threads go off track and roll right back onto topic - sometimes for pages and pages at a time. Use the report function if you want something done - that way all mods will asses and unanimously decide. Avoids bias (if you suspect that) and assists mods.

You aren't actually understanding or trying to understand and getting sidetracked by all these secondary points. All good, I can see I am not received. C'est la vie

Xe xer ximself monstrosity

Mother of GOD. I only just saw this thread now. Understood the assignment 🤣🤣🤣 The question is - and in true woke fashion - what pronouns would be claimed? 😂

I've had multiple at length discussions with you about this - it's your communication style that polarises people. You claim consistently that anyone speaking to you in good faith will know what you mean. But users aren't mind readers, and when you use imprecise language you can't expect people to understand a nuanced take. The constant black and white statements. Absolute 'all men' blanket generalizations, and inability to concede any points, is what digs your own grave. I'm not even a dude and I take offence to many of your statements. You don't appear to ever take anyone's argument in good faith but demand that others apply this to you.

I agree with this! I think the short form clips are a good low barrier of entry to begin some content. Easier when we do not have good energy levels, and, in my own experience, these small tasks snowball into higher total output. Action retrains habits. Action builds momentum. Action shapes thoughts and feelings. I never wait for inspiration. Paradoxically, I find doing performing many small tasks (squeezed into the day), injects me with a compulsion to drive harder at my larger projects. These smaller tasks act to build momentum and motivation, and I end up with MORE done, greater capacity and output. For this reason, I disagree with users who express consternation regarding smaller clips like this 'robbing' output and progress in Leo's larger projects.

Yeah, exactly. Like any medication it has pros and cons. If the benefits of taking the medication outweigh the cons (ie one is so fat that metabolically they are facing immediate issue with diabetes, cardiovascular strain and fatty liver etc) then taking the medication is going to help, despite the drawbacks of muscle/bone loss. None of these weight loss drugs replace regular exercise and healthy balanced diet. They just help you get out of the shit until you are in a better place to address other areas of life. I am not sure on this but I think the weight comes back when you get off the drug? Don't quote me on that. GLP1 agonists just prove that people cannot put down the fork (for whatever reason that may be).

Perhaps it would be like.... torturing yourself to death huehuehue sry back on topic I couldn't help it

All the best questions IMO. We love contemplating the ontology of a cup, but won't touch an emotion or feeling. All contractions of different forms. I practice extensive body scanning when investigating emotions and feelings.

In my understanding most of what people think is anger arises from another base - fear (and its associated emotions). Fear is the delusion of the self/ego. Many adore delving into intellectual / thought pursuits - and refuse to even investigate feelings and emotions. I believe anger is used as a loose term for a whole host of emotions and feelings many do not have nuance in detecting and expounding on (and that aren't in fact anger at all, when we inspect them closely). I do not know many who delve into their inner emotional world and approach feelings and emotions from an ontological lens. Prefacing that! - it could be simply the bias on this forum I think to proceed further we must dive into anger and how we each define it - I think this could be where confusion lies. Pure anger, in my worldview, phenomenologically often contains; aggression, aversion, heat, attack energy and a desire to push/resist/destroy the obstacle. Fear, urgency, protectiveness, moral clarity, frustration, upset, grief, consternation, confusion, nervous system activation, assertiveness, sadness, anxiety, shame, embarrassment, overwhelm, hunger, exhaustion, pain or discomfort. All of these sensations, feelings and emotions can act as a base for anger to arise from, or be wrongly mislabelled as anger. And I witness in my experience and would argue most people mislabel all of these complex, subtle contractions as anger. Passive aggressive behaviour arises from hidden forms of anger like sarcasm, deliberate procrastination or being chronically late. Oppositional defiant type behaviours. Self harm behaviours can also be another result of anger. Anger is NOT: clear perception, discernment, decisive action, fierce compassion, boundary enforcement. These all exist without the psychological contraction of anger. For example: I present an awakened teacher sharply correcting someone. This may externally resemble anger, but internally there may be no hatred, resentment, wounded pride, or personal grievance. Just clean intensity without aggression, attack or any desire to push/destroy etc. Moving toward the Buddhist type framing - Can there be aversion without a self-structure organising it?

But the assumption here is that these individuals do not have a self or ego? Anger is from attaching to the thoughts about spirituality. Attachment is from the self or ego. Criticism does not always carry anger.

@JoshB my stance isn't about suppressing or bypassing anger. I am 100% for allowing all emotion. My stance is that it originates from the self. If you must know, I have suffered mental and physical abuse/torture in the past. For years. I ended up with a TBI. I don't require compassion. I have processed the emotions that arose as a result.

As in, anger isn't from the self if you are abused?

This is my stance - ego/self origin. I haven't heard a compelling argument or example that suggests otherwise.

ROFL maybe thats what Peterson Academy really is 🤣🤣🤣🤣