Gesundheit2

The saying: "Don't judge a book by its cover" is not meant generally but specifically. At least in the way I understand it now. In my experience, if the cover is trash, the book is probably trash. But if the cover is nice, then there is a chance it's actually nice. You should generally trust your gut feeling about bad-looking stuff. And only approve those that pass the tests. So my understanding of the saying has become more oriented towards positive skepticism and less towards positive naïvety.

Or understand the suffering.

No, he's just a person who is stuck in chronic criticism that turned into a survival strategy. And like most other post-modernists, his philosophy is fruitless. He has no will or initiative. And he is toxic/destructive/pure negative. He does not teach you how to jailbreak your mind, because he has not done that in the first place. He is stuck in his mind, playing games, coming up with nonsense and equating that with wisdom.

He's probably generally opposed to compliments.

Let's first distinguish between two types of people: People who genuinely disagree and provide constructive criticism. Trolls, haters, etc. There has been times where people were trolls and haters (my unconscious self included). But in the case of this particular thread, I think it's fairly obvious and safe to say that these people are mostly of the first type, at least in the beginning. Now, the disclaimers are good. And whether they're enough or not is probably up for debate, but that's not the point. The point is that don't allow the trolls and haters to have a gun that they can shoot you with in the first place. Just don't give them that gun. By being a jerk, you actually hand them the gun and tell them to shoot. Can we just look at the facts and at what can be improved instead of shifting responsibility, pointing fingers, and casting blame? How about we all stick to the same rules? If Leo is allowed to be a jerk, then everyone else should be allowed too, no?

He seems to get the most triggered when people associate his methods with his teachings, which is quite ironic. One aspect of this is that he says God is Love, but then he acts in (at least seemingly) unloving ways. Then people complain and confront him about that, and then he says you don't understand Love. He makes a distinction between relative and absolute, and discards relative love for absolute love. It's not that hard to understand. People are asking him to be more relative-loving, but apparently he finds that silly only cares about absolute love. I think this is the crux of it. On a somewhat different note, I think people who try to force or coerce others to share the same perspectives as theirs are actually seeking grounding in company more than anything else.

@Inliytened1 Not if you do it properly. The best medicine isn't the curative drug, but rather the preventive measures.

@Nilsi Excuse my bias. I'm generally opposed to foolishness.

Banning the haters is not improvement. It's degeneration. Improvement is learning how to plan your move steps ahead before your opponent (in this case the haters).

Actually, multi-perspectivalism is rare. Most people are highly dogmatic and cannot entertain two different perspectives and will find that kind of thing insulting and offensive, maybe even contradictory and illogical. And despite the massive passive aggression, I'm still not willing to engage seriously with a content or a person that downplays wisdom. I don't even understand how people take that fool seriously.

I think everyone would agree that the opposite of wisdom is foolishness. Well, maybe except the fools.

@Thought Art Are you okay, dude?

@Thought Art Yeah, I think it's hard and there's generally a limit to what a person can take. Especially considering that there are people that have history with you who are constantly talking shit about you even after everything you've done for them out of love, and you can't even respond to them directly because you know you shouldn't. It sucks. Indeed, it is a very frustrating experience to see much of your efforts go in vain, especially the more you actually care about the work and the people. It must be pretty heavy and demoralizing. I honestly feel amazed that Leo is still doing his thing despite all that. It is inspiring to see that this is humanely possible. But on the other hand, I think Leo is capable of pulling through and even turning things around. He has shown a lot of strength over the years, and he is God after all. It will pass.

You need not to defend him. I love Leo and accept him either way. He could speak in the most aggressive tone in the world, and I personally would still not have a problem with that. And while I'm sure there are lessons for all of us to learn from this thread and from Leo's style, let's consider this thread: And these comments: And especially this one: He needs our help to keep him accountable. He actually asked for it. It is actually in everyone's best interest to send a good image of Leo to the world. And the better the image, the better it is for everyone, including and especially him. This is not to say he has to become fake and inauthentic. There are several ways to express the same meaning. There are harsh ways and soft ways, and various other ways. It is possible to work on the delivery and enhance it so that it is both effective and respectful. If you want to have a great impact, you can. Just set your intention to it, and improve along the way. I think Leo needs to examine his attachments and biases and then he can improve based on that. He needs to take an honest, careful, and unbiased look at what triggers him and what motivates him. I've improved a ton. At least, I think I have. I don't see any reason why anyone else can't.

Why can't this challenge be considered a domain and more like an opportunity for inter-personal skills work and development?

The reality is that some things were said and they were uncalled for and could have been delivered better. That is the deeper level everyone should be looking at. We are here to improve ourselves after all, right?

Where's the role of consciousness and virtue? An eye for an eye only makes the whole world blind. Besides, if you know yourself well and you are confident in what you know, no criticism should shake you. If you have the truth, falsehood cannot hurt you.

Although, notice who started the verbal abuse in this thread and who reacted to it. It's the other way around than you're describing. Leo barged in and insulted Frank first, and then people started reacting to it. Then Leo doubled-down, and they doubled-down too until things came to this. None of this would have happened if Leo behaved differently, optimally more smoothly.

@Leo Gura I think many people will stop questioning and criticizing you here if you simply rename "forum" to "school".

@Ulax Respect

Nothing beats hard work except technology.

No, it is a delusional concept. If it was true, I would be practicing it.