Gesundheit2

B-but Nahm is just a thought

Well, what is Actualized.org? A YouTube channel with Patreon. A website with the Life Purpose course (product). And a forum for discussing self-help topics. I don't think these things necessarily form a cult, even though they can. I mean obviously no one is being blackmailed or forced into anything they don't want. But I can see some cult dynamics which can be unconscious from Leo and from the others. For example the blind defending of Leo from some Actualized members sometimes, and the hero displays from Leo as a leader, these things seem a bit cultish. But I guess it can't get any better. For me, the pros weigh more than the cons, and if it's a cult then it's a very useful one.

@zurew Thanks, man. Appreciate the tips. Are you a developer yourself? I started out my journey from the Front-End end, but I might as well go full-stack eventually since the paths seem similar and cross over each other all the time. I chose the front-end path for a variety of reasons; The low-end hardware that is required. The high income that is promised. The low mental demand, which turned out to be a bit illusory, but still relatively low compared to other programming careers. The former experience I have in design. The luck factor. I happened to watch an HTML and CSS crash course by accident, and I thought why not go all the way? To be honest, I don't prefer this kind of job for itself. I prefer more physically demanding jobs, I think they're more healthy, but most of them are frowned upon and don't pay well. But I don't hate it either. The only one obstacle that I'm struggling with right now is problem solving. And I'm not struggling simply because it's hard for me, rather because I don't have a high IQ. I mean, I can understand the problem and the solution when the instructor is explaining it, it's no problem whatsoever. But to replicate the solution on my own, it takes time and effort, which is probably the case for most developers. I still haven't gotten over the learning curve, but I've only gotten into problem solving like 6 months ago. Overall, I've been on this path for a year. In two days the year will be complete.

Complete surrendering and submission.

I used to have low IQ and EQ, but I used to (unconsciously) think a lot (not the same as overthinking) in order to make up for the low IQ, and somewhat the low EQ. In social interactions, my physical appearance (clothes, style, hygiene, glasses, elegant watch, etc...) used to do much of the work for me. People always assumed that I'm top tier and gave me leeway and special treatment without me actually saying or doing anything special, well except being successful in school which I don't consider an indicator of intelligence; people apparently think differently. Some people could see through me and treated me as I deserved which I found cruel or cold at the time but now I find fair and logical. I always lacked confidence and charisma, which is why I didn't have a lot of success with the opposite sex or with my former job as a sales representative. As for confidence, I used to do religious affirmations and they worked like magic. But charisma has always been a bitch with me. It's hard. You can't make a John Cena into The Rock. The gap is so big and obvious. Cena doesn't have charisma. The Rock has it. How and why? Nobody knows. I'm John Cena; boring, flat, unemotional, I even joke with monotonality, etc... So, in order to fit in with the expectation that I'm top tier, I used to counter the lack of charisma by acting like a hypermaniac with verbal diarrhea. Luckily, I didn't do that for long, because I actually got burned out quickly, but jeez looking back now I definitely was disgusting I would kill myself. Right now, I still don't have the charisma that I want but at least I'm comfortable with myself, which allows me to act somewhat charismatic and it seems authentic when I do so. But back to the original IQ topic, right now my IQ levels are average or slightly above average according to the test. However, in a way I feel dumber because I don't think as much as I used to, sometimes I doubt my ability to think. But when I think even for a little, I'm smarter than many people. As for my EQ, I can now read other people's energy and emotions very easily and with very good accuracy probably because I can read myself, but I'm still working on how to respond correctly in a way that not only promises a win-win scenario but actually guarantees and secures it. In theory, my EQ is very high, but in practice it's still below average. It sucks, but it will change with more practice and awareness.

I'm starting to think that what people call a religious experience or God experience or direct consciousness, etc... is actually my baseline state of consciousness. No one I know in real life talks about any of the stuff here from experience. All of them parrot religious wisdom without comprehending basically anything, because they're mostly materialists and wear the religious mask due to conformity/out of peer pressure. I always found trouble relating to others, now I'm thinking that's because we're not on the same frequency to begin with, hence I still manage to relate eventually with some effort. The people on here and on other substance-induced awakenings sites create a lot of drama around God and view it as a weird/rare artifact, which indicates that they don't experience it long or deeply enough, or that they're full of ego and the contrast brings them to their knees. I can't be fully sure until I try the drugs first, but boy does it seem like what they consider God is just the mundane to me. I wonder if that is actually the case, and if it is then what would a drug do? For me to actually be efficient in the materialist world, I put lots of efforts, which seems effortless for almost everyone else. Sometimes I struggle to think a sentence. Sometimes I wonder how people can go on and on and ramble about anything basically non-stop when I can't speak about anything from memory. Almost every time I talk or respond to someone whether online or in real life, I find myself automatically tapping into the words themselves in the moment without much tapping into memory. In other words, I rarely rely on memory or the subconscious mind to think or interact with people, rather I mostly talk from the now. I actually used to have more trouble in the past couple of years when I was fully dedicated to spiritual practice, right now I'm not at that frequency and life feels somewhat easier, albeit being less happier.

I don't think we're on the same page. Religious people have religious experiences despite being "dogmatists", so you're clearly just dismissing them right off the bat for no obvious reason except the difference in opinion. How do you know it doesn't exist? You're talking from a different paradigm, but that doesn't give you the right to automatically cancel out all other paradigms. The truth is that you don't know whether the God they talk about is actually real or just imaginary. At least with the religious God morality exists, unlike with your God. Your God doesn't differentiate between right and wrong, which is not the case with the religious Gods.

But Leo, that's a strawman of religion. Religion claims that God is the creator of existence, but not existence itself. Religion makes a distinction between creator and creation that God is somehow/someway separate from its creation, which you deny. You use the word God as a synonym with the word existence/direct experience. Religious people use the word God as a synonym with the word faith/belief.

Thanks life, you're awesome ?

Hey, thanks for the suggestions. Intel core i3 1st Gen CPU; M 370 @ 2.40GHz. I'm sold. I didn't know that viruses can be transmitted merely through the browser. It's a little bit ironic because I should have known that already since I'm on the way to becoming a web developer. I'll probably go with Avira if you recommend it. Haha kinda scary thought that such a simple program can steal that much money.

I don't tell you what to wear, so you shouldn't tell me where to stare

What other people think doesn't really matter, neither does what they say. It's what they do that actually matters. But... What they think influence what they say, and vice-versa. And that in turn influences what they do. So, that's why what people think/say might matter. It's always the case, but it can be very twisted sometimes.

You don't know that. That's the non-duality God. What about the duality and plurality Gods? Rinse and repeat the above answers.

Why do you feel entitled to men's eyes and thoughts and penises? Be serious and work hard, that's the only way. I know many women who don't allow any man to treat them wrong because they set the perception straight with their attitude from the beginning. On the other hand, women who are flimsy and accept special treatment are always ridiculed and ignored when serious events happen.

This analogy is not quite accurate, because they're not actually serving their self-made foods. They're not only stealing costumers but also the ingredients and most of the food itself while serving it in a different package to escape copyrights but not very different so that it still looks similar to the original. Again I don't know what happened, I'm just talking based on the thread posts here.

You don't know their motives. They may be thinking Leo is a devil that is leading people off the cliff so they feel responsible for guiding them back to the right way. But I don't know who and what happened so I may be just talking nonsense.

YT is a fair competition. This is different. They're stealing Leo's efforts, it's lazy and not creative competitive at all.

Of course, any mind activity automatically implies playing the hierarchy game. So as long as I'm thinking and talking, I am playing the game. The mere fact that I consider everything data is itself a hierarchy that I've created in order to make sense of reality, and so far reality never made any more sense than now. Ultimately, if I were to drop the hierarchy, I would be silent or say that I don't know. That's the only way I know to equalize all thoughts. I told you before, you assume too much about me, and the assumptions seem to be blinding you from my communication. You assume that I'm stuck inside my mind and can't see beyond, let alone escape it. But ironically from this conversation it seems to me like that's how you're actually operating. For example, I see you talking about the "me problem" which is not a problem for me. You assume about me what you're actually doing, which is projection. Doubting can create clarity in more than one way. It can help create distinctions between more clear and less clear understanding, so it's not necessarily just black or white. As well, the ultimate clarity you get is that you don't really know anything, and that solves the "me problem" as well as many others. You can doubt the concept of gravity, and you should, because gravity is a theory. We assume that masses attract each other, but maybe there's a different assumption that makes more sense and works more in alignment with reality. Now, the real thing that is labeled gravity is an appearance that can be doubted as well, but at this point the doubt is at an existential level, which doesn't necessarily affect the way gravity works. Yes, actually. That's a real possibility. Not every thief gets caught, so doubt in this case can be useful to the criminal as it can give him the courage to do the crime.

Doesn't matter unless your pocket is bald too.

Most of post-modernism is mental masturbation, because it's mostly focused on deconstructing language, which is a distraction from the inquiry at hand. In my experience, deconstructing language does not provide any meaningful answers about knowledge. It only creates confusion and distracts from the real questions. I've delved into it before and won't do that again, because it didn't get me anywhere meaningful, rather did the opposite. So yeah, I won't engage in that anymore. See, that's what I was talking about above. This is just a silly language game. I said in the post right above that I doubt this thought and that I'm open to changing it according to any new data that might come along. That's doubt actually applied to itself, unlike the little loopy game you're suggesting. You literally said it's not a good thing. Here: But maybe you assume that I wish to treat everything or all perspectives the same, which I don't. That's like saying if everything can be broken, why use a sledgehammer? It creates clarity and removes illusions. I think that's enough for our goals here. You can create any meaning you want, but you can also doubt that meaning until you reach clarity. It's your choice.

No, it doesn't. Assumptions are still assumptions with or without that statement. That statement only serves to bring awareness to the fact that an assumption is itself, which is true. I told you I can't possibly know your vocabulary, but from what you said so far I can tell we will have a hard time if we keep going in the same direction. We have to agree beforehand to the conventional vocabulary if we are to keep talking, that's an axiom for any fruitful communication. Otherwise, we'll be talking past each other all the time, and we won't know when that happens or doesn't. It generally is the case that people share the same vocabulary or at least very similar ones when they talk, which is why nobody has to declare that rule explicitly. Significance is an added feature/quality. I try to see the perspective in its rawest form first, then I may add a particular level of significance to it, or might not. This is silly mental masturbation. The data so far suggests that each and every thought can be doubted. If you can present a thought that cannot be doubted, then by all means bring it up, and I will try to doubt it to the best of my abilities. Of course it can be doubted. It's just a thought/data and it might be wrong, so again by all means doubt it all you want. It's actually very simple, just bring one thought that cannot be doubted, if you can. How? Just because it is called "doubt" doesn't make it a bad thing. Really, all doubting boils down to is inspection. And I think we both value this method, so we don't disagree here.

I am beginning to see the nuances of social interactions. There's not one right way to act in all cases, it's more complex than that. The most important things are the ability to tap into the other person's perception of you, assessing your value in their eyes, understanding the circumstances, understanding the story that brought you together (history), body language, then finally verbal language which is the least important of all. Interesting.

So much baggage, and not much to make up for it. Not worth it.