wildflower

The interesting way Leo frames awakening is just in relation to temporary states of consciousness or changes in perception, and interpretations of these states. For example the Buddha frames enlightenment in a completely different way, he's concerned with suffering and the end of suffering, and pretty much didn't care about any of these metaphysics or never to be taken as absolutes. I guess you could classify Leo as an absolutist, and Buddha a non-absolutist Which almost seems the opposite of Leo - he doesn't renounce anything material at all in regards to sense pleasures for example. It's almost Leos version and Buddha are completely orthogonal

Just watching this video, can anyone clarify some things. While I agree with the main thesis, the panpsychist view, and myself have studied QM casually, there seems some inaccuracies: Leo states that superposition apples to an elephant and that when no one looks it exists in an infinite number of possible states including all other animals. This isn't correct, the wave function exists a probability distribution, sure, but the size of the wave function is exponentially inversely related to the size of mass. So particles have a relatively huge wave function compared to their size, and highly volatile probability, where as a large mass has almost infinitesimally small wave function, and has a very very very certain probability of certain properties. Applying QM principals to large mass in this context isn't correct, while there might be a infinitesimally small change to a large object (much smaller than any tool we have to measure it), it wouldn't be anywhere near from an elephant to a mouse

After a lot of psychedelic use I also arrive at the same position as you. I have abused psychedelics mainly Ketamine, and it just becomes escapism, or chasing detachment/dissociation. Every major single insight I have had on psychedelics wears off after a year or so , becomes a memory. I've also taken psychedelics everyday for long periods and always end up borderline with psychosis and weird thoughts and feelings. Sober is definitely where it is at for me. Skillfully living and organizing my internal world, intentions and behaviors, and lots of meditation. We have to learn to embrace and integrate the depth of our humanity while we are here. Everything for me just becomes various ways of perceiving, viewing and relating to the universe, and each has their time place and utility. Integration is key

Yeah that's more radical. Lot's of questions come to my mind, like the consistency of reality, why everytime we look the object isn't a different one etc, maybe you explain all this in a video? The only thing I could possibly have to relate to what your saying is just when have strong trips, and consciousness collapsing back down into finite form, but I couldn't make any absolute ontological claims from these experiences. Here's a drawing I did after a trip to explain the experience of being abstract potentiality (the outer part) collapsing back down and crystalizing to a single point of perception, it may be somewhat related to what your saying, but these things are hard to convey with words, thats why I tried to draw it

Also just want to add @Leo Gura Im sure you have read alot of Jung (I have a discord on jungian psychology), but essentially a lot of his work and associated work goes into explaining the archetypal nature of mind, and the work is foundational to good epistemology. His work on synchronicity which was widely discounted by science is also interesting, it's an acausal model. Jung wasn't enlightened but his work gives a good context to relative domain

Gotcha, this is one of those things were contexts need to be explicit else it becomes a bamboozle. Just so we are on the same page: essentially you are pointing out the fact that everything is essentially arbitrary boundaries and classifications (archetypal derivatives) we overlay on top of perception to (ego-self) subjectively and relatively make sense of it. Beneath this apriori metaphysical model is nothingness, or infinity, until we start to arbitrarily create finite things from this infinitude via our archetypal metaphysical constructs. Like for example, there is no fixed absolute boundary to what we class as a human, you can't find one, same with colours, there is no absolute fixed boundary between 'yellow' and 'orange', etc etc The way I interpreted it from your video was you were implying that reality itself changes completely when we don't percieve it, like something out of Dr Strange or another dimension

Sure, this was just something I picked up on as I genuinely try to listen to what someone says, and take their arguments on their own merit. I agree with your thesis on QM, science, rationality etc, but essentially for me they all meet at the very end anyway and collapse, it's just how you arrive to the end Can you please expand on the second line. Are you stating when you don't look at an elephant it's form changes? Or if you don't look at another human their form changes? It's really hard to know how to interpret what your saying without the context

there is a we, there is no we, there is neither we nor no we, there is both a we and no we

There is no whole point, thats the point, you need to go deeper

Yeah I wasn't talking about any of that, so don't worry, misunderstanding each other

Abstract object literally means abstract thought about an abstract object.... that should be obvious No you haven't watched Leo's videos, he claims that the elephant and your children when you aren't looking are existing in a superposition of infinite possibilities, and mentions other objects like elephant and cat.... You don't understand what I'm saying or Leos video, he mentions beginning of universe being an wave function of infinite possibility, I agree, but I added my own views and clarifications. But we are talking past each other, as your not addressing or perhaps understand what I'm saying. I am going to be honest what I think you are talking about is completely nonsensical to even talk about, because as soon as you write or say anything it's a contradiction, which I find untenable

No you can't actually measure light I disagree, the wave function is a abstract object that describes probabilities. The problem is if you apply this to abstract notion to large objects you end up with errors, or thinking things like an elephant is existing in a superposition of an ant when you are not looking. This isnt true actuality. Becuase QM shows us things are relational, that is to say the thing that comes into existence, comes into existence in relation to what already exists. Let me explain further, the beginning of universe was a wave function that contained an infinite^infnite amount of possibilites, but as reality manifests, the amount of possibilities is negated, all the way until the end of the universe But right now, not everthing in the material world is existing in an infinite superposition, form is negating possibilities., this eventually becomes the infinitiy of infinities containing the negation of infinities. This is obviously abstract, but I can explain further if it's not clear. But it should be clear by the consistency of form at size you can see, it isn't every time you look again at the world a complete infinitely different form. When you look at an elephant, look away, look back, it's almost identical to you. It isn't now some strange esoteric possible form

I'm sorry you have no idea what I speak about when I'm referencing language, and clarification of language. If you take your own logic, no one would ever speak or say anything to anyone. I'm just pointing out your deluded hypocrisy, and how insane it is to communicate like this.

None of these questions are addressed in the video. But let me just answer something that will help, all of science are just models or stories we overlay onto empirically reality, that have utility to do so. None are absolutely true, all are relative, and they all break at some level But I've asked specific questions regarding Leos video, can you answer those (not sure if you can), if not no worries

Well no, it's not hard to say ego-death is it? It's just extremely poor communication. Thats not actually all of it, he says you die and all of reality is annhilated, so he isn't just referring to ego-death. You see how confusing this is, even you are confused, you just don't know it

I just want to talk about science for a bit as I enjoy science, is that allowed?

It's not a Leo bashing thread. It's a truthful open discussion. No one is using pejorative language towards him. I have nothing but love for Leo and enjoy his videos. But Im capable of both having love for someone and also an adult honest conversation, maybe Im wierd, but I've been doing this spiritual stuff a long time, it gets easier

I'm saying there is a time and a place to talk about and throw non duality at people, and that time and place isn't... every time and every place Like I said you seem like a nice guy, I wish you no harm or insult, it just derails conversations which I find needless, but you can carry on as you wish, just ignore me

But like thats basically a call to authoirty (a formal fallacy), its absurd. He wasn't speaking to me when he posted that btw, but it assumes so many things, that he couldn't possibly assume. I've studied all this for over 10 years, and did my first psychedelic 12 years ago, so I qualify his 10 year mark btw. But this style of discourse is antithetical to my values and principles, it's illogical, highly biased and selfish, and doesn't deserve to be engaged with. So he doesn't need to speak to me or others, thats up to him

You still don't understand, you think I don't understand non duality, that I don't believe in it, that I haven't experienced it etc etc... none of this is true What I am talking about is completely orthogonal to all that, but look if you don't understand me by now, I'll just stop trying, and you can continue as you were

We all have work to do, and we all want to work in peace. If any of us publish our work or thoughts into public forum it is open and assumed for public discourse, you understand that right? Leo, his thoughts and his work do not sit outside the realms of feedback, discussion or critique. He even himself says the same.

No you aren't understanding me, no contradictons or illogical things about the Truth I'm talking about the way members including you communicate here, almost like robots who can't think or speak for themselves, it's scary man

Again, just want to say I agree with his main thesis, and I have directly become conscious of the multiverse superposition onto reality. It is actually explained by Jungs work synchronicity to a certain degree.

Im not making a mockery of anything, I was pointing out the illogical, contradictory or hypocrital behaviour. I literally back everything I say up with genuine explanation

What do you mean? Thats literally the teachings, I can give you timestamps from videos....