Xonas Pitfall

I really liked Leo's post on multimodal learning, which incorporates various types of media to enhance understanding and retention of information (images, videos, maps, and other resources) to create a richer learning experience. It's a super cool concept! 😋 It reminded me of this neat tool: https://notebooklm.google/. You can check out the YouTube video, but basically, it allows you to upload PDFs, texts, images, and more. It will create an interactive podcast between two AIs that sound rather human, making the conversation fluid and engaging so you can learn even more effectively. It's currently unsupported in many countries, but in case any of you can use it, it really is amazing and handy! Share your experience!

@Buck Edwards Care to help me out? 😊 Thank you!

@Someone here I agree! That’s exactly why I’m asking why this is often deemed a silly question. I’m speaking within the "relative" realm here, not the "absolute" realm where all dualities collapse. Ego is a relative concept that seems to emerge in humans after a certain period of living on Earth. My question is aimed at understanding what the ego is and exploring whether something similar could be artificially replicated in AI. I’m curious about what aspects we might not fully understand regarding the nature of ego and what it means for us.

Hmm... I suppose another good question here would be: how do you think Ego arises even? I particularly like Bernardo Kastrup’s explanation on this (feel free to add more thinkers if you know better analogies). He uses the example of Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID). Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID) is a mental health condition where a singular consciousness becomes fragmented into multiple identities, known as "alters." These alters represent different personalities, each holding unique memories, experiences, and even physical characteristics. Some alters can be quite descriptive having different ages, appearances, and even identifying as supernatural creatures. A weird fact about DID is that the individual can have distinct physical responses depending on the alter, such as changes in visual acuity, allergies, and even brain activity. Studies also reveal that these distinct identities can have separate dreams and sleep patterns. There are cases where one alter may be blind, while others can see perfectly, or where some alters have health conditions like blood sugar imbalances that are not present in the others. It’s truly bizarre to think about. But if we apply this to ego development theory, it suggests that we all start out as undefined, pure consciousness, "one with all." I think I heard babies feel entirely one with their mothers in the early months after birth before gradually developing a separate sense of self. Over time, as we gather more information and experiences, we begin to understand ourselves as separate entities, creating the notion of “I” or “ego", and the "other". This fragmentation continues throughout our lives, where we identify with certain things we like and experience, and reject or repress other aspects (the “shadow”) that we want to forget or avoid. Couldn’t you argue that a similar kind of fragmentation could apply to AI? If an AI were to experience "fragmentation" in its programming or input systems, we might start to see the development of an ego-like structure or a self. This might involve the AI forming preferences, biases, or behaviors that seem to stem from a singular experience of "self." How would this look or manifest in a machine learning or artificial intelligence system? For example, an AI could develop different "personas" based on the different tasks or interactions it experiences, similar to how DID alters emerge from specific triggers. Perhaps as it is fed more data and tasked with more complex, identity-requiring roles, it begins to form a cohesive sense of "self" from the fragmentation of its inputs. Unsure . . . 🤔

@Buck Edwards What does metacognition mean to you?

@Davino "That's the most gorgeous fish I have ever seen." 🥺🐟 Bloop. Blup. Blooop. Blooopy. Blop.

Direct Experience vs. Mental (Theoretical) Knowledge These are cliché examples, but they highlight something significant. Imagine someone who has studied colors for years, learning about wavelengths, frequencies, the nature of waves, and the visible spectrum. If this person is colorblind, their understanding of red would remain entirely theoretical. If they suddenly gained the ability to see it, the depth of that experience would be transformative. The same idea applies to love, attachment, or sex. People can tell you all kinds of stories about what they feel like, you can watch movies, or see how your parents interact, but nothing compares to being the one who experiences it directly. Similarly, someone could describe the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia, explaining the visual and auditory hallucinations, but living with schizophrenia is an entirely different reality. This ties into the Hard Problem of Consciousness: how could abstract concepts like symbols, stories, and mathematical formulas truly explain experiences like a broken rib, the taste of chocolate, or a mother’s hug? Even though detailed descriptions can be provided, the actual complexity and depth of living through these experiences far surpass any theoretical explanation. Comparing them feels almost absurd. This is the issue of mistaking the map for the territory. The map is not the territory. For example, I can describe what Africa looks like, and tell you about its landscapes and wonders, and you might form a mental image. However, when you go there, the experience will be infinitely richer and more than any description. The same goes for psychedelics, which is why they are considered so important in these areas and why many people rate them as life-changing experiences. They provide a direct experience of non-duality, revealing how fragile yet expansive consciousness truly is. You cannot simply think your way into that state of being—it’s not something you can achieve by logic or theory. The experience itself is what makes it transformative. People often say it felt "more real" than their day-to-day experience: how they experienced death, an out-of-body experience, recalled a past life memory, met an entity, became a tree or a cup, met God, or had a union with Truth. How do you measure or make sense of that? Are you going to deny their reality too? What makes their reality more real than yours? Is it because others can observe it? Does that mean the more people witness it, the more "real" it becomes? If everyone agrees something is real, does it make it so? Consider colorblindness: if no one saw red, would it still exist? The Himba tribe, for example, doesn’t have a word for blue, and experiments show that without language to describe the color, it’s more challenging to differentiate it from others. [https://www.good.is/why-ancient-civilizations-couldnt-see-the-color-blue] Consider when racism was the norm or when people thought slavery was acceptable—did that make slaves or non-white races inherently more "real" as stupid or inferior? Money is technically an abstract concept—in "reality," it's just paper, metal coins, or digital numbers (ones and zeros) in a bank, stored on some electrical CPU circuit. Think of NFTs and Bitcoin as well, to really drive this point home. Even though these are abstract concepts, they influence our lives more than many tangible things. God, for many people, is also an abstract concept, yet it influences behavior and society more than many conventionally "real" things in the world. If not consensus, what defines reality? Is it tied to survival? Does pain make something more "real"? If someone is being tortured, does the resulting death and pain make their experience more real than someone experiencing paranoid delusions and pain during an episode of schizophrenia? Both individuals feel pain, but why is one experience considered more "real" than the other? There are also people who genuinely cannot feel pain: Congenital Insensitivity to Pain (CIP). Also, under high doses of drugs such as opioids or anesthetics, people can drastically minimize or eliminate the sensation of pain. What if we were born with this inability to feel pain? How would that alter our experience of reality? Something to contemplate... 💭 With so much schooling, science, and the vast availability of informational products and videos, we often forget how "mystical" reality truly is. It is easy to believe that there is an explanation for everything. As a result, our mental models of reality can start to feel more real than reality itself. But this is not the case. Mental models are simplified explanations of a reality that is infinitely more complex and rich than any description could ever capture.

Couldn't you make an argument that beauty doesn't have to be purely physical either? If you say no, then how wouldn't the preference for a big, buff, strong guy be equivalent to a preference in looks that values strength to the same magnitude?

I see both Realities at Once. Solipsism.

◉‿◉ ⟶ ◉‿◉ ⟶ ◉‿◉ 𓁿⟶𓂁𓂄⟶👁️‍🗨️⟶𓁹‿𓁹⟶👁️⃤

@Ampresus What if she obliged to all your desires, became the perfect girlfriend, and then once you’re hooked and in love, she starts suggesting you “provide” for her and give her more of your money, claiming that it’s in her "biological nature" to continue loving a man? Also, when you say "your heart has opened up more," are you sure that means you want to have multiple relationships, or is it just about exploring more sexually? Can you imagine yourself giving twice or even triple the amount of attention and focus you’re currently giving to your current relationship? I don't think there's anything wrong if you want to go through a phase with more sexual experiences, but at least show respect to your girlfriend and allow her to have her own fun (whether it's with guys or girls). I think you're misunderstanding the concept of "unconditional love." I’m not sure if you’re aware of it, but you're taking selfish desires and framing them as selfless and good in your mind. Being more loving requires empathy and understanding. Have you asked her how she would feel about this? What would her conditions be for making this work? Have you thought about what kind of actions or words would be necessary to reassure her that she’s still your primary lover? Have you considered the possibility of meeting someone you might love more, what if she does? Would you have the self-discipline to break things off with them so your girlfriend doesn't feel betrayed? Would you have the respect and humility to tell her to her face that you don't love her the same anymore, or would you just continue the polyamory until she notices your decreased attention and slowly gets heartbroken over time? And what about the other women? How would they feel if you presented yourself as a single guy with good game, they fell in love, allowing themselves to be charmed and trust you, only to feel completely betrayed when you introduce the idea of polyamory? Why not just be open from the start and find people who are genuinely compatible with the lifestyle? It’ll save you so much headache in the long run. People who begrudgingly accept something because they were coerced or tricked into it are a ticking time bomb until they leave, and can you really blame them? Wouldn’t you feel the same way? Again, if you want to take an unconventional path, that's totally fine. But please don’t use reframing tactics—whether consciously or unconsciously—to convince yourself that you're being “more loving, more open-minded, and more unconditional,” or that you have so much love to give to more people. In reality, your reasoning seems to be selfish rationalizations for wanting more sex and validation without fully considering what the other parties might want, or what would be fair and respectful to them in this situation. And by the way, if you just want to be selfish and keep your "main" girlfriend while manipulating other women into falling in love with you, only to keep them in a polyamorous setup by using their fear of losing you or abandonment, fine—but own that. Don’t mask it as “I’m more open and loving now, I can’t just love one woman, I’m so selfless and full of abundant love that I need to give to more people.” I hope it makes sense. My tone might seem harsh, but I'm trying to help you become more aware and genuinely unconditionally loving if that's truly your goal. The way you're approaching it now is quite the opposite.

Oh my! Congratulations!

1. Protagonists and Central Figures Protagonist: The main character driving the story. Tragic Hero: A protagonist with a fatal flaw leading to their downfall. Anti-Hero: A morally ambiguous protagonist with flaws but redeeming qualities. Reluctant Hero: A protagonist hesitant to embrace their heroic role. Chosen One: A character destined to fulfill a great responsibility or prophecy. Fallen Hero: A once-great figure now facing their downfall or moral crisis. 2. Antagonists and Villains Antagonist: The primary force opposing the protagonist. Villain: An evil or malicious character. Tyrant: A domineering, oppressive leader. Puppet Master: A character manipulating events behind the scenes. Double Agent: A character secretly working for an opposing side. Turncoat: A traitor who switches allegiances. 3. Mentors and Guides Mentor: A wise figure offering guidance to the protagonist. Sage: A character of great wisdom or spiritual insight. Oracle: A character with prophetic knowledge. Mentor’s Apprentice: A character learning from a mentor. 4. Side Characters and Companions Sidekick: A loyal companion offering support to the protagonist. Confidante: A character who listens to the protagonist's inner thoughts. Guardian: A nurturing protector figure, often parental. Protector: A selfless defender of others. 5. Comic Relief and Entertainers Comic Relief: A character who lightens the mood through humor. Jester: A character using wit, mockery, or absurdity. Gossip: A character who spreads rumors and secrets. Charmer: A smooth, persuasive character who wins others over. Celebrity: A famous or influential figure. 6. Philosophers and Thinkers Philosopher: A character who contemplates deep moral or existential questions. Voice of Reason: A character providing logical, rational advice. Idealist: A character driven by high principles and optimism. Pessimist: A character who focuses on the negative side of things. 7. Action-Oriented Characters Avenger: A character seeking justice or revenge. Survivor: A resilient figure who endures great hardship. Rebel: A character defying authority or societal expectations. Crusader: A passionate fighter for a cause. Adventurer: A daring figure seeking excitement and new experiences. Renegade: A defiant character, often challenging the status quo. Rival: A character in competition with the protagonist. 8. Magical and Supernatural Figures Supernatural Being: A character with otherworldly abilities or powers. Shape-shifter: A character who can change their form or identity. Siren: A seductive figure luring others into danger. Alchemist: A character with knowledge of transformation, science, or magic. The Cursed: A character burdened by a supernatural affliction. Time Traveler: A character who navigates different timelines. Vengeful Spirit: A ghost-like figure seeking revenge. Enigma: A mysterious character with hidden depths. The Seer: A character with the ability to foresee the future. 9. Outsiders and Misfits Outsider: A character who doesn’t fit into societal norms. Misfit: A character whose differences make them alienated or misunderstood. Loner: A solitary figure who avoids close relationships. Recluse: A character living in isolation, often with secrets or wisdom. Lost Soul: A character searching for meaning or a sense of belonging. The Exile: A character cast out or banished from their home. 10. Visionaries and Dreamers Dreamer: A character lost in imagination and ideals. Visionary: A forward-thinking character who sees possibilities beyond the present. The Seeker: A character searching for knowledge, understanding, or self-discovery. The Romantic: A character guided by love and passion. 11. Power-Hungry Characters Ambitious Climber: A character seeking power or success at any cost. Ringleader: A charismatic leader organizing a group for a common cause. Mastermind: A highly intelligent planner and manipulator. Deserter: A character who abandons their responsibilities, often facing guilt or regret. 12. Victims and Martyrs Damsel in Distress: A character needing rescue, often due to vulnerability. Martyr: A self-sacrificing character enduring hardship for a greater cause. Scapegoat: A character unfairly blamed for others' actions. The Cursed: A character burdened by a supernatural or personal affliction. The Orphan: A character who has lost their family or support system. 13. Deceptive and Mysterious Figures Trickster: A cunning, manipulative character causing mischief. Con Artist: A character skilled at deception for personal gain. Disguised: A character hiding their true identity. The Chameleon: A character who adapts or changes to fit different environments. 14. Healing and Caring Figures The Healer: A character who can heal physical or emotional wounds. Caregiver: A nurturing character devoted to the well-being of others. Nurturer: A motherly or fatherly figure providing care and support. 15. Neutral Observers and Narrators Narrator: A character telling the story or offering commentary. Chorus: A group offering collective insight or commentary. Witness: A character who observes a key event and reflects on its meaning. 16. Specialists and Thinkers Polymath: A character with expertise in multiple fields of knowledge. Inventor: A character focused on creating new technologies or solutions. The Machine: A robot or AI character exploring themes of humanity or consciousness. 17. Love-Oriented Characters Love Interest: A key romantic partner of the protagonist or another character, often driving personal growth or change through the relationship dynamic. The Romantic: A character deeply driven by love, often focusing on passion, emotion, or the pursuit of meaningful relationships. Hopeless Romantic: A character with idealized views on love, sometimes to the point of naivety or unrealistic expectations. Seductress/Femme Fatale: A character who uses charm, allure, or sexual attraction to manipulate others for their agenda. Star-Crossed Lover: A character who faces insurmountable challenges in love, often leading to tragedy due to external forces beyond their control. The Protector (in love): A character who fiercely guards and defends their romantic partner, motivated by love and loyalty. The Pursuer: A character who is relentless in their chase for a romantic partner, often overcoming obstacles for the sake of love. 18. Innocent, Pure, or Childlike Characters The Innocent: A character who embodies purity, goodness, or naivety, often unaware of the darker aspects of life. Child Prodigy: A character with immense talent but retains a childlike curiosity or innocence, facing the pressure of their abilities. The Naive Optimist: A character who sees the best in everything and everyone, often to the point of being gullible or easily manipulated. The Child: A young character with a childlike demeanor, representing innocence and wonder. Pure-hearted Hero: A character whose moral compass remains untainted, driven by a sincere desire to help others. The Angelic Figure: A character who personifies purity and selflessness, often inspiring or healing others through their innocence. 19. Unusual and Oddball Characters Eccentric: A quirky, unconventional character. The Drifter: A character moving from place to place without commitment. Misunderstood Genius: A character with great intelligence or creativity not appreciated by others. 20. Justice Seekers and Whistleblowers Whistleblower: A character revealing hidden truths or corruption. Spy: A character engaged in espionage or gathering intelligence. The Crusader: A character championing justice or a moral cause. The Avenger: Someone seeking retribution for a personal grievance. 21. Oppositional and Contrasting Characters Foil: A character contrasting with the protagonist, highlighting their traits. Skeptic: A character questioning beliefs, authority, or the status quo. Doubter: A character who challenges others' convictions or decisions. 22. Everyman Characters The Ordinary Person: A relatable character with no special powers, wealth, or abilities, representing the common individual in extraordinary situations. The Bystander: A character who witnesses events happening around them, often dragged into the story by circumstance rather than by choice. The Worker: A character whose life revolves around daily routines and responsibilities, such as a blue-collar or office worker, symbolizing the average person's struggles. The Average Survivor: A character who, despite being unremarkable or ordinary, manages to endure difficult situations, often representing resilience. The Rational Outsider: A character who doesn’t quite fit into their surroundings but reflects the experience of the average person who feels different in society. The Family Person: A character who represents the everyday concerns of family life, such as a parent or spouse, driven by common goals like providing and protecting loved ones. The Conservative: A character who questions or doubts the extraordinary events happening around them, grounding the story with a realistic, questioning attitude. The Underdog: A character who represents the average person facing challenges that seem insurmountable, often earning the audience's support through their persistence. 23. Peacemaker and Mediator Characters The Diplomat: A character skilled in resolving conflicts between opposing parties. The Empath: A character who deeply understands and feels others' emotions, using this ability to mediate tensions and bring people together. The Conflict Avoider: A character who goes to great lengths to prevent or stop conflict, often through passive means, such as appeasement or dissuasion. The Peaceful Leader: A character in a position of authority who leads not through force but through diplomacy, kindness, and fairness, ensuring peace within their community or group.

@Leo Gura Amazing! Super hyped for it. Thank you!

@Nemra Got it! Very interesting! Are you into femboys then (not joking, kind of joking 💫)? Would you say you'd find a male who presents more femininely more attractive than a guy who presents himself as fully masculine, even if you do like masculine qualities? It makes sense why you showed only female examples of androgyny even though you're attracted to both, or why it's a "fetish." Someone born female would need to show a different polarity to fit the masculine desire you have, whereas a guy would need to almost "minimize" his masculinity to an extent to be seen as androgynous. What do you think?

@Sugarcoat Sugarcoat likes to be Evil. 😈 But that's okay . . . For a brief moment, even if it wasn't real, I felt Connected. I felt One. I felt the 😈 Embrace. ❤💞💓💗💞💕💟

@Sugarcoat I love Sugarcoat. 💚 She always understands me.

⡏⡥⠀⠀⠀⠠⠠⠀⠄⠄⠀⢠⣴⠾⠟⠻⢷⣦⡄⠀⠠⠠⠀⠄⠄⠀⠀⠀⠄⠄ ⡇⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⠶⠟⠛⠁⠐⠆⣰⡟⠋⠛⠻⠶⣤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⡇⡇⠀⠀⢀⣴⠞⠉⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⡀⠀⠹⣧⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠳⣦⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⡇⡇⠀⣠⠟⠁⠀⠀⣠⣴⠟⠋⠙⠻⠷⠾⠟⠋⠙⠻⣦⣄⠀⠀⠻⣄⠀⠀⠀ ⡇⡇⣴⠏⠀⠀⢠⡾⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢷⡄⠀⠀⠹⣦⠀⠀ ⡇⣿⡏⠀⠀⣰⡟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢻⣆⠀⠀⢹⣇⠀ ⡇⣿⠀⠀⢠⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⡄⠀⠀⣿⠀ ⣿⡿⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⢿⡇ ⡿⣿⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⣿⠇ ⡇⣿⡄⠀⠈⣿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣿⠁⠀⢠⡿⠀ ⡇⡟⣷⡀⠀⠘⢿⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⡿⠃⠀⢀⣾⠃⠀ ⡇⡇⠘⣷⡀⠀⠀⠻⣷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣾⠟⠀⠀⢀⣾⠃⠀⠀ ⡇⡇⠀⠈⠻⣦⡀⠀⠀⠙⠻⠶⣤⣤⣤⣤⣤⣤⠶⠟⠋⠀⠀⢀⣴⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀ ⡇⡇⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⢶⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⡶⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠁⡃⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠛⠻⠶⣶⣤⣤⣤⣤⣶⠶⠟⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Two eyebrows converging into a single Unibrow—an undeniable testament to its true, unified nature. The UniBrow. Ouroboros. Unibrowours.

@Nemra I see! Do you think you like androgyny because you are fundamentally attracted to women, yet you wish for them to embody masculine qualities like assertiveness and confidence? So, a woman who is androgynous would more likely exhibit that mix or contrast?

@Schizophonia TeeHee. Definitely a lot of defiance, an "outcast-y" feel, questioning the status quo, along with a playful, childlike "jestery-ness." A goofy side while also embracing some familial responsibility as a caretaker and guardian! Sweet!

Hmm . . . Alien Intelligence, Sacred Geometry, Transcendental Knowledge, Quantum Mechanics, Meta-Spirituality, Higher Consciousness, Cosmic Awareness, Multidimensional Realities, Esoteric Wisdom, Celestial Beings, Universal Energy, Divine Proportions, Eternal Life Codes, Spiritual Technology, Akashic Records, Interstellar Communication, Bio-Digital Evolution, Astral Projection, Neural Pathways, Morphogenetic Fields, Consciousness Hacking, Quantum Entanglement, Zero-Point Energy, Stellar Cartography, Hyperdimensional Mathematics, Etheric Bodies, Holographic Universe, Psi Phenomena, Astral Navigation, Galactic Frequencies, Superconscious Programming, Soul Architecture Trans-Human Design. This is the ISIS terrorist Taliban in an alternative inverse universe (-1, -2, -3). (Ɛ- 'ᄅ- '⇂-) ǝsɹǝʌıun ǝsɹǝʌuı ǝʌıʇɐuɹǝʇlɐ uɐ uı uɐqılɐ⊥ ʇsıɹoɹɹǝʇ SISI ǝɥʇ sı sıɥ⊥

I very much like androgyny too! What does androgyny represent for you? Does it make the person seem more unique or "quirky," hence the appeal? Do you appreciate the potential projection of someone rejecting traditional societal norms of femininity and masculinity? Or perhaps it's their freedom and openness for self-expression that draws you in? Or is there not much depth to it, haha? Do you like aliens? 👽 Bald people? 👨‍🦲

Self-Love (Self-Preservation, Stability, Security - Exploration, Expansion, Ego-Dissolution) Conservative-Liberal → Tradition-Progress → Stability-Flexibility Safety-Expansion → Security-Growth → Comfort-Exploration Ego-No Ego → Selfishness-Selflessness → Individualism-Collectivism Rational-Emotional → Logic-Intuition → Reason-Feeling Practical-Idealistic → Realistic-Visionary It's another duality, you are very correct! This concept is reflected in Maslow's hierarchy of needs: the necessity of establishing self-boundaries to preserve your ego and meet survival needs. Without these, you can become unstable and unsafe—because in order to experience life and grow, you first need a secure foundation. If these basic needs aren't met, life inevitably forces you to confront them. On a practical level, this looks like falling behind on rent, declining health, insufficient finances for necessities, or lacking social support to stay grounded. One reason childhood often feels like a happy and magical time (assuming the experience was generally positive) is that your core needs for security and self-preservation were met by your parents. You had a loving safety net that allowed you to explore freely—everything was new and exciting, not weighed down by the worries that come later in life. This balance between security and exploration is something worth striving for throughout life. However, focusing too much on comfort and self-preservation can be limiting, especially in a world that is constantly changing. Reality is fundamentally impermeant. If you ignore external realities (for instance, assuming your job is safe from AI disruption and not staying informed), you risk becoming unprepared to care for yourself in the future. Once your foundation is stable, you can then turn your attention to self-actualization, transcendence, and the exploration of new possibilities. Growth becomes a natural process, as the core of who you are seeks to continuously expand and understand itself more deeply. You just need to allow it the freedom to do so, without the weight of constant worry of self-preservation. --- When I refer to self-preservation and self-barriers, I mean both mental and physical aspects. These concepts reflect in everything you are. There’s no reason why it has to be a constant battle between self-preservation and expansion—they support each other. For example, if you desire to go on a five-month retreat for consciousness exploration, your "self-barrier" instinct will naturally kick in. Rather than viewing it as an enemy, think of it as a protective, yet supportive, voice like a concerned parent who's being realistic and pragmatic about your approach. If this desire persists, the question to ask yourself is: "Okay, I really want to expand my consciousness in this way, so what do I need to do?" You’ll need to inform your close relationships about your absence, arrange for someone to check in on you in case you lose your mental balance, and prepare for personal mental challenges you may face such as boredom, lack of perseverance, and mental strength. Then, plan how to overcome these obstacles. Treat any incoming self-expanding desires as clues for what you're motivated to do next. Use your self-preserving knowledge and past experiences to ensure you expand properly, safely, and without harm.

First of all, I grasp the duality of selflessness and selfishness. This question is on a more practical, grounded "human-relative" level. I often hear people say that selflessness is the best way to live your life, to truly align with happiness and fulfillment, and to give yourself in service to others. But I'm not sure that's what I'd personally advise. I think "authentic alignment" might be a better way to phrase it. A part of me really enjoys the idea of a self-expressing artist who creates masterpieces out of a sheer "selfish" drive to express their feelings and emotions, or an inventor advancing modern technology out of a genuine curiosity for growth, intellect, and a deeper understanding of reality. Or a comedian who amuses himself endlessly with jokes, regardless of their reception by others. None of these scenarios require acts of service or selflessness toward others, yet they seem like beautiful ways of living. You could even argue that some of the most helpful or useful things for humanity come from this raw, authentic drive—not because they are created with others in mind, but because the creator is purely driven by personal passion and curiosity. I'm not saying selflessness is bad or that I advocate for people to be more selfish. I think selflessness is beautiful. However, part of me wants to elevate the form of selfishness mentioned above and make it equally beautiful, if not more so. Perhaps I sense some imbalance in society's overemphasis on an "other-centered" mindset, to the point where it blinds us to the beauty that can emerge from self-amusement and authentic self-expression. How would you define these things? If you had to choose a word to describe the direction one should take for the best, most fulfilling life, would it be more selflessness, more authenticity, more awareness, or something else? I think I'm also asking this because I've heard Leo talk about selflessness in a very elevated way, which makes sense. However, I do wonder how this would play out practically. Playing devil's advocate for a moment—who would you say feels more fulfilled and at peace: a monk sitting alone under a Bodhi tree endlessly exploring consciousness without serving any other human beings; a writer locked away, spending day after day expressing their philosophies out of pure personal drive; or a nurse who adores giving herself in service to others, healing them? Would you say all of these people could be equally happy, or would the nurse (or any other example of a highly service-oriented life) be better off because it's supposedly more "selfless and giving"? I guess I'm trying to understand the semantics of the word "selflessness." Could it also include people acting out of pure personal drive, or does selflessness have to involve service to others? And how do we distinguish between higher and lower drives, or between what’s truly good and beneficial versus what's simply selfish? Thank you!

@Keryo Koffa Could you elaborate on this a little bit more? I find the statement interesting . . .