Clarence

Awesome! Love seeing the videos up to date on the website.

It makes total sense. Thanks a lot for sharing parts of the process; it feels very special and I truly appreciate it. I'll be sending you supportive thoughts throughout the writing of this massive book.

@Leo Gura Great work on your book! Thank you so much for everything you do… Just a quick question: who are you directly talking to in this introduction? I find it confusing when you refer to “the scientist” in the third person, and then address the reader directly with “you” or “your mind”. For example: The scientist thinks he’s just doing objective science first, being an ego second. No! That’s absolutely wrong. You are ego. The scientist does not understand himself. Or: So this book is about slowly building a ramp so that the scientific rationalist mind does not balk and throw away the book in disgust, because I know your ego-mind does not run on objective facts and logic. I get confused about whether you're talking to the reader about scientists, addressing both the reader and the scientist in different ways, or mostly talking to scientists. I get really confused by the switching from third to second person. It feels uncomfortable to me, but maybe it's just my own misunderstanding or the extract is too short to give full clarity. This, however, is only happening in the first half of the extract. The second half already feels much clearer and more focused. I’m sharing this impression because I truly hope this book will have a profound impact on mankind. And the fact that I’m feeling this itch makes me think other readers will feel it too. It also feels to me that the first half takes a very confrontational tone toward scientists and scientifically minded people. I’m not sure if you’re aware of that, since you mention afterward that you will be ramping up. I think hitting this hard in tone might cause many readers to feel defensive or emotionally close off right there, especially scientists or scientifically-minded people.

Why would doing this make you feel like a "nice guy''. I don't think she wants you to make her feel like a lady, she simply wants to share moments where it's not about sex or talking about random stuff. She likely just wants to feel a deeper connection with you, a connection that is more emotional than sexual or mental, and cuddling (or leaning her head on you when it's not about sex) is one way of expressing that.

I use ChatGPT a lot to improve my English, and it's true it loves em dashes. I've always used them, but it often adds some I don't need and have to remove. Other than that, they're very useful to introduce a thought on a different note or to emphasize something, so I still use them regularly. @Leo Gura Why not use the em dash in your texts instead of two hyphens — don't you think the em dash looks better? I get the sense that you also like polished writing ChatGPT: Yes, both -- (two hyphens) and — (the em dash) are used, but only one is typographically correct: — (em dash) is the correct punctuation mark in formal writing. It's used to set off parenthetical statements or add emphasis. -- (double hyphen) is a substitute often used in plain text or environments where the em dash character isn’t easily accessible (like early computers or basic text editors). It’s common in programming, emails, or forums. Summary: — (em dash) = typographically correct. -- (double hyphen) = a workaround, but not proper punctuation. So in formal or polished writing, the em dash — is preferred.

#187 I was baffled when I started studying philosophy at university and found out that no one (either teachers nor students) truly cared about making sense of reality. It was a huge disappointment. Fortunately, I discovered Actualized.org during my studies, and it inspired me to become a monk. The teachings on Enlightenment and meditation seemed far more important for making sense of reality than academic study. But then came a second disappointment: no one truly cared about Enlightenment or making sense of reality there either! I had hoped to find people who shared the same desire as me, but they weren’t in either place. Obviously, I can’t take any academic or monastic person seriously, nor do I have any hope left in them, since they don’t even care about understanding reality. It’s mind-blowing that such a fundamental interest in life can’t be found anywhere on Earth.

I'd advise reading this website: Antimoon.com There's a lot of valuable information in it. If I had to learn English all over again, I would use this method. I feel like my output got messed up because of school and traveling too soon. I should have focused on input only for much longer and avoided trying to speak or write too early, which is what teachers asked me to do. Taking classes in any language is terrible, since you constantly hear people (and yourself) making mistakes, and that becomes part of your input. Input should come only from native speakers who speak perfect English; otherwise, mistakes or unnatural sentences will enter your input and start to sound natural. Correcting that later is incredibly difficult. I'm trying to do it now, but I don’t feel like I’m making any progress. I use ChatGPT to correct my English every time I write. It's burdensome, but it's the best way I've found to see and correct my mistakes. I wish there were no language classes at school and that I could have learned on my own using this method. I'm sure all my English skills would have been better. I also ask ChatGPT many questions to better understand the nuances between similar words and sentence structures. The goal is to know which ones are more natural in a given context and closer to the intent and tone I'm aiming for. The trickiest part is that it often wants to make more corrections than necessary, so that’s something to be aware of. But you can always ask for more explanation about a correction if needed.

@Yimpa Lol

@Yimpa I don't quite understand the connection to what you're saying here

@Leo Gura Amazing episode, especially the last 20 minutes. I loved this new style of entertainment. But Leo… how can you say you're not so advanced with such sincerity? That's what baffled me the most! Only a truly advanced mind could have derived and delivered such advanced content. That's very basic logic

To share another perspective, Matias De Stefano posted this: « The Pope is called the Supreme Pontiff, which means ‘Great Bridge,’ since the concept is that the Pope (heir to Simon Peter’s throne) acts as a bridge between Heaven and Earth. The central symbolism of the Vatican is the Keys and a Pinecone. The pineal gland of the system is the bridge between mind and heart; that’s why the election of a Pope, in the collective unconscious, represents a reprogramming of the pineal gland of history. It’s not a matter of religion but of psychological symbolism, since this place has controlled our way of relating to time and space, to ideas and feelings, conditioning our way of being and modifying our Rainbow Bridge. » This sounds a bit far-fetched from our point of view, but the essence resonates with me. I can see how the election of a Pope can play a significant role in the collective subconscious, one that is not about religion. We can simply notice how the whole world felt involved and connected to this election, regardless of religion. I think the Pope has a very unique role to play, and I can understand how he acts as a bridge — in people's minds, consciously or not, but also for diplomacy around the world. I'm not saying to believe everything the text says; that’s not my point at all. It's just about sharing a perspective in which the Pope is not only seen as the head of Christianity. And… his name is Leone anyway, both in Latin and Italian. I truly don’t understand the thing about changing the name across different languages, especially when the actual name is relatively easy to pronounce for everyone. And honestly, for a Pope, Leone is more fitting than Leo

Well, in Italian, his name is Leone XIV, and in French or Spanish, it's Léon XIV. So for many people, there's still only one Leo 😎

Leo… that's a great name

Thanks for your understanding. I didn't know there were people asking for tampon dispensers in men's bathrooms. That's a huge vibe problem, indeed. What's even worse is that trans men don't even want to be associated with such things, and certainly don't want to see them in men's bathrooms. Plus, periods stop shortly after starting hormonal therapy, and most trans men get a hysterectomy anyway. So, on top of being a bad idea in politics, it makes no sense. Perhaps, but the majority of people are at a low level of development and don’t think things through. That obviously bothers me, but that’s the state of the world. When you use those terms yourself, it’s quite different. From my perspective, it doesn’t necessarily serve your point, and it can be hurtful, misunderstood, and also send out bad vibes.

Hey @Leo Gura, I understand the point you're making in politics, and I agree with you — it's actually common sense to me also. But why use terms that are derogatory to trans people? I feel like you're not respecting the integrity of trans individuals when speaking this way, and that can be harmful, especially since you lead a group and it signals that showing a lack of respect towards trans people is okay. I believe that is not your intent (at least, I hope so), but to me, that's how it can come across. Neither the Left nor the trans community should advocate for unrealistic, utopian ideas, and they should be much more balanced and grounded in reality. But trans people still deserve respect (not being called 'chicks with dicks' or 'men having periods', even if your aim is to emphasize the Right's point of view and the excesses coming from the Left). Many trans people can understand this and don't try to push such ideas forward. I never did either. So I think it's important to keep a respectful tone. Using terms that are inflammatory or dismissive of people's integrity can cause a lot of damage, both to individuals and to the broader context. I hope you understand the point I'm trying to make and will consider it. As you're the prime example here, if you show the forum that it is okay to speak this way about trans people, it implicitly gives everyone the license to do the same freely, which I don't believe is right. Those terms are too demeaning to be used lightly.