VoidJumper

Really cool beautiful conversation, highly recommend it. If you don’t know Artem, check him out, imo he is the real deal. He has written a bunch of stuff at true-freedom.net for anyone interested.

Maybe we’ve got something to learn from the monkeys 😅

Mhh I actually found the exchange very interesting. Especially the part were Leo straight up ignored all of Artems points and arguments, and once he called him out on it simply banned him.

What are you talking about? There’s barely any Buddhism…

Sounds pretty cool 😂

On enlightenment, discerning true insight, abusive teachers and more:

At the core of this is the false belief that something is wrong and you have to make it right. That's what causes suffering. In spiritual seekers, especially after some initial progress, this belief tends to increase, resulting in even more suffering than before. It's really quite amazing when you investigate to see how almost everything you are doing has something to do with this fundamental erroneous belief. Something is wrong and it needs to be fixed.

I have landed on this question: Are some things more true than others, or is everything equally untrue? Example. On the one hand is an islamic terrorist and on the other we have ordinary Joe. The question is, is one worldview more true then the other? One thing can only be more or less true in relation to specific something else. For example, we can decide that we want to live in a peaceful society and in relation to that goal, it is more true that it is wrong to blow up innocent people. But that is just an artificial goal. Who is to say that the world indeed should be peaceful? I don’t know what the world should be like, do you? I have my personal preferences of how I would want the world to be like, but the world don’t care. We can create an artificial context (e.g. society) dedicated to a certain goal. All well and good, but ain’t nothing true about it. Here is an outrageous statement: The beliefs of the islamic terrorist are no more or less (un)true, than the ones of anyone else. Damn peculiar.

One truth is clear, whatever is isn't boring

To make a point that the issue isn't the idea of vaccination itself, but rather the formulation of modern vaccines. But you're right, I shouldn't make claims when I'm not willing or able to back them up

Because @Hatfort made the claim that antivaxers are wrong and justified it with this example of how a lighter version of the disease was used to bring about immunity etc., while the potential problems with vaccines relate to the composition of the modern versions. Sure that's why I said I was agnostic. I find the arguments interesting and compelling, but am not in a position to verify anything for certain. It can be a positive to come at a given field from the outside because you didn't go through the years of brain washing required to rise up within it and don't have any incentives to keep the scam going. What am I supposed to do? Sacrifice 10 years of my life to become the worlds foremost expert? And then do that on every single controversial issue? What I can do and what the greater population can do, is listen to the arguments of both sides and then make a judgment based on who is making the better case. Now this only gets more difficult as a group of people who have decided they are the arbiters of truth only allow one side to be heard. And I'm not gonna lie, that kind of thing makes me immediately suspicious. Of course he is resonating with me because he aligns with my ideology, my worldview. But I have no horse in the race. If he can be proven wrong I would actually be quite relieved, but as far as I am aware that hasn't happened yet. You seem so certain you know the truth. What are your qualifications @zurew ?

Are these the words of a crazy conspiracy nut?

Just going off what RFK said. It's hard to imagine he's pulling it all out of his ass. He seems like a principled guy overall, so why would he make this stuff up? He's also not stupid, and it really is a rather strange hill to die on if you are not 100% convinced it is the right thing to do. Personally I'm agnostic but he is making a compelling case and more and more people are taking it seriously. What is your solution to this?

The fact is that it is spreading. Now the question becomes what to do about it. Wagging the appeal to authority finger will not change these peoples mind. At the moment I am agnostic, but I think RFK is making a very compelling case. If you want the anti-vax sentiment to stop spreading, he needs to be taken seriously and then shown why he is wrong once and for all

This is hardly the same as injecting small children with aluminum containing substances that haven't even been double-blind placebo tested

"There's people out there that will complain about something and find an excuse why it's not beneficial. And the reason for that excuse is not that there is no data, the reason for that excuse is coming up with some sort of excuse for themselves, that's what that is."

I would take anything that could help me. For some people it might give them the extra energy they need to be able start doing deeper work. Or they might get addicted to feeling good and want to find ways how they can feel even better e.g. deeper work. You just can't generalize like that.

How is doing a 1 minute cold plunge a few times a week a distraction from deep inner work? The physical benefits are quite astounding. It just makes sense to do it + you feel like a million bucks every time

He would hardly ban vaccines by executive order. He has shown multiple times that he is very open to being proven wrong. He would simply inspire a more honest conversation and inquiry about these things so that the truth may come out. If he is wrong about vaccines and they really are the end all be all, you guys have nothing to fear.

The problem with Leo's work is that it exists in a vacuum. Sure, he argues with people here on the forum, but imagine he would sit down with someone like Ralston (for example). My bet is that Ralston would embarrass him within minutes. Same with his political takes. It is easy for Leo to go on about how his views are oh so far advanced beyond anyone elses etc., but he will never actually come face to face with someone in a debate, where he could be exposed. I could be wrong, of course, but you gotta wonder...

This is an amazing conversation. In this clip RFK Jr. clearly lays out what exactly the problems are and in what ways the system has become corrupt, captured, or is simply not serving its stated purpose for whatever reason. I don't see how fixing these things could possibly be a bad thing or "result in the deaths of tens of millions of people" as Leo says.

That is precisely the problem with teaching before you are done. Aren't you doing people a disservice by providing them with subpar information?

The question is, would you still think he was a Nazi, in a world where the corporate media thought he was the best guy ever? "Look at all of these wonderful historians, they have dedicated their whole life to their craft. Surely they must be correct, they can't all get it wrong! (And the bad 30% of historians who do disagree and are rightly censored, are just crackpot lunatics who don't understand that the status quo is always correct)"

@Breakingthewall @Breakingthewall I would love to see that! That goes for all the big names out there by the way, including Leo. There is certainly an interesting discussion to be had about the ethics of making money with spirituality. I'm not sure where I stand on it. Yes it opens the door for grifters, but fact is that we live in a world where we need money. People find value in what I say and want to come to my talks and purchase my tapes? I don't see that there is anything wrong with it. It's better than flipping burgers.