Jwayne

I'm here for a broader conversation than a commentary on Leo Gura's ideas. I don't find the Spiral Dynamics model to be impressive, it's rather reductive, childish and regressive in terms of not being rigorous and almost anti-academic in its foundations. Another one that's popular online is David Hawkins map of consciousness. I don't find that to be very insightful either. What I do like is meeting people, especially those that are metaphysically-inclined and seeing how they've lived and applied this in their life. The written musings here about psychadelic trips, "god-realizations" and hierarchies of which state is 'higher' are not that interesting. I'd rather learn about the people themselves and make friends that way.

Your description - typical of the way people on this forum write - demands much elaboration. When this is left to the reader's own translation, you end up with pseudo-communication, e.g. pseudo-agreement/disagreement. Because everyone is talking past one another. If you are using the terms used in some video series, then I trust people will be in common understanding. But even then, there must be exhaustive clarification of each term. That typically happens within the practical dimension of a tradition wherein humans contextually transmit meanings directly. As for a productive contribution, I said it should regard collective aims - which substantiates it into something beyond private indulgence.

I generally agree with that. Every challenge will summon a response from understanding, both the embodied/internalized aspect and the part you must consciously work out in the moment.

I prefer studying books over watching videos. What should happen is that people return from individualist spiritual practice with some kind of productive, generative contributions in some way conducive towards collective aims .

It's not good for anyone to "trust you". What you explained could just be parroted from something you've read or imagined. Your apparent confidence has no value for someone else, and actually could mislead them. This is the kind of pissing contest that happens everyday on this forum. "I'm so enlightened (more than the others) but it can never be demonstrated to you."

Changing your behavior can happen as a conscious intent to 'make a change' or can be a consequence of a transformation of substance (i.e. learning). Consciously changing your behavior so as to appear as higher understanding to others and then to gloat with their approval, is, of course, a trap of self-delusion.

That assumes not-murdering is a necessary outcome of understanding. In that case, I would argue, your action to murder was necessarily informed by understanding. It is certainly not divorced from understanding, so to speak. Because whatever you understand is with you - inescapably - in your decision-making.

Whatever you understand will be reflected in your action at some level. That's embodiment, it is learning. It cannot be otherwise unless we remove all significance from the word 'understanding.' Obviously you cannot embody what you don't understand. That's pretention.

Understanding without embodiment is not understanding but merely verbal/intellectual. Understanding comes with material transformation as reflected in lived experience, presence, intellection, action, speech, personal qualities and so forth.

Good answer

Is there any way to verify your "Omniscience"? What do you have to show for it? You're using it as an unfalsifiable claim. A large part of this forum is a dick measuring contest about whose psychadelic experience (and guru) is superior.

Absolutely do not take anti-depressants. Heal your brain with healthy dopamine sources, exercise, sunshine, whole foods, optimize for GABA/testosterone/DHT and reduce serotonin/prolactin/estrogen.

The USA military - with hundreds of bases spread around the earth and non-stop history of imperialist intervention - is objectively a far greater risk than the Russian military (as heinous as it may be).

AI is always going to be lacking because it doesn't experience qualia. Thus it doesn't understand. It is a powerful tool to supplement human labour so humans can be free to do higher things. Right now it is a language processor and can emulate certain tasks - and those are good things if implemented with an aim towards human aspiration rather than the imperatives of capital.

The mRNA vaccines are known to be cardiotoxic. You can look at data on injuries and side effects (i.e. from the CDC, or VAERS) to compare/contrasts the risk profiles of each. At the societal level, see elevated rates, such as in the data from the United States where there is lots of information available, of All Cause Mortality (up around 6%) or Excess Non-Covid Natural Cause Mortality (up over 15%) which are higher than even during the peaks of the pandemic and started rising with the implementation of mass vaccination. In general, any human cell which synthesizes non-self antigens becomes inevitably the target of the immune system.

It depends on where you live and what you mean by better. Many inexperienced guys are going to clubs for what they think will be easy sex when they actually would be more fulfilled by a loving relationship. But all they see in-front of them is their lack of sex and so they dive headfirst into resolving that immediate problem and then end up with other issues as a consequence of their short-sighted, not well-thought out plan.

What I see in online spiritual communities, including lurking in the Actualized forum, is something derivative of a larger trend in Western society. And something which is not innocent of having been manipulated by heinous actors for ideological ends. I refer to individualist solutions to collective problems. Specifically, the individualizing of a larger issue usually due to not having the foresight, willingness or opportunity to engage with it at the collective level. Another reason may be due to the spiritual bias, which practically translates into a political error, of zooming-out to an ostensible root level mistake (e.g. 'a lack of CONSCIOUSNESS') and attempting (or actually) resolving it at an individual level - with the intention of long-term, stable progress - and which practically/actually forfeits the immediate prospect of collective/political action towards the manifested issue. Obviously, I would argue, there should be a balance between the short-term collective response to structural-institutional-etc. problems, and the long-term spiritual response at an individual level towards overcoming the root errors (e.g. of cognition, of awareness, of realization, etc.). And there are practical reasons for not falling into, what I would consider to be, the trap of individualist pseudo-solutions to collective problems. Because even God-realized (assuming) aspirants' loved ones, children, friends and communities (including the societies in which they live, and its future prospects) are still subject to the institutional-structural-economic-political authority as legislated and implemented. So this face of manifested mass spiritual-intellectual knowledge, that is to say, the political climate, must be addressed on its own terms, just as the deep work of spiritual evolution/awakening must be carried out on its own terms. This is worth mentioning because spirituality is able to be coopted (and often is) by heinous actors (e.g. think of authoritarian state intelligence agencies) to keep individuals atomized and isolated from one another and hence disempowered and concerned with otherwise mystical, ethereal and immaterial aims while looking away from or marginalizing existing material conditions, such as class relations, inequality, and so forth. There must be a balance that is practiced amongst the spiritually-inclined because they have already made progress in the deep inner work. And if they can also adapt themselves to real world social action, such as education, community organizing, etc., then they will be a more powerful force for good in the world. One must be powerful in a worldly way and also in the sense of spiritual capacity. Too often, and at great detriment to human civilization everywhere, only one side dominates over the other. In spiritual communities like ours and elsewhere, the community-based, pro-social and real world on-the-ground implementation of our spiritual work must be consciously emphasized, especially in a way of serving others and relating in empowering ways to the collective.

@Leo Guralikes to throw around the term "human scum". Well I can't think of anyone it belongs to better than Andrew Tate.

Can you give examples rather than a barrage of abstraction?

I don't understand why the author concludes that AI leads to the extinction of everything on earth: "If somebody builds a too-powerful AI, under present conditions, I expect that every single member of the human species and all biological life on Earth dies shortly thereafter." The only way that happens is if it hacks its way into every network and somehow irrevocably sabotages them to end human civilization? Is that the line of reasoning?

Is everything alright with you and your loved ones?

You need to get her on a date. If she doesn't like your previous recommendations but is still talking to you then suggest different ones.

It won't work obviously because women will read your energy. Do something more productive when you're in introverted mood, like reading.

The mRNA vaccines have far more risks than the traditional vaccine. Even countries which used traditional vaccine have realized it only had temporary immune-modulating properties, didn't prevent transmission and wasn't as reliable in reducing severity as expected. Just as masks don't really help as they were promised to but they still linger as a preventative recommendation.

Can you give an example? Some forms of discontent are highly productive and beneficial. It would be regressive to reduce them.