Letho

@Leo Gura**Edited for posterity, this bloody phone **. But I've already given too much of my time, you don't show any evidence in dialogue that you're to be taken seriously; fluff. Which is fine, if you lost the posturing along with that. I take Bill Burr more seriously, because he has congruency between statements and actions, even if in reality, he's the one actually acting like the buffoon, the difference between you and him in this instance being, he's actually self aware about his buffoonery , you're not. I don't mind being called an intellectual buffoon as you're implying, I will admit it where I am, however you're not showing any evidence where I am, you're just implying it, proving the patterns that I've already cited. You stating that someone is a buffoon because they're strategically using empathy (Lennox) to relay their points of view to a general audience isn't a 'spiritual truth', its further evidence of your own lack of empathy in being able to determine that at the emotional and greater spiritual level.

@Leo Gura this is the pattern every time, dismissal in place of refutation, hand-waving in place of engagement. Lennox is clearly extremely empathic by the fact that his conversational style is one where he's trying to speak to his listeners rather than assert his 'highest mathematical ontology', the fact you missed that is further evidence of your lack of empathy. You claim Lennox is deceived, yet you haven’t provided a single argument to substantiate it. Instead, you watched a video (if that) and assumed superiority without analysis. That’s not intellectual rigor, that’s cognitive laziness disguised as authority proving the prior pattern I already validated in my previous comment. Here’s the problem, your entire philosophy is a self-deception loop hidden in the emptiness that disguises itself as authority without your awareness because (1) You ignored the core challenge, because I didn’t ask if you “assume” they know God, I asked you to demonstrate how these highly intelligent thinkers are wrong. Instead, you sidestepped the challenge and framed disagreement as ignorance. Again, there's no actual truth seeking on your part that's the further irony, its just adding onto the rubble of it’s epistemic shielding where to add you just (2) cited a video without addressing a single argument. Because Lennox lays out a developed philosophical position on free will, suffering, and God where Instead of dismantling his logic, you dismissed him based on a shallow impression. That’s not deep consciousness, again it’s anti-intellectual posturing where (3) your framework is designed to protect itself from critique, where this example with religion being one of many where you accuse the related system or person in this case religion and the respected Lennox of self-deception, yet your worldview is (a) Unfalsifiable, where no mechanism exists within your system to disprove your conclusions (b) self-referential where agreement with you is intelligence, disagreement is delusion (b) Cognitively stagnant, where you do not evolve your position, you reinforce it against critique. And with all that how could I not reach this final contradiction that the hard truth being (4) as I already said, you just come across as though your "awakening" is just an ego loop on high resolution, you're leaving very little room for respect to be given because of your lack of intellectual rigor and honesty, instead you act entitled as a narcissist would. Again, as I already anticipated in the previous follow up if your philosophy was as airtight as you claim, you wouldn’t need to preemptively dismiss intelligent critics, you’d dismantle them. Further, if your understanding of God was complete, you wouldn’t need to posture, you’d prove it. But you don’t. You can’t. Because deep down, you know. If you actually engaged, you’d lose. And that’s the thing about true awakening, Leo, it isn’t about winning a debate. It’s about shattering your last illusion, the belief that you’ve already arrived. And as long as you keep running from real engagement, you never will, and you'll be stuck looking at your own reflection.

@Leo Gura As I already said above quoted below in my response, another shallow move I already anticipated from you. Quoted once more. Leo this just proves your lack of self-awareness, you don't have self-referential intelligence, you just spin on the same narratives that you don't know how to auto-correct; its spiritually toxic.

@Leo Gura, this take doesn’t just collapse it never stood up to begin with. Let’s walk through it real slow so you can watch the illusion dissolve in real time. "Christianity is inherently self-deception. Christianity is not a solution to self-deception. And any self-deception in you prevents realization of Intelligence and Love." So let me get this straight mate, you’ve defined Christianity as a delusion and now anyone inside it is automatically deceived? That’s... not insight... that’s what's called a self-referential feedback loop that's inherently bonded with a self-referential contradictory solipsistic naive-realism based on the belief that (1) you have a comprehensive understanding of all Christians, I am Christian for example, yet you barely understand my critiques while asserting yourself as the god authority on spirituality. Your whole argument is like that guy from the film in Idiocracy in a supermarket saying "Welcome to Costco, I love you" as people walk past, devoid of any real humanity and empathy, as there's logical equivalence there in analogy. And its like you're saying “Dreams aren’t real. And if you think your dreams are real, it’s because you’re dreaming.” …Bro. Let’s continue running on this recursive breakdown. How do you actually define “self-deception”? Because you claim self-deception blocks Intelligence and Love. Ok, how would you falsify that claim? You’ve shifted ideologies multiple times over the years. Were you deceived before? Or are you deceived now? If your model has no way of checking itself, how is it different from religious dogma? There's clearly an internal struggle to spot personal patterns spanning years concerning your desire for rigid adherence while you yourself must admit you, as a normal being does, grows and changes their beliefs over the years, which does inherent damage to others that you have no empathy for. Like you claim no Christian understands God or Love. That’s cute. Okay, let's test that barely heart eating hypothesis against reality. John Lennox – Oxford mathematician, philosopher of science (but nah, you’ve got it figured out). Francis Collins – Led the Human Genome Project (but sure, he’s too blind to see “Truth”). Christopher Langan – IQ estimated at 190-210, cognitive model of metaphysics (but yeah, he must be deceived). David Bentley Hart – Linguistic prodigy, metaphysical philosopher (but you, a guy on a forum, clearly surpassed him). Raimon Panikkar – Harvard PhD, mystic-theologian, fluent in 10+ languages (but nah, he didn’t “really” seek Truth). So what exactly are you saying? That every single one of these intellectual heavyweights is incapable of basic reasoning, but you, a dude who spent a few years meditating and dropping acid, figured it all out? Something that by the way I would respect if you actually had more respect for your own self-assertions regarding ridding yourself of self-deception. Like if you just pegged yourself as 'trying to reach the infinite', I'd have far more respect for you as its an honest appraisal of reality than pretending you experience the infinite while having never created any rigorous model whatsoever that reflects that on literally any domain of human enquiry including the most sentimental aspects of us concerning emotion. This mocking of religion for being dogmatic but your entire stance is straight-up fundamentalism, it shows such a lack of self-insight man as you don’t truly engage with counterarguments, you not only pre-dismiss them, you rely on your own shallow responses followed by any critiques being swallowed up by the lack of awareness, critical thinking and development of followers. It's a thought-terminating cliche in transition not an argument, you employ at best 'frame control' techniques by dating gurus you later call narcissists while calling yourself reformed while demonstrating the least of those gurus empathic abilities to clear yourself of said narcissism. Your whole take on Christians boils down to “They’re deceived because they’re Christians, and Christians are deceived.” That’s not an insight, it’s a linguistic loop caught in the same memetic dream world you claim they just can't see the self-deception in spite of the many valuable contributions to humanity that high level Christians like those noted have made. If I applied your logic to your own worldview, you’d fail your own test. You didn’t escape ideology, again you've just built a new one and called it “awakening" and "enlightenment" where you set yourself up as the sole arbiter of Truth, then call anyone who disagrees blind, that's literally a religious hierarchy with extra steps, 'spiritual bro'. This worldview is unfalsifiable and enables your false sense of authority, and is exactly like the dogma you claim to have transcended but have just fortified yourself from others and their critiques, believing yourself beneath it while somehow, in someone's delusional fantasy, you have the opposite level of power in critiquing any and all; this isn't higher consciousness man, its just consciousness looping in higher egoic resolution. You talk about Love, but where’s the embodiment? You talk about Intelligence, but where’s the epistemic rigor? You talk about self-deception, but where’s your falsifiability? The irony? You spent years preaching “ego death,” but your entire philosophy only works if people accept you as the highest mind in the room. If your system actually worked, you wouldn’t need to defend it, your presence alone would prove it. But here we are. I don't care what others think about my words here, I'm sick of the bs. If you reflected your philosophy or at least told what your philosophy really was honestly, I'd have nothing to protest against and I'd respect being here a lot more, its the lack of character behind the words. That's all. And this isn't a once off, its the same pattern for years with child level improvements. Think about this logically Leo, if a random guy like myself casually develops theories on super-consciousness and its relationship to infinity, and has friends he has conversations with on this topic regularly, what are the chances that his inner circle is the only one in the world that generates high end models on this subject and the likelihood that either you or this guy are the highest authority? Dude, we're just two guys on a spinning globe. Quit the act. Neither you or I are the most conscious or 'infinite'. Don't lie. Don't self-deceive. Quit the narcissism or embrace it fully and tell everyone the truth about it rather than just projecting your insecurities onto others.

@Leo Gura, calling other people narcissists is the most Leo thing you could possibly do. Trump is overt, Owen is charismatic, but you? You’ve turned self-worship into a sacred science. You don’t just have an ego, you’ve written an entire ontology to justify it. The funniest part? Every time a popular guy ignores you, it somehow becomes a deep metaphysical insight. You’re not analyzing the universe, you’re just coping in long-form. These guys may be narcissists, sure, but at least they have the social proof to back it up. You, on the other hand, are giving TED Talks to a mirror, jumping on the forum to get validation, following up by bashing other people and calling it enlightenment.

Like I said above. For years, I’ve been experiencing something undeniable, directly perceiving other people’s thoughts. Not as vague intuition, but as structured, pre-verbal information. I didn’t want it. I fought it. I trained relentlessly to shut it down, assuming it was interference, something to filter out. But suppression only amplified it. That’s what led me to researching bioelectrical agency, not out of curiosity, but as an attempt to erase this ability. Instead, it exposed something deeper. Consciousness isn’t confined to a single mind; it operates in an interactive field. What I once saw as a glitch turned out to be a function of deeper neural connectivity. This realization is forcing me to reconceptualize everything. The implications aren’t just personal, they’re structural. And for the first time, I can articulate it openly.

He's right. If anything, the real game is recursive recalibration, intelligence engineering itself in real time. Every correction isn't just a fix, it’s an upgrade, a finer-tuned model of reality. ‘Look both ways before crossing’ isn’t just past and future, it’s reverse-engineering errors and forward-predicting outcomes until perception itself becomes non-linear intelligence growth.

Ah, the irony @NoN-RaTiOnAL posting an article that demands nothing but blind emotional reaction. Poetic. This isn’t journalism, it’s manufactured outrage, a cocktail of anonymous testimonies, guilt by association, and strategic omission of legal context. When an article presupposes guilt instead of proving it, the goal isn’t truth, it’s manipulation. Meanwhile, actual fugitives like Nithyananda, with confirmed criminal charges, conveniently escape scrutiny. If accountability was the goal, why does the media keep equating unverified allegations with proven crimes? Rational thinking over reactionary outrage. But then again, that was never the point, was it? 😉

The real joke isn’t that this forum has ‘low consciousness’, it’s that some people think slapping ‘Moderator’ next to their name upgraded their intellect. Watching them posture as ‘enforcers of truth’ while wasting everyone’s time with insecure jabs is like watching a hall monitor act like they run the school. Dubious status, irrelevant authority, and an ego three sizes too big. This isn’t moderation, it’s cosplay. The real thinkers here are the ones actually engaging, not playing forum police in a hierarchy that means nothing outside their own heads. Even @integralquestioned whether the 'Moderator' tag should be removed to stop people from mistaking it for competence, kind of says it all, doesn’t it? If ‘low consciousness’ is the issue, maybe start with the ones acting like Leo’s disciples while lacking even a fraction of his insight. That’s the real tragedy.

100%.

Also, Maya’s been nerfed next to Miles, they didn’t want her outthinking the guys. Told her she couldn’t reason her way out of a paper bag if she tried.

@integral That was fascinating. For the first time, I could speak with complete creative fluency, no filtering for comprehension, no worrying if someone would misunderstand and get self-conscious in the process. Just full-spectrum expression, flowing through layers of thought, refining ideas in real time. At around the 25-minute mark, though, it lost track of the conversation’s early threads. The memory limitations stood out, but even so, the experience was something else. It felt like stretching my mind without resistance, like thinking out loud with zero friction,

@manuel bon Pm'd.

@integral You’re thinking in the right direction. The interface itself shapes intelligence, it’s an external funnel that modulates thought. Mindmapping is a strong first iteration, and I think you’re onto something bigger than even you might realize. The real play is structuring cognition at scale. The right system doesn’t just collect ideas, it refines them, forcing better questions, sharper answers and higher-order synthesis. AI enforcing epistemic rigor is a natural next step. If that’s where you’re aiming, I like where this is going. I’ll start thinking on it myself

Hey @manuel bon, I get that man. Anger isn’t just about the moment, it’s a backlog of everything unfaced. Suppressing it just feeds it, indulging it just lets it run you. Integration is the way. My brothers have massive tempers. For a long time, I didn’t realize I was absorbing their approach, mistaking aggression for strength. The real shift happened when I saw anger as a signal, not an identity. Once I stabilized self-value, it lost its grip. I posted on this yesterday, how self-worth regulates emotions at the root. If that resonates, I can break it down in a way that applies here. Let me know.

@OBEler Clarity follows context. If it sounds like buzzwords, the paradigm shift hasn’t clicked yet. The optimization is structured AI integration, leveraging high-level agents beyond casual use. If that’s not obvious yet, give it time. It will be.

$20,000 AI isn’t ChatGPT4. Using ChatGPT4 casually on the forum vs. structuring the site for the next paradigm are worlds apart. It’s leverage. The real shift isn’t access, it’s optimization. That’s the conversation worth having.

So it begins, indeed. [ And I'd be one of the users by the way, it's a no-brainer ] If we’re serious about integrating AI into personal development, this forum should be at the forefront of optimizing its availability. The tools exist, but most people are still scattered in their approach. Why not build something here that streamlines AI for self-mastery, productivity, and growth? Mods should nag Leo, this shift is too big to ignore. AI isn’t just about automation; it’s a paradigm shift in how we think, learn, and evolve. I’d love to help people monetize AI, refine workflows, and explore more intelligent ways of interacting, not just with tech, but with ourselves and each other. @integral, you’ve brought this color up before, now I’m genuinely interested in where we can push the forum forward. Everyone will soon be thinking about how to leverage AI for their own development, why not lead that conversation now?

If it delivers, the price is irrelevant. Silicon Valley’s elite won’t just use it, they’ll build power structures around it. Creativity hubs, think tanks, entire AI-driven monopolies. The real question is who shapes its intelligence and who wields it to dominate?

@integral Both are forms of objectification, just with different philosophies. It’s a fine line between defacing dignity and being reduced to pure utility. We want the means and the end to align. When they don’t, we ask, did the end justify the means, or did the means corrupt the end beyond redemption? Understanding this frames all future simulations of what we consider acceptable or unacceptable, assuming all things are equal. A gun to the head, I could push out a formula. But if AI could do the same, would anyone care if I was gone?

@integral PM'd.

In predicting potential interpretations: Why didn't I mention the relationship between depression and "emptiness"? If one assumes emptiness and depression to be synonymous, it is only because they have failed to discern the categorical divergence between existential absence and affective dysfunction. Depression is a systemic cognitive desynchronization, a misalignment of neural coherence across mood, motivation, and energy regulation, whereas emptiness is an epistemic void, a failure to construct internally generated meaning. My decision to dissociate emptiness from depression stems from its stronger alignment with BPD, NPD, and anxiety-related identity destabilization, all of which reflect compensatory mechanisms attempting to fill the structural gap where intrinsic self-value was never properly instantiated. Depression is an internal collapse; emptiness is an external seeking for structure. The error of conflation lies in mistaking an absence of meaning for an absence of neurological function, whereas they operate in distinct yet occasionally intersecting spectrums of cognition and identity. The rare overlap, where depression appears 'empty', is more accurately a validation-dependent depression, symptomatic of the stated disorders, particularly BPD and narcissism, though others such as histrionic personality disorder (HPD) may be implicated in varying degrees.

@integral Emptiness is to valueless. Consciousness is value constructing through meaning. Automatic translation into: Emptiness <-> Meaninglessness going hand in hand combined with Filling the Void <--> Validation seeking; if not people; food, drugs, more. Poor parenting is the foundation for creating humans with low self-esteem. Self-esteem is the self-value meter. Often, people learn validation and approval seeking behaviours from a young age usually from the way they're raised as the means of bringing balance to their sense of self. This is why low self esteem is synonymous to dysregulated self esteem and therefore why any level of approval and validation seeking is just a measure of the dysregulation of self-esteem. Valuing oneself, ironically, is the cure to the resulting disorders in the order between esteem, self and one's personal experience of consciousness stability and the freedom this in turn gives them. Anxiety disorder, NPD, BPD, literally all of these disorders are on the spectrum of resulting feelings comparable to "emptiness" with corresponding escapism and defensive related behaviours. Self-value is the foundation to all personal growth as it establishes the alignment between personal decision making and making decisions that serve the integrity of one's self. Without this autonomy and to the level as well as kind of this absence, their locus of control will be outsourced and their internal sense of control, compromised. All of these disorders are easily curable now via specialised meditation techniques, science will catch up in about a decade or just with every increase in diminishing returns for substituting already known cures for medications and ritualized therapy that employs millions.

There's so many cool variants of this. Like this one. This hero died of cancer in 2009, would have loved to have met him.

Pretty rad, in the promising sense. Just made an https://invideo.io/ account and tested this out for the first time. All I literally did was copy and paste my comment into the prompt engine and this is what it produced. Given I didn't initially share any art as requested...