Scholar

So turns out, this might have been caused by B12 injections. It seems like they cause delayed migraines in me, 1-2 days after injection. I am not entirely sure this is the case yet, but I will be able to confirm on my next injection. The funny thing is, I took the first injection 2 days before my trip, and on the day of my trip I felt slightly sickly, and during the trip/after I was plagued by a migraine as well. I was attributing this to the trip, and days after I took the next injection, and 2 days after had the ocular migraine described here, I also attributed this to the LSD because of how similar it felt. This goes to show how tricky it is sometimes to figure these things out, and how easy it is to come to false conclusions.

Contemplate the negatives of being in that situation.

You really need to learn to properly read what other people write. My whole point is that he is grounded, reasonable and practical, because he grew up in the stone age. He has that groundedness because he developed through stage blue, orange and so forth in a healthy manner. We don't have this type of development any longer, at least in a large percentage of the population. There is a stage you are skipping, but sure. We know however that healthy evolution can only occur by proper development through each stage and an integration of those stages. This is why this old guy seems far more reasonable and grounded, because he went through each of the developmental stages.

The guy is from the stone age, such people will go extinct sooner or later. The difference is, the church is dying, while this is an indication of the future.

In a moral sense, the responsibility falls on the man, and of course he has to live with the consequences. Predators however are exceptionally rare. Most of these incidents happen because of simple immaturity. Even Russel Brand probably didn't think of himself as a rapist or predator, he probably did little of what he did consciously. He just had terrible impulse control, and his interaction with women just lead to an objectification of women. None of that should spare him from the legal and social consequences that will ensue, but we have to make this clear to understand how to solve the problem. This is similar to how, most children who are molested by adults are not molested by pedophiles. It's counterintuitive, but true, and yet we focus on moralizing the issue around pedophelia rather than the major cause of child molestation. In most instances where sexual assaults occur, it is not a man physically forcing themselves onto a woman. That is exceptionally rare. In most cases, the man is pushing the woman until she relents into sex, and the woman is often too uncomfortable to make a clear signal that she is not consenting. Other situations involved drugs like alcohol and so forth. Part of the problem is that in our culture, women play the role of sexual defense and males play the role of sexual aggression. It is expected that the woman will not be open to sex instantly, even if she is interested. She needs to be basically manipulated by the man into sex. This is basically how casual sex culture functions for the most part, it's a type of game. And this type of game, of course will lead to it's own dynamics that then lead to people getting hurt even though there is no actual malice involved. We have to understand that sexual interactions make people irrational. Sexual drives are strong and inhibit rational thinking, and especially in sex addiction this can completely undermine a persons executive control. So, with high status men, who get to have sex with an insane amount of women, naturally what will happen to their chimp minds, in todays sexual culture, is that they wills start objectifying women. In other words, women become primarily a means to an end, and it is forgotted to take into account the woman as an end in and of itself. Men then start manipulating women into sex solely to get the sex, as that is the goal of casual sex culture, pure hedonism. This is just going to happen in a population of immature minds, which is what our population is. The problem is that you assume, naively, that we will just have this casual sex culture where everyone treats one another respectfully, has some sexual activity and moves on no strings attached. This requires actually high maturity to do in a healthy manner. Many women who go for these interactions actually want a relationship with the high status male, while the male is just interested in sex. And to continue their casual sex-capades, they will of course start shutting down their empathy for the women they have sex with, it will be simply overridden by their sexual obsession. The more power you have in that regard, the more risk there is for depravity. You have to look at the human mind like the mind of a chimp, and put aside the moralization for a minute. In this scenario, given human nature, you are just creating these types of minds and therefore these types of situations, as a natural consequence of the system.

I am not insulting you, I have abnormal cognition myself. I am telling you all this because I made such mistakes myself. You probably have it worse than I had it because you are a programmer and that will just give you coderitis, but none of this means you have to be stuck in that mindset and cognitive mode forever. You just have a bias towards it, for whatever reasons. Your problem is that you are thinking too logically, too much, and in inappropriate situations. You are probably not very familiar with other modes of cognition because you reside in this type of cognition most of your waking time. One of the issues is that you are too attached to your intelligence and intellectual abilities, because you probably get most of your self-worth from your intelligence. So, anything undermining your intelligence will be taken as an attack on your identity. Thinking has become a way of life to you, when it was always supposed to be just a tool.

I think the cause of much of this simply is hedonistic casual dating culture. People get exploited by sociopaths or functional equivalents usually because they are naive and immature. So, in a system in which you increase casual intimate interactions between people, such incidents will just increase. So, of course women will prefer to go for high status men, and if you listen to the types of situations that led up to many of the cases we are talking about here, it is almost mindblowingly immature and naive how the women have acted. Which makes sense, because these women were young, naive and inexperienced. They just wanted some Russell Brand for themselves, and they were too hedonistic and unwise to predict the type of behaviour such a man could be biased towards. There was nobody to truly protect them from this, and nobody really taught them to be in control of their own hedonistic desires. In fact, they might not even be aware of such hedonistic desires. Men are not much different, they will be completely blinded by attractive women, if they are immature. But of course, men inherently don't take the same risks during such interactions, so men don't really care that much. This is why we don't care as much when male students have sex with their teachers vs vice versa. Like men have an irrational drive towards attractive women, women have an irrational drive towards high status men. And like men get into all sorts of trouble because of their irrational drive towards attractive women, so do women get into trouble because of their irrational drive towards high status men. Now, you can moralize around this as much as you want, but we are talking about the nature of human beings here. It will be difficult to culturally move away from dynamics like the objectification of women by high status men if casual dating culture persists and these chimps keep having sex with tons of women without consequences. You can correct some of this through education of men, but really, what this requires is more maturity in the population in general. There will always be sociopaths around, and power always will corrupt, no matter how much you educate people. So, the solution has to be on both sides, women need to act less recklessly, meaning they need to be more mature about how they interact in casual dating culture, and men also need to be more mature in controlling their hedonistic desires. Really, both sides are immature with their hedonistic, chimp like desires, and that's the root of the issue. This is the core reason why religions controlled sexual interactions so much, and why they moralized them. Because people act like chimps, and the sex drive is one of the most powerful irrational drive in the human organism.

This is a type of problem that might not be able to be solved through the justice system, and it might be unlikely that it will be solved through social media witch hunts. One of the major problems is that in casual dating culture, females are inherently disadvantaged as the powerdynamic, especially when it comes to actual physical interactions, is biased towards men. So, every casual dating interaction is inherently risky for the woman. Women in general are also disadvanted on a psychological level because they are less assertive and aggressive. In practice, such a dynamic, combined with an inherent immaturity within the population, will constantly lead to such situations. Women are drawn to high status men, high status men are able to abuse their power due to being high status. So, in casual sex culture, high status men will have endless opportunities of sexual interactions with women, which over time leads to these types of depravities in some individuals, whether due to sex addiction or other types of dynamics. The whole situation is driven by a sort of immature hedonism, and because sexual interactions actually are a serious thing for most people, these types of situations will continue to occur. You have to also keep in mind that casual sex for high status men tends to lead to an objectification of women, and an objectification of women will lead to an insensitivity to their needs and desires. Another aspect of this is a falling away of safety mechanisms. In the past, your parents would have to evaluate a potential partner before you had the chance to really get into risky situations. Of course in practice this was not always the case and there were other drawbacks to that system, but there was some sense of protecting young individuals from their own naivity and inexperience. Today, dating is much more private, and especially young, naive inexperienced women can be easily exposed to risky situations that they do not quite understand are risky, both to their mental and physical well-being.

Well he said a breakthrough so deep there is no returning to your previous mind structure.

Never is just a temporary arrangement.

As you should be.

This translates to: Being stuck in L-Mode causes me suffering.

I'm describing a tool Forest, nothing more. However, rigidly holding onto relativity and non-rigidity is it's own form of rigidity. For example, when it gets in the way of conversations because whenever something is said relativity must be pointed out anew.

The fact that I have to explain this to you indicates you have abnormal cognition. I never called you an autist, you take things way too seriously and personally, this is the issue here. I am just trying to help you figure out what is going on, because I suspect this is a you problem. The fact that you are reacting this way to what I said tells us much more about you than you seem to recognize. And again, we are not here to be mean to you, we are trying to help you. If you had some distance from all this, you would be right here next to me laughing at yourself for how silly you were being.

What I described is not a thinking process. When I say intention and belief, it is beyond a conceptual idea or belief. It is more like, looking at a cloud and seeing a face in it. That's the type of thing we are talking about, it is rooted far deeper. Yes, it is as real as any other, because that's how realness is constructed. That "belief" is what realness is. You probably are not aware of the R-Mode vs L-Mode distinction, but what you refer to here is the L-Mode type of belief, not the R-Mode type of belief I am referring to. The subtle thing here is that it does not arise from nowhere, much like your dreams dont arise from nowhere. Your perceptive state at the moment of a dream will determine the dream, and in the same way it will determine the trip you had. If you had been in a state of existential terror, you would have seen very different things, and the magical forest might be appeared as something completely different. By imagination you just mean existence. So, it exists, as all things that exist must exist. There is no thing that exists more than any other thing that exists. And, part of L-Mode is a distinction between "actual existence" vs "subjective existence". If fully engaged in R-Mode, this type of distinction is no longer made. In fact, making that distinction can disrupt that state, as you described, in the same way it can disrupt a dream state. Both states are the same brain states.

I had basically this happen in my first trip. There is something interesting I learned during Lucid-Dreaming. I generally have quite a lot of lucid dreams, and for the past 2 years my goal was to improve my mind's eye visualization abilities. I was taught there there is a similarity between intentional visualization (which I am very bad at, almost aphantasic) and dreaming. When learning to visualize, you have to almost put yourself into a trance like state, and it is important that you don't try to "control" what you want to visualize. This is tricky, because the mind only knows control, that's how it goes through life. I control my body and my mind to achieve things, but how can I control my way into visualization? It is similar to meditation, in that the more you try to control, less it will work. With imagination, you do not manifest through control, but rather through intention and believe. So, to visualize a cat, you have to convince yourself that you are seeing a cat. You don't actually create the cat by some direct means, rather, you simply imagine you were seeing the cat until you convinced your brain to such a degree that the cat appeared as a visual phenomenon in your mind's eye. I took this knowledge and applied it in lucid dreaming, because I would over and over have the problem that once I was lucid and tried to steer my reality, the dream would collapse and I would wake up. I was trying to be too controlling. So, the next dream I employed a trick. I had a certain dream scenario, and then I took a binocular out of my pocket and I convinced myself that looking through the binocular I would see another place. And it worked, as I looked through it, I suddenly found myself in the place I wanted to be, because I somehow convinced my brain that it was what I would see through the binoculars. I didn't control myself into it, rather I used the binocular as an object to project my intention and belief onto. It is like drinking orange juice during a bad LSD trip. If you drink orange juice, your bad trip will instantly transform into a good one. This will happen if you are convinced of it happening. If you truly believe the orange juice has that effect, you can use the orange juice to actually alter the trajectory of the trip. Usually, the way we employ control is through left brained type of means. Though, the subconscious and dreamlike state cannot be controlled this way. It requires vision, intention and belief. Obviously it's hard to describe in words, the true difference, but once you kind of grasp Left-Brain vs Right-Brain Mode of being, you get a good sense what the difference is. One is trying to control, the other is convincing oneself such that the dream gets changed into that. The dream is determined by your belief-state. If you are scared and paranoid, the dream will become scarier. And if you try to control it, you wake up because the dream state is not a brain-state of control, but of complete relaxation. This is because the dream state requires a certain brain-wave state, which is different the conscious-control brain-wave state. This teaches us the value of shamanic objects, totems and so forth. Objects into which we concentrate certain mental belief structures, intentions and emotions. By tying those aspects to the objects, we can, during a trip, use those objects to steer the experience, which is what shamans have been doing as well. It is similar to using an external memory palace. By the way, Leo has reported for a long time that he never came into contact with beings during his trips. The reason for this is his bias towards left-brain-mode. It is also what makes him overthink and overvalue contemplation. He is only now kind of discovering the more relaxed, right-brain type of mode of cognition.

But that is an incredibly strange question to ask, why would you ask this question. See, if you came to me and told me this in person I would laugh at you. Maybe I would laugh so hard that I would be crying from laughter. And you would probably interpret it as malice. But it's not malice. It's just that you might have difficulty seeing how clumsy this question is. This doesn't make you a bad person, but it is something worthy of laughter. Now, to you this might be harsh because you are insecure, so you are too tense to be playful about this. I also think you might have tendencies toward some type of autism, which could make communication more difficult for you in general. In general, you need to take all of this far less seriously. And if you can't, you need to work on resolving how to take yourself far less seriously. Hell, watch something like "The Theory of Everything", and take Stephen Hawking as an example for you. He doesn't take himself seriously, and I think I remember there were scenes were he was socially awkward and was being made fun of. See, if you are playful enough, you can turn the "being made fun of" into an enjoyable interaction rather than tensing up into insecurities. That is the mindset you have to achieve, it has to be all fun and games.

Also, am I the only one who gets seriousl Bullshido vibes from Peter Ralston? His biography seems completely made up, and I still have not found any proof for any of it. Just give yourself this:

The issue with this type of thinking, that the cartoon wolf is not simply something occuring in the brain, is that we simply do not observe new information arising as the result of trips. It becomes hard to believe in the convenient excuse that it's all just set up so you can never prove the truth. I think it is likely that one day they will be able to precisely show what kind of brain activity is the cartoon wolf, and they will be able to manipulate you and convince you of that so that you will be 100% certain and convinced that it is somehow beyond the brain, even though we will be able to showcase on a monitor the precise hallucination that are occuring and how the neurological activity relates to the phenomena.

No but I am glad I did not pick this life path. Being in left brain autism mode for 8 hours a day is just hell and I think unironically makes you less human.

The not recognizing yourself is part of what you are and how you created yourself intentionally. Self realization is the default, God has that all the time for all of eternity. It's only the ego that makes it out to be a big deal.

I don't think there is "illusion". Illusion is another word for existence, much like you use the word consciousness. I would wager what you mean by not an illusion is that it is necessary attributes of existence, or something like that. I think Hegel had a lot of influence on oyu.

I don't see how that is a problem either. The self construct is part of Maya, so the upsetness and the taking things seriously is also just Maya. Anything you will see as anything will be seeing Maya as Maya, this is obviously true no matter what you do. You still do the same exact thing, playing a different game that you also take super seriously. Your idea is to reject Maya, which is also part of Maya and being invested in the illusion. There is no way out of this. Realizing that Maya is illusiory is part of Maya and also an illusion.

What's wrong with being a good human being or morality, or following some human guru? It's all consciousness/maya/existence anyways, it's not like you are doing anything different from they what are doing, they are just valuing different things than you.