Scholar

No, that's not the benefit. That's what you think the benefit is. I don't believe that benefit is real whatsoever. You are not calling out fascism when you are calling half of america fascists. And that's how trump supports feel like. They are being demonized, people say they are evil. If you get called a fascist, who do you think will come knocking on the door and invite you to join their club? I don't think you are doing this without dehumanizing anything. I don't think there was a need to call out fascism, I think you created all of this by calling out fascism where there was not fascism. You have manifested your own fears into reality. And you continue playing the same game, seeing no results whatsoever, and making it worse. I just have no faith in the solution you are proposing, and I do not think that focusing on that will solve any of these issues whatsoever. You are playing whac-a-mole. Instead of calling out fascism, and achieving literally nothing because nobody even knows what fascism means anymore, and nobody really takes you seriously when you call them a fascist, you could work on this from a higher tier perspective, and see how you can stop contributing to division, and instead work on resolving it. Your shame and fear tactics do not work in my opinion.

It's a social dynamic. People don't really believe anything anymore, they are just conforming to whatever their social group wants them to conform to. Because conspiracy theorists are in an opposing social group, you really, really don't want to be identified as a conspiracy theorist. If you believe in a conspiracy theory, you will be one of them, and your social group will ostracize you. The same dynamics play out with the conspiracy theorists. If you believe anything the media tells you, you are a soyboy cuck sheep who is a slave liberal pedophile supporter.

You call all of them fascists already, so what's the difference? If you demonize normal people and call them nazi's, who do you think benefits most from that? You are literally having the opposite effect of what you seek to achieve through the demonization.

The reason why you call him a incorrigible monster is the same reason he supports Trump and is an idiot. You two actually have a lot in common. Maybe you should be friends.

I will tie this in with societal dynamics, and why yellow recognizes the true importance of freedom of expression. We all carry selfishness and evil in us, we all have unjustifiable biases, we all have hatred, fear and bigotry within us. The issue when you limit the free expression of individuals is that you give individuals only few options to handle these aspects within themselves. A progressive person who is hateful, and is told that hatred is unjustifable, has basically three options to deal with it: The progressive can repress their hatred, internalize it and ignore that it exists. The progressive can pretend that they are not hateful, that what they are doing is just a natural extention of ethics: "I don't hate nazi's, I just punch them because that's what we need to do!" The progressive can justify his hatred. "Yes I hate nazi's, and here is why you should hate them too, and if you don't hate them like I do, you are evil!" The fundamental issue here is that the progressive wants to tell themselves they are fundamentally different from the people they criticize. They could not possibly be racist. So when they do feel hatred towards White People, they will tell themselves that actually, that hatred is no hatred at all, or that that hatred is actually good. Because the progressive cannot allow himself to be flawed, he cannot admit to himself that he is just a racist. So of course he has to explain to you why it's okay, why it's good to be racist towards white people. Why it's a virtue, not a flaw, because there is no way he is flawed. If he was flawed, he would be a bigot. And because he knows how much he hates bigots, he could not possibly admit to himself that he himself is one too. Because we are so sensitive to evil, every evil in every person must be justified, and turned into good. That actually, hatred towards men is good. That actually hatred towards immigrants is good. That it's not even hatred, that it's just virtue. Because if it wasn't good, then I should be the one who should be cancelled, because I think bigots should be canceld. I should be ostracized, because I think people like that should be ostracized. This is a regression to stage blue. We are not allowed, we should be ashamed. And our evil, our selfishness, could not possibly be anything put the Will of the Ideology, the Will of God. A lot of people who once were stage blue and progress up the spiral, they know how much they can be flawed. They know how evil they can be. But today, if you grow up without stage blue, you never went through that. You don't even know you can be racist. You don't know that when you hate white people, that's racism, and that you are a racist like any other racist. And because you cannot admit this to even yourself, you cannot ever resolve it. The fundamental issue is not that people are racist towards White People. That's not really an issue. The issue is that people are lying to themselves, and they lie so much that to get out of the lie, to put off the mask, means they have to face the very hatred they have towards the world. They have to look in the mirror and see the racist, the trump supported, the bigot, the cancelworthy, punchable nazi. That's what they are, they just express their hatred in different ways. This means if we do not allow society to self-express, to be authentic, then we cannot ever address any authentic hatred. And because society will be under such survival pressure, because everyone who is flawed is basically an outcast, individuals will have to repress and recontextualized their hatred. Everyone still feels the hatred, they have it growing inside of them. And because society as such demonizes that hatred, all it takes for someone to convince that person to come to the dark side is to tell them. "Here, join us. Here you are allowed to hate, here you can hate as much as you want. Here, hatred is Good. Join us to fight the Nazi's, join us to fight the Marxists, join us and let your hatred flow through you. You can hate White People, you can hate Black people. Whatever you will hate, here I have a group of people who will let you express yourself, finally, for the first time, you can be yourself." This is the consequence of repression. You cannot hide from the little Hitler inside you, he will hate, unless you face him and admit to yourself that you are him. If nobody is allowed to be flawed, there is no other choice but to turn the flaws into virtues. If we punish the selfish, because we all are selfish, we will start to call the selfish the Good. And that's when true evil can take place. We have to remember that we are all humans. And humans are terribly flawed and selfish. You and me, we are flawed and selfish. And we need to accept that, because the alternative means that we will be stuck with our flaws and selfishness. The difference between me and Hitler is marginal, and circumstantial.

So, what I have learned myself from watching all these discussion is that being really mindful of my goal within a conversation is essential. I have noticed that a lot of stage green people seem to be seeking consensus. They have difficulty accepting conflict, disagreement, which I sometimes have issues with too so it is important to watch out for. To approach is a conversation from the perspective of just clarifying why one beliefs what one does, without having the need to convince the other, or change his mind, is really useful. Often we only ask why someone beliefs what they do so we can debunk them better, or so we can politely tell them why they are wrong. Instead, we can focus on simply reacting to it by stating our opinion on it. So, in that sense the conversation is very focused on oneself. I get a sense that for green this can be infuriating especially with topics they feel strongly about. For green, it's "This is JUST your opinion", for yellow it's "Aha, this is my opinion, interesting." Yellow is focused on authentic self-understanding. Not to belief something because one ought to belief it, but really figuring out what one actually does belief and why. Green will say "I should not belief this", and when it does belief something it will post-hoc rationalize why it believes what it does. Yellow is more focused on what is actually believed and the authentic reasons why ones believes it. When Yellow says "I don't like this, because that's just how I feel about it", Green will say "But that's invalid, you can't just not like this because you feel like it, you are being evil!", which implies that green will lie to itself to uphold a certain self-image. "I am not this, I am not that!", independent of whether or not they are this and that. That is the essence of bias and self-deception, and the reason why green cannot fix certain issues. It requires to be authentic to oneself, about oneself, to actually be even able to identify that which one is repressing for the sake of self-image. So yellow is authentic not because they just want to be authentic, they are authentic because they can see this dynamic clearly within themselves. In the past year or two I have actually been experiencing something similar. Where I will act unconsciously, being kind of conscious of it, instead of repressing myself, so I can see what I am truly like. Previously I was all about "But a conscious person doesn't do that, a stage yellow person doesn't do that!", and now I am more like "Well, I don't care what a stage yellow person would or wouldn't do, I am what I am, everything else is a lie.". So I can sometimes see how I am causing harm, and I will still do it because otherwise I would have to lie to myself, very similar to what Mr Girl is often referring to when he says he won't call a trans person a certain pronoun. The recognition of ones own bias. To not be controlled and blinded by it, but to see it clearly for what it is. And to see it, sometimes we must live it out, so we can truly see what we are like. An example in myself is that I know I might kill someone if they tortured an animal. Previously I would say to myself "Well but I should be the more conscious person and not kill them because that's unconscious and unloving", now I am more like "Ye I might kill that person because I know myself well enough that I would, and I will not pretend that I wouldn't, because THAT would actually be more unconscious than the alternative". To be conscious means to recognize that if I saw someone torture an animal, I would want to rip them apart and to torture them too. That's what I am, and if I want to change that, it won't be enough to just say "I am too unconscious to do that!". I could do that, I could stop myself for this reason, but that is not truly solving the deeper issue here. Mr Girls point is that peopel are stopping themselves from being mean to trans people for fear, not because that's who they are. And we all need to watch out for what we truly are, to come to terms with it. Because only then can we begin to change. Stage Yellow is shedding your Self Image, and allow your authentic self to shine through. To be yourself, with all your ugliness, for everyone to see. Because that's what you are, and that's what everyone is. You are the only one who is willing to show it, which of course will get you in trouble in a society in which everyone wears the mask and forgot what their faces even look like. Everyone pretends they are not selfish, yet everyone is selfish. You are selfish, I am selfish. The danger here is of course that yellow might be too easy to accept it's own selfishness, and to not change it. Another example is, I might argue that I care about animals because they are suffering more and whatever. And sure, that is true, they suffer more and there are much more of them who suffer. But that's not the actual reason why I care about this issue more than human issues. I care about it because that's how I feel about animals. I look at them and I feel pure innocence, and whether or not they are innocent is irrelevant. That's how I feel, and that's all the reason I need. Everything else is a lie. This is a new type of freedom. Because usually, you restrict yourself from being authentic because you want to uphold a self image, to yourself and others. You don't want others to know how selfish you are, you don't even want to know yourself how selfish you are! But you are you little seflish bastard. And that's just the truth. You can pretend to yourself and others that you aren't, but that will not change the truth. This is also why yellow is not interested in convincing others. Because that is just another lie. I want people to actually care about animals. Not because I convinced them that they should, but because they can see the same innocence in them that I can. And that I cannot do with arguments, I cannot do it by debunking them. The only thing I can do is show them my authentic self, and maybe, but most likely not, they will be touched by my authentic self in an authentic way that authentically changes them.

So I remember there were different types of meditation to achieve certain brain wave patterns, does anyone have some useful resource on this? I would like to practice entering a theta wave state.

I only find Arvari river when I google it, can you refer me to the site?

I don't think the question of "How Should Society Handle Pedophiles", is reducable exclusively to a conversation about treatments for pedophiles. I think the fact that you are narrowing the topic of this conversation to that particular issue indicates to me that you are scared to tackle and accept the statements I made that are, as I explained in my previous post, related to the issue we are discussing. Whether or not I look informed to you is of little interest to me, you seem very bad faith and unstable in the way you handle disagreement with others.

I have discussed my view on pedophilia in my initial posts, and provided my perspectives. Seems like you just got triggered by me pointing out that the best way to reduce harm to child-like beings is adopting a vegan lifestyle and convincing others to do so aswell. This was to point out how we as a society have biases just as bad as the pedophiles do, and that essentially, we are only marginally better than them. I was making a more general point here. Most people are willing to put child-like beings through terrible suffering, trauma and death just so they can feel some pleasure or convenience. I don't expect such a society to be capable of maturely handling pedophelia. The issue why people can't have empathy for pedophiles is fundamentally because they do not see that all sentience is the same, that there is only one experiencer. This kind of extention of identity and recognition of truth is essential for any actual progress to happen here. The reason why people discriminate against humans is the same reason they discriminate against animals. So that is the core issue that needs to be addressed.

You are just stating truisms. The entire discussion is based around prescription, not descriptivistic notions of humans and their biases. I could give the exact same account of things for the Nazi's and the holocaust, or why pedophiles rape children, and how your defintion of harm is subjective etc.

Being a meat eater causes more harm than raping children. Just because the harm is not done to humans doesn'T mean we cannot quantify it subjectively. It is not my notion of harm, it is a notion of harm that takes into consideration the subjects that experience the suffering. What you are doign is basically like a pedophile who rapes mentally handicapped children and then says "Well, it's only harm according to your notion of harm, but the creature I raped can't even conceptualized social contracts!" Of course an average human benefits more from it, how is that relevant? The average white person will also benefit more from avoiding white people suffering than avoiding the suffering of black people. You are just explaining bias, I never said humans aren't biased.

I am not informed on what kind of treatments are effective for pedophiles. Yes I am not informed on the efficacy of different kinds of treatments for pedophiles. From what I have heard, within the subset of pedophiles, it is usually individuals with anti-social disorders that are the problem. Yes. I think it is a combination of both, I am unaware of any treatment that is effective. However, when we are talking about preventing abuse of child-like beings, adopting a vegan life-style and convincing as many people to do so aswell will be the most effective thing to do for any given individual who is not actively involved in solving these issues through other means.

The suffering of a 1-5 year old child, or a mentally disabled person, will be far more similar to an animal like a pig, cow or even a chicken, than the suffering of an adult human. Do you care about the suffering of an adult human more than a child, or less?

I crossed out human because it doesn't matter that they are humans, it matters that they are beings, that they are experiencers. That's why we should have compassion for them, not for any other reason. Whether or not they are humans is as relevant as what the color of their skin is.

It is very interesting, because animals basically are very much akin to small children in terms of their cognition, yet we completely accept raping, slaughtering and enslaving them for our own convenience. Imagine we had a child that would most likely die around 15 years of age and would remain stuck in the mind of a 2-3 year old. Imagine if we took millions of these kinds of children and raped and murdered them so that we can eat their corpses or drink some fluids of theirs. In an objective sense, our culture is completely backwards. Being a meat eater for example is in practice causing far more harm, in an objective sense, to child-like beings than most pedophiles cause with their pedophelia, even if they are predators. We treat innocent, child-like beings worse than we treat pedophiles and mass murderers. And we also treat them worse than predators treat children and mass murderers treat their murder victims.

I don't know if ostracization prevents any terrorism from happening. It seems to me that social isolation is more likely to cause terrorism. The issue here is, if a pedophile simply is a pedophile, and you tell him he is evil for simply being a pedophile, then the step to raping children is much smaller, because society already views them as evil, and they already have to keep their nature a secret. If you ostracize pedophiles, all you will basically have is people hiding their pedophilia, which might increase the likelihood of depravity actually taking place. If they were integrated into society, it would most likely be A) easier to monitor and treat them and B) allow them a life where they will feel like they benefit from adhering to social norms. The more difficult question would be, how could we even achieve this kind of destigmatization without falling into different kind of pitfalls that would negatively effect society, and how can we even talk about this without the conversation immediately being rejected. Pedophilia is so stigmatized that people who make arguments in defense of pedophiles (not child abuse, just the individuals who are afflicted by this condition), will be suspected to be pedophiles themselves. As it stands, we have no idea how many teachers are pedophiles. In my personal experience I had multiple teachers who I suspect had such kind of tendencies, aswell as a school bus driver I remember. We have an opportunity cost, by not shining a light into this darkness, we put children at risk that otherwise might not be.

But that's just your opinion, none of this is objective whatsoever. I view morality as something metaphysical, not just something humans come up with. Morality means preference, and firstly, all conscious beings have preferences, not just humans. Just because someone cannot communcate their morality, or symbolize it via language, does not mean it is not present. So you are just asserting that only humans have anything to say about morality, but that might simply only be because humans can speak. And then you are saying, that morality is about those wants of those individuals who can speak. It is a nice structure you have created for yourself where you can undermine the prefererences of anything that cannot speak, and infact you will most likely ignore other ways individuals communicate with you and deem it is irrelevant to morality. None of this is objective, and all of it is simply a way to justify your view of human supremacy. I could also create a nice little ideology that ties morality to be exclusive to white people, or somehow that it is tied to evolution, nature and natural selection as the nazi's successfully did. It was very popular back then, and the desire to construct these kinds of ideologies is no different in you than it was in Adolf Hitler.

You frame morality in an objectivist way and then you proceed to completely subjectively draw the line on what you determine to be worthy of moral consideration. Who says that that's what morality is all about? And why do draw the line at people? Why is it not your race? Or all mammals?

It's the guy who said it's okay to pay for CP knowing that the money would be used to continue to produce more of it, because "all consumption under capitalism is unethical and therefore, all consumption under capitalism is ethical".

The two are a good fit because they both basically showcase limitations of stage green dysfunctionality. It is interesting to observe, because we know that new stages are precisely build due to the limitations of previous stages, and if you followed Destiny you could see it happen step by step in him.

To be clear, his argument is that he will be able to allocate the money in a more efficient and socially benefitial way than the government because he already established his ability to create jobs and so forth for the people by creating a large business. It is basically a dictator mindset, that he will use power in a more efficient way than a government elected by the people.

The interview is about 3 hours. He basically explained that he was always like this, and that he refuses to censor himself. It got him into so much trouble in high school that he was arrested because he said "Everyone who says they never thought about shooting up a school is lying.". He goes into further detail how he has an inability to censor himself, that it just feels very uncomfortable to him and that he would rather die. Fair enough.

I am not sure that he is yellow at all, it seems like the way he acts is more due to early trauma and personality. https://youtu.be/aKx4Y9ErxVA?t=3327 It looks like he fell into this kind of role and therefore naturally came to see certain limitations of certain stages. Also you guys have to remember that Spiral Dynamics is based upon the idea of integrating each stage and evolving up the spiral. For much of what you call "stage green" today, is not actually a healthy and normal transition through the spiral, as a lot of people lack earlier stage development like stage blue. You can often see a stark difference between people who had an early religious upbringing for example and reached stage green, and people who never had that in their life. We have not really replaced religions with any other institution that could fascilitate functional stage blue identities.