Scholar

By the way Leo you should clarify somewhere that makes it clear to members that their DMs are not private and can be read by moderators/you. I think it is a breach of privacy not to make this apparent.

There were some strange fallacies in the video, like how they frame that a singular individual would make no difference. That makes no sense in the context of a cultural revolution where most people would change their consumptive habits. They aswell explained how if we do not stop consuming so many animals we will not be able to fix climate change, yet at the same time they say we should focus mostly on politicians. What are politicians supposed to do here? They at this moment perfectly represent the people, who simply do not care about climate change for the most part. It seems like they simply lack understanding of how societies evolve and transform. There is a reason why we do not vote for politicians who radically care about climate change, because most people simply don't care. They are not developed enough to care about the world. What we need is a cultural evolution towards stage green, and that will necessarily include adoption of responsibility and a change in consumptive habits. The actual truth would sound more like we need to both adopt radical consumptive habits aswell as radical political change. But I doubt either of those things will happen in time. This video really gives off the vibe of "Holy shit we have no fucking clue what to do about this but let us try think outside of the box". The fundamental problem is that climate change will cause an increase in survival pressures, which will make it unlikely that we will progress and more likely that we will regress into less developed stages. So, I would not bet on any of this getting solved with an increase in consciousness, but rather the opposite. It will be fueled by fear and suffering.

No, because the person is imagined, it is one "object" in imagination. Whoever you think you are, and whatever desires you have, all of them are imagined in the first place by the Divine. So, once you attain ultimate insight into imagination, you simply recognize that the universe already is precisely the way you wanted it to be imagined, including the limitations of personhood. It's like you are already imagining everything, including your lower form desire to somehow attain super human combat abilities. But you already imagined so that this is not possible, because that's the way you wanted it to be. Consciousness already is imagining everything exactly as it wants to.

Good luck with that.

Consider this: “Thus it is said: The path into the light seems dark, the path forward seems to go back, the direct path seems long, true power seems weak, true purity seems tarnished, true steadfastness seems changeable, true clarity seems obscure, the greatest art seems unsophisticated, the greatest love seems indifferent, the greatest wisdom seems childish. The Tao is nowhere to be found. Yet it nourishes and completes all things.” Contemplate this in the context of extinction and alien intervention.

That's probably not wise, if we are not able to save ourselves, we will not be able to sustain further technological development, which will require even more collective and individualistic responsibility. Right now we are enslaving and exploiting more animals every year than humans have existed in the history of the world, what makes you think that they would save us if they are not even willing to save those slaves. They might nudge us in the right direction, but if we can't deal with this ourselves, we simply are a failed species. The wisest thing at that point might be to let us go extinct, or allow us to evolve into a new direction after a fresh start post-cataclysm. Don't forget humanity most likely is not special at all, infact it could very well be that among all the other more developed species, we are exceptionally unconscious due to our particular genetic make-up. And to those aliens, waiting a few million years might not be an issue. In fact, if they are here, it is likely that they were here for a long time and if you look at past cataclysms, it seems like they had no issue watching whole civilizations get obliterated. Aliens probably recognize what I have described in my last post. This earth is it's own form of intelligence, and to evolve it must go through it's self-expression. To hinder that would be to actually disrespect the wisdom of Divinity, and they might clearly recognize that it would lead to more harm than good. The only possible way to change the trajectory of this world is through teaching us Inner Evolution, not force Outer Evolution. One more important aspect here is that the individual and particular Expression of this Planet is in and of itself valuable. If the aliens were to come to this earth and simply impose their own unique evolution onto us, then they would destroy the very purpose of why they are trying to help us in the first place. They are trying to help us so that this planet can come to it's full and authentic self-expression, not so that they can create clones of their own particular planets dispositions. Otherwise, they could just let us all go extinct and replace us with themselves. They probably recognize divinity in the unique way this planet is evolving, and to think that they would know better than God itself would be pure arrogance. They are here to cherish God, not to impose their egoic desires onto God. Contemplate this. If you were the aliens, would you save the dinosaurs from extinction by changing the trajectory of the asteroid? How could you possibly know that it is the wisest thing to do? You have to let go of your attachment to humanity and see the bigger picture. Humanity is nothing in the grand scheme of things, and sooner than later it will perish, through evolution or extinction. That is the very point of all of this.

Watch this.

Panic evolved for a reason, sometimes it is appropriate. Society is not conscious enough to resolve this through pure reason and wisdom, so to surpress the natural reaction of fear might lead to more damage, counter-intuitively. Sometimes letting things play out unconsciously is this wisest thing to do. Don't forget, Divine wisdom permeates all things, and it is far greater than the limited wisdom of Leo. I would instead encourage him to explore this fascet of himself. Fearmongering solves alot of things, wisdom can only be aquired when we see clearly what it solves and what it does not solve. See, we first have to recognize the wisdom of the unwise before we can truly surpass it. We have to include, to transcend. And to include means to recognize it's divinity. Consider the possibility that in the future, the wisest path will be to regress to stage blue. To create a solid epistemic foundation, rooted in some sort of eco-fascism to solve our immediately survival problems. To put everyone who resists to a wall and shoot them dead. See, when we as conscious people resist that possibility, what else is that but fear? I am not saying that it will be what will happen, I want to illustrate how our supposed higher consciousness can sometimes lead us to be blind to the wisdom that gives rise to all things. In an even deeper sense, that wisdom gives rise to both your resistance to it, aswell as the resistance that you do resist to. And in that bigger play of resistance, there is a deeper wisdom, a deeper freedom and an expression of true Will. As soon as you scoff at the ant for it's ignorance, you forget the very foundation of what Intelligence is, you become blind to it. And your only solice is that, that very blindness, is part of Divine Intelligence. Even further, let us recognize the Divine Intelligence in Adolf Hitler and everything he achieved. It takes great humility to recognize that it was truly Divine, truly intelligent, and that the source of his actions, the source of his ignorance, was the very Wisdom that allows us to see it. See, the problem with Arrogance, from a perspective of a seeker, is that it makes us blind to all of this. As soon see look at the Trump supporter and see anything but pure Intelligence, it is the moment we have lost out sight to our own survival. And that is ultimately not a problem, it is wisdom aswell, but as a seeker, we need to recognize that. If one were to truly recognize the Absolute Wisdom of Existence, I do not know what would happen. It seems like it would Dissolve the very thing that recognizes.

Is it really hard to understand that shaping something to look like a corpse of a once sentient being is different than making something look like a product that has no resembles to it? Anti-vegans are utterly cringe in how hard they try to make vegans look bad.

I'm pretty sure vegan's don't eat products that are shaped like animals. Ironically, meat is made to look like anything but an animal, they look more like vegetables than anything. When you look at a sausage you think it looks like a pig? The level of cringe.

Ironically, even from rationalist perspective, the guy would fall apart if you asked him to justify any of his metaphyiscal positions. You can sense how shallow his understanding of metaphysics is, like unfortunately is the case with most scientists. They are so unaware of their depth of ignorance that they do not even know how many assumptions they just take for granted with their materialist worldview, so much so that they do not even comprehend that they need to justify all of it, which of course they do not and cannot. They are not even equipped to do so on a philosophical level. They will walk around talking about metaphysics and then when you point out their assumptions and ask to justify them, they will say "That's just philosophy we don't do that in science!". It's really child-like behaviour, as soon as their incompetency is revealed they will immediately dismiss any legitimacy to the rational inquiry into metaphysics, which they themselves claim someone else is engaging irrationally with. How would they even know how to contextualize their physicalist models without metaphysics? Man, scientists are so uneducated it's really a shame.

This isn't news, sadly a lot of people are in denial about this. They think just because it looks natural means it will be better for the environment. Factory farming is the most efficient way to do animal farming, of course it's less environmentally destructive on a large scale, it's called factory farming for a reason. Normal farming just doesn't scale. If you try to scale it you just do more damage.

A bit surprising coming from the Infrared guy, who is very emotionally immature, but it has some good takes that contextualize well within Spiral Dynamics:

Anything that wouldn't be considered exploitation would basically be vegan. However, in the context in which your grandma keeps your cow most likely, as property not in the context of guardianship, is inherently exploitative and therefore not vegan. If you find an egg that you know a chicken will not eat (because chickens eat their own eggs to get their nutrients back), so you are not stealing it from anyone, then you could possibly eat it and that would be considered vegan, as it wouldn't be exploitative. However, if you were to keep chickens as property so you can consume their eggs, that would be slavery and be non-vegan, no matter how nicely you treat your slaves. Also, we have to consider that nowadays we would be normalizing the consumption of eggs if we were to continue to do so, which also would lead to more suffering indirectly. But in most cases, even backyard chickens exist in an exploitative relationship towards their owners, so unless it is an animal sanctuary it will most likely not be vegan. Acquiring chickens in most cases will not be vegan in the first place, it has to be in the context of rescue.

Nothing makes sense experientially, other than the experience of making sense. You are operating on a very surface level here, deluding yourself with your own thoughts. The impossibility word refers to something specific, if you had insight into it you would know why I call it that. Of course it doesn't make sense, that's the point. You have not decuónstructed the very lense you choose to view this from, which is why you have trouble grasping what I am trying to convey. What you are saying is a story, a story of a perceiver who pays attention and gains deeper insight into reality. See, you pretend as if you have discovered someting of greater depth, when in fact the appearances just took on a new form of being. Deconstruct this lense, you are trapped in concepts.

Would like to provide me with examples that you would consider assholish given the deeper understanding I have offered to you?

I don't really see anything he is saying as particularly assholish. You should contemplate how much compassion you would have for someone who puts your family in a gaschamber to then eat strips of the flesh. See, the more you care about your family, the more difficult it will be for you to not form hatred for these people. Do you think it would be fair to demand or expect from you to be compassionate towards these people? And don't forget, you demand them to be compassionate to people who literally pay for the rape, murder and death of others, while none of them will show any compassion towards the vegan who simply is angry at them for doing so. The level of cognitive dissonance that requires is astonishing.

I mean, people rioted for months in the US because of a little discrimination, think about what people at that stage would do if they viewed animals as actual individuals. Do you think these people would care whether you have your food sensitivities? No, they would take you to the street and lynch you.

As you expand your identity, what will happen is that you might be thrown down a few stages in terms of your survival. Think about this, your stage is linked to your state of survival. If you do not identify with animals, our society is actually pretty progressive. People are safe for the most part, crime is at the minimum and so forth. Now, if you expand your identity to include animals, the picture changes. Suddenly you go from one of the most progressive societies that ever existed, to a society that is causing more death and suffering than any society has ever before in the history of the world. You go from "everyone is equal", to "those who aren't humans can be tortured, murdered and raped for pleasure". You suddenly find yourself in a society what to you would seem like Nazi Germany during the holocaust of the jews, and even worse because each individual within that society seems to directly contribute to this, rather than being enslaved to an authoritarian system. In that state, it is very easy to fall back to more primitive survival patterns. And consider that this person might have an atypical mind, he might have some sort of autism, or whatever else. Ask yourself this, if you lived in a society in which people raped infants for fun, would you lose your faith in humanity? See, the kind of person who would get radicalized in that kind of society would be more sensitive than everyone else, they would actually be higher developed, even if they thought it was justified to commit terrorism. Put any person that lives today into the time of slavery, and they would become radical extremists within a few hours.

Much in the same way that if a spiritual guru was to say slavery was justified because otherwise, who would feed and keep the slaves alive, calling that silly would also just be my perspective. As is you calling this a perspective. That it is a perspective is irrelevant to what is going on here.

Sadhguru somehow argues that it would be better for cows to be breed into existence continuously even if it means they live a life of suffering, because somehow it would be immoral to let the articifial population of cows continue to faze out of existence over time. How can you take a position like that seriously? So we forcefully breed these cows, and we pretend we are doing them a favor while it happens to be the case that we exploit them and basically give them a life of misery?

No, because he clearly is a little weazel whose arugments simply do not make sense. If your arguments are shit and simply incorrect, it is beyond just some sort of difference is perspective, it is clear that bias is blinding you. Have you even watched these videos? The guy is incoherent, he is employing every trick in the ego-handbook, and you can see just how triggered and emotional he gets with the topic. If he truly gave his perspective, he would simply say he doesn't really give that much damn about animals, and whatever else his true positions are. But he does not, because he probably is himself too unaware of his own biases.

Perfect saints? lol Sadhguru is a complete dumbass as far as this question goes, you can practically feel the ego dysfunction emanating from him.

A high conscious person wouldn't think it was wise to force their own narrow understanding of the world onto everyone. Just because you think it would be good if everyone was forced to take the vaccine doesn't mean that it is a good idea. This mindset is the perfect demonstration why dictators are such a bad idea, you would be a terrible dictator. Just the fact that you think this would work makes you a terrible dictator. A conscious dictator would immediately create institutions that would replace his own dicatorship.

You better have no compassion for all the non-vegans who die from any virus then as animal agriculture is directly linked to the emergence of viruses and superbugs. Some people believe enslaving and killing animals for pleasure is an inherent human right. What we do to animals is worse than all human genocides combined. Do you think we should have compassion towards humans who contribute to what we do to animals and the world? Funny how people call vegans judgemental.