Girzo

@thepixelmonk Seeing this I uphold my intuition that the church guys are deluding themselves. I don't see how mushrooms being fresh can change anything in that equation. Even if there is some novel compund in them but it can be so easily damaged that it is undetectable after drying and crushing then there must be miniscule amounts of it.

@Danioover9000 And I am simply telling him why it's a wrong path to take, so he won't waste too much time here. It's out of compassion, not lack of chills OP is talking about behaviors in just a second sentence. It's clearly a mark of confusion, as SD doesn't deal with norms and behaviours at all. Different cultures at the same stage Blue with very similar values can have radically different norms and behaviors, for example Jews and Muslims.

I think I will stick to Peter Ralston for now. It all sounds like a repack of spirituality with more and more psychedelic flavor. First you have God, because Leo explored 5-MeO-DMT and now we get some alien stuff, because Leo started to dose higher on more visual psychedelics I assume. Not judging only because of years of Leo's great track record of delivering fascinating content. Otherwise I would completly stop listening about this stuff, but now I am waiting for more information before making judgement. I think Leo is a type of guy to trip on low-medium doses and think it is the greatest, then exploring ridiculous doses and thinking he is the first there, while 1/4 of the psychedelic community has already been there. I have always been and still am sceptical of Leo's claims that psychedelics work different for him than most people.

What you are proposing is not an improvement, but a degradation. More =/= better. I think it comes from a misunderstanding of what Spiral Dynamics is. It's not even a map of human development. It's a map of how HUMAN values HAVE evolved. Values, not general development. Also, it only describes what is, not what will be, it only has some vague idea of what could be. And we can already can fit Jesus and Buddha on it, because the values presummably esposused by those historical figures are avaialable to us from ancient written texts. Adding animal stages make no sense in that context, because how the heck are you going to measure values that animals adhere to. Are you gonna interview a hamster? Or go under the sea to make a visit to a family of humpback whales and ask them a few questions? Okay, I might have been harsh with my language and tone, but it's only because the idea is so outragous, that's the only way to underline it that seems fitting in my opinion. You can propse your own model that describes general development. Spiral Dynamics is not it. SD is a tool for managers to solve conflicts in organizations. Model of Hierarchical Complexity is a model that could fit anything from atoms to aliens, but it's also not a model of general development. Ken Wilber tried to create something like general model, but didn't really achieve it and settled for something more managable. Also there's a reason why his books are 1000+ pages long. It's fucking hard. And we won't achieve it by typing random thoughts on some random internet forums, I can assure you of that.

Stupid as hell. SD is not well-grounded in hard facts by itself, it's a kind of theoretical tool/toy. You want to add to it ungrounded fantasies about historical figures, aliens and what-not. That's either bananas or an acitivity for a children summer camp.

It would also fix a lot in business if everyone at company knew how much each other, especially bosses, make. It would automatically fix greed. People have strong aversion to being treated unfair, also seeing others being treated unfair, too.

@Greatnestwithin He has built wealth first. This channel has been a normal self-help channel in the beginning, do you remeber? Normal stuff, first Enlightenment videos and pushing meditation are from around 2015, I think? Jesus, I have been watching Leo for waay to long.

@Optimized Life yes, he doesn't generate that much value as Leo has said when taking him as example, because: 1. Based on the trajectory of our society something Amazon-like would have been created either way, with or without Bezos. He didn't innovate, just applied what already was there. Similar companies sprang around the world in similar timeframe. We have Allegro in my country, yes I use it, yes I don't care about it's existence. No, sellers are not thanking heavens everyday that they have this platform to sell on, it eats their margins horribly, so much they most often have their own shop websites with the same products and prices. Also it's mostly cheap chinese shit that I don't think should be made in the first place, it's a part of how capitalism wastes resources. 2. You are all ascribing him either the value of the work of his employees, I mean all the employees, not only the front-line, OR you mistake value that he creates with value he has power over through leveraging his creativity and his position. To make a one billion company you have to siphon at least 980 million dollars worth of value from society. To make a $200b company, you have to siphon like 99,9% of that value. And that fucking 99,9% could have been used and can be still used to achieve other goals now. I have nothing against Bezos personally. He is the same as other tech industry billionaires. It's discussion about role he plays and it's real value to society. I see majority of value in the people, their output and their potential, and I am not sold on Leo's argument from the video about CEOs being million times more valuable to society. Money and power =/= value Wise use of money and power, yes that's a lot of value, but I don't see either Bezos or Musk to be exceptionally wise or loving in their use of their position. So I think there's a lot of people that could replace them, so they are not that valuable, they are in a valuable position, but this position is mostly results of our current system, it's inner dynamics and not ingenuity of these particular individuals.

@Thought Art Jesus, I have studied management for 3 years at a university and now study sociology. I have worked in production and now plan to work in academia, also tried to start many of my own ventures. I am no naive leftist and well-aknowledged with how society and capitalism work. It's all connected, every role is needed. The power doesn't has to be distributed the way it is commonly distributed now that's all I am proposing. If you think that janitor is 1000000x less valuable than CEO, then you are just dead wrong. Being a janitor doing 12 hours shifts is fucking raw survival, it's hard, and it kills your ambition, it stomps it, unless you are an exceptional human being. It's not people, it's their role. Crushed psychological well-being, social ridicule, are costs that janitor pays. That's why they deserve more equality either in working less hours (which in my worldview is way better than money), more respect, or at least knowing that no-one is exploiting them, that a CEO of a company has for example 20x cap of earnings relative to the lowest salary of his workers. Also, people spend the same amount of time doing their tasks, janitor and boss, and life is incredibly valuable, you getting to the point in your life where you are, while keeping you alive, society has invested enormous resources to achieve that. It all comes down to how much you value human hours, I value them highly and that's a real reason we are disagreeing right now, you guys don't value human life as highly as I do, and that's okay. That's anegdotal evidence. Read some scientific research, CEOs are repleacable, some companies function better without a CEO for some time, and also I am not for abolishing the role of an CEO, just capping how much value creation we ascribe to their work. That is a fking lie, the society is so structured that many of the hardest jobs like being a firefighter or a nurse are the most discounted, the least respectable, to coerce people into staying in those professions. Exactly because they are so valuable and becoming them is hard, so they are not easily replaceable. Read some Sociology 101 instead of another book on Austrian economics. There are other hidden costs you are paying for becoming a firefighter, other than how hard the training is. Also, firefighters are often well-educated, so it misses a point.

@Thought Art I discount executives and MANAGERS, because society generally overestimate them. My initial point has been really about managers, it has turned out to be about CEO because in my opinion it is ridiculous to think that a manager produces million times more value than a janitor. So we started talking about Bezoses. And I prop the normal average workers, because they are often underestimated. I am all in for what works. I am not some ideologue. I understand our current structure of society works. I am all in for exploring other working alternatives and innovations to the current system. I believe one alternative is empowering average workers because they hold a lot of potential, and the potential of workers at a company is far greater than a potential of any CEO. Is it hard as hell to empower that potential? Yes, it is, that's what I have said that even trying it on a small scale with a single company is a life purpose in itself. I think it should be tried, someone trying would be a CEO worth his salary, a really valuable CEO in my opinion, like Jos de Blok. Not Bezos, Bezos' value is mainly in his postition and role, I think most of his innovation and existence of something like Amazon are attractors, something that would have probably happened either way based on how our world had been shaped and the direction it was going towards a few decades ago.

Because value in either of these companies is not Bezos', but thousands of workers, decades of developing infrastructure, billions worth of physical materials and fuels and millions of their clients giving them data. It's a matter of who you ascribe the value to. I ascribe it to people and Earth, from which people have extracted the resources. You ascribe it it personalities and abstract companies. If Bezos never existed there would be many other valuable things created with that value, if big companies had limits to growth, there would develop some new interesting, creative dynamics on a lower scale. We don't need competition in every field, on every scale. What makes humans unique is cooperation, and government should in my opinion do everything to support cooperation between humans. I see existence of giga companies like Amazon as a residue of a progressing change towards their break-up or heavy, heavy regulation. They are descendants of company cities and other power-hungry forms of societal organization from the past.

I have. I have watched your video and I think you miss a point. You think about value from a personal perspective of a worker, or a user of a service. I think of value as net positive or negative effect on society. Your Bezos by creating so much value can be creating a net negative effect on society by fueling resources and human life hours towards useless pursuits like faster shipping or another pointless space travel company. I know it's hellishly difficult to compute. That's why we are having this conversation and why I am sure you neither know what are the real results of big capitalists' actions. Take it as a feedback Leo. I am not a lefitist and I am not sold on many arguments in that video. It's just not that good. Because they also want fair wages and normal working conditions. They just lack vision to compute that they have to choose, but once the choice is visible, then it's kind of obvious what is really valuable, which systems should be upheld and not given away to all-consuming Amazon amoeba.

I disagree, people produce value with at most 3x rate. But some people have access to leverages and they leverage these to differences to absurd degrees, like you say million times difference. But speaking from an avsolute perspective people are not that much different in intelligence and neither creativity, nor productivity. We are all stupid copycats, and if there are some exceptional people, they are not Musks, Jobses, Gateses and Bezoses, they are the people they all have copied from.

Not much. The thing is Jeff Bezos doesn't create that much value, he is a master at siphoning it from other sources. If Bezos and his company didn't destroy their competitors, they would still exist and would still pay and treat their workers better than Amazon, as they did in the past. "Oh if Amazon didn't destroy them then something else like Amazon would have bought it." That's the point, something like Amazon shouldn't exist. Yes we need big capital to make investments and long-term projects. In our system it's giants like Google or Amazon, Elon Musk, etc. that invest in big projects. But you know who else does big projects? The government, the creators of the Internet and guys who put man on the moon. The government can do everything that big companies can do. We can have big companies, but not too big. It all comes down to how much you value human life, I value it highly. So values, cultivating similar values in society. Aiding individuals and societies in development on the Spiral.

@Leo Gura it doesn't matter if you are mediocre, when you get more control of your work, when you get more responisibilities, you grow and grow happier, too. Education is not required in the beginning. The point of creating Tier 2 workplace is exactly thinking about how to accomodate average people in that system. Saying "oh, it's education and genetics" is begging a question, a kind of conceptual laziness. Creating a Tier 2 workplace that functions, accomodates average stage Blue and Orange people and doesn't collapse quickly is a life purpose in itself. The book "Reinventing Organizations" by Laloux is a good exploration of this topic. There's also Corporate Rebels and a few more not as well-written.

@QQQ for 5-meo-dmt there is some shop that sells from Czech Republic.

@Tyler Robinson logic is a construct. There are many different logic systems. So yeah, it's not logical, in a sense that there's some underlying logic that rules the universe at all times, in all cases. Humans would like it to be so, so they could ground reality in something, but no.

Edit, ah misread, you have talked about the dumbest, then it might have an effect. I have written a reply with selecting for the smartest in mind. Yeah, but from what I have learned intelligence works by a different set of rules. It seems to be increasing overall in population, regardless of the outcome of any particular mating. Like there's a mechanism, deeply hardwired, that's been responsible for human brain's capacities development in the past, and still working within us, assuring that every generation of humans is more and more intelligent overall. I don't know the details, I haven't studied evolution nor cognitive science seriously. But the existence of such mechanism adds many interesting dynamics, like for example that you need to measure progress over generations, because maybe by selecting the smartest individuals you have also chosen a lot of people with slowly working that aforementioned mechanism, so over 100 generations they are stupidier than a general population, because the effects of selecting of what is on the surface are slower than the underlying mechanism responsible for humans' and humanoids' boom in intelligence.

@Hardkill one factor is that the West has always had a headstart in development. Another is that the East has been producing food for Europe, so there was less incentive to move towards new social structures, serfdom has been ideal for food production and the whole Europe had to eat something.

@Majed They are abstract categories, but they serve a purpose, they are not for nothing. They were created, because there was a need for them. And there are rules around them, because they also have been needed.

@Greatnestwithin DIY retreat with friends or a commercial one? I don't get the appeal of paid for psychedelic retreats. People leading them can be lacking in knowledge, as in this example, you don't know what the hell you are consuming and at what exact dose. You give up some control, you have to smell some shitty sage/palo santo or some other lung-irritating incense, and THE WORST OF THEM ALL you have to deal with nonsense-spouting hippies who have chosen to participate in the same ceremony. Lighting up a bonfire with your friends and sharing a DMT pipe in circles is soo much better than any of this commercial bullshit, IMO. Unbearable, hippies are unbearable. What's even better take your gf/bf on a trip to mountains, go on a hike into the wilderness and take a hit in a serene scenery. No people, no spiritual cosplay, no distractions. Just Love.

Yeah, the same, it's maybe even easier to vape, but harder to dose, because freebase can get sticky and oily when you store it in imperfect conditions. Vaped freebase oil also sticks to cold glass, making cool patterns. Te coolest looking psychedelic "dirt" to scrap off the pipe. So glass pipe works, parsley works, e-vape works, etc. Vapes that use cotton are cool to use. With DPT, I don't recommend to use the e-mesh method people use for DMT.

@Darodos I would vape it. Plugging required high dosages for me. Do you have an idea on how to vape it?

@LSD-Rumi I haven't encountered anything sinister either. But DPT for sure tingles the part of mind that sees faces everywhere more than other psychedelics. So if that's scary for someone, then DPT might not be for them. It also gives a lot of physical sensations, so if someone is scared of it then it might be scary for them.

@LSD-Rumi your experience sounds normal. I think even as high as 150 mg plugged is a way to go, and something around 250-400 mg oral. Vaping DPT freebase is the most effective method. Works best in form of eliquid, qnd then you just toke bit by bit until you are satisfied with strength. You don't need to do one big toke as with DMT. You can vape once or you can vape for hours. Normal cheap eliquid vape device. Not some elaborate glass and gas torch combo for perverts. That's what you vapor genie guys are, perverts