MM1988

But what would that experience be like from my perspective?

Am I right when I assume that books like Meditations by Marcus Aurelius & The Six Pillars of Self Esteem (Both from the free sample) will make you emulate an enlightened person, because these emotional problems really stem from ego? Like, Meditations will tell you how you feel about certain things based on logic because thats far mor feasable for a beginner. So it is probably a good idea to do meditation on the side just to be more aware of your inner workings but once you are at a certain level with your meditation and insight (after years) these books would be useless to you, is this right? The reason I ask is because I have concepts from these "lower level" books coming up during the day, but im also very interrested in non duality teaching and I want to sort all this information in my mind, because I dont know if these teachings contradict each other or build up on one another, and when in which order. So the main problem is that I feel some of the categories on the book list are not as seperate as they seem to be, it would be nice to know how all these knowledge integrates into a big picture.

I usually am not against radical advice, but I think this is very selfish. Why would you want to creep out a random girl just because you have to overcome some issues? Do something stupid in a public place instead, some people may even find it funny and it lightens up their day.

Ive been meditating daily for over a year now. I started off with a 20 minute timer, now I dont use a timer anymore and it varies between 10 and 30 minutes, on the weekends I usually do multiple session in a day. The probem is I cant even for sure say ive ever observed a thought. Sure I catch myself thinking and go back to the breath. Sometimes I can feel my brain "thinking" in the background while im focused on the breath, but thats as far as it got in terms of unusual mind state. It really feels no different than when Im focusing on work, a movie or a videogame, just very ordinary. I never had any insights either. I feel like if I would just sit there philosophizing I would make more progress in terms of insights but I know that thats not what meditation is about at all. I may be able to concentrate on my breath better or longer than at the beginning but honestly I cant even say that for sure. Lately I thought I made some progress when I felt something all over my body and started seeing weird things in my vision after focusing a long time. But upon further investigating this state the second time it happend I concluded that this is just my body getting sleepy, altough it is weird to still be focused on the breath while entering a pre-dream state im fairly sure thats all it was. I enjoy it for what it is and will continue to meditate but I feel myself slowly sliding back into my "its all bullshit" opinion I had of it before I discovered Leos videos.

What I dont get here is that science to my knowledge isnt as materialistic as leo makes it ought to be. Isnt science basically admitting that nature is inherently magic. Science doesnt claim to be able to figure everything out. Science says we dont know where the big bang come from, we will probably never know, and even then we dont know what caused that etc. We dont have any idea what existence is, we know the everything goes through first person experience, we know quantum mechanics is paradoxical . Maybe the real answer is even too complicated for a human mind to even grasp at all. No scientist says he knows the external world exists, maybe its a simulation, and when it is what is outside of that simulation - no idea at all, a scientist will admit this. But then again we have no way of figuring this out anyway, so isnt science our best bet? Even when we know science wont even in theory be able to solve everything isnt it the best shot we got, and better than doing nothing since these problems cant be solved? Leo on the otherhand makes the claim if you sit in a cave for 40 years and meditate the answer will come to you spontaniously eventually. Thats an outrageous claim, and nobody knows if thats true. Even if it were we can conclude that not even a monkey would be able to have access to that truth, because he will never sit still and meditate. There exists life on this planet from lifeless organic material like plants up to the humand mind, and lanything in between, literally anything. Why would just a human have access to this, why would we be so special?

@Leo Gura I would love to see you debate a scientist at one point. Do you think that would be possible in the future?

99% of people will just look at the video being 2 hours long and decide its not worth their time. When I watch these video I just think its incredible that this kind of deep information can be condensed into just 2 hours by leo without it getting boring at all. Leo we appreciate what you are doing, dont get discouraged because the content isnt mass compatible. Maybe you could cover some shallow topics once in a while to gain subscribers and then going on with the deep stuff again, I know that this is how I initially found your channel but I like the deep content much more.

@sweater then don't, no need to be rude

@sweater Thats more or less my point. You dont know if 1+1=2 or 1+1=5. We know for a fact that it doesnt contradict materialism if a material brain can be made to look at 1+1=2 and 1+1=5 and conclude both to be correct. Its just that 1+1=2 makes sense in a waking state, but when you dream or on some kind of deliriant logic goes out the window and 1+1=5 suddenly could make perfect sense to you. Why shouldn't it be possible to have a material brain manipulated in such a way that it thinks its enlightened? I'm aware that I'm also applying logic here right now, maybe that's my mistake or the reason I don't get it completely.

@Serotoninluv I think you are correct, science simply doesnt have the capacity to verify every bullshit claim. That doesnt mean science is closed minded and refuses to even test it. Leo is also correct when he says science is in bed with business, you are more likely to get funding for stuff that might turn into a sellable product. Homeopathy is a great example because it would be even more sellable than it already is if it were backed by science. So, was science closed minded here? No, this was investigated by science because there was tons of anecdotal evidence of homeopathy working which turned out to be bullshit, but you cant just go after EVERY claim someone makes. Granted, this also makes it unlikely for science to investigate existential questions as long there is not much public interrest, because there is no money to be made.

@Leo Gura So you basically claim that the experience of the absolute is "on another level" to such a dregree that it can't possibly be implanted into or experienced with a materialist brain? Assuming technology exists that can modify such a brain to the smallest particle without killing the organism. Alright, if thats your claim there is nothing left for me than to accept it and it makes no sense discussing this topic any further. As I said I'm not really worrying about your delusion or try to debunk it, these are just the kind of questions that came up for me while watching your video.

@Leo Gura If you know the absolute truth like you claim you do - there are still two possibilites. 1. You are correct - the materialist view is false, there are no brains, you know the truth. 2. The materialist view is correct, but your brain has undergone some modification that makes you believe you know the truth together with all the evidence you need. How would you ever know the difference between the two from a first person perspective? There are schizophrenic people in mental hospitals who delude themselves into being the next jesus christ, and for them thats a reality. If the materialist view is correct, and your brain can be modified to believe/experience whatever it wants than everything goes. Even when you sleep at night and dream, suddenly logic goes out the window, 1+1=5 could make sense to you in this state, so you cant even rely on that. For all I know you don't even exist and I lie in a coma somewhere due to an accident and my brain comes up with this whole reality. How would someone ever be sure about anything, yet you make these absolute claims. BTW I'm not trying to "debunk" anything here even if it sounds like that, I'm merely highly interrested in this topic. Also, WAKE UP LEO! Actualized.org doesnt exist, you had an accident, it was a car crash when you were 18 years old and you are in a hospital, your family is worried!!!

@Shiva: of course you cant prove or disprove anything with science in an absolute sense, its more of a "this is a best we got" approach. @Leo Gura If a consensus of science says "this is just a hallucination" this doesnt mean its the end of the story. Its just the theory most scientists at the time think is the most likely. But I think any scientist understands theories can be disproven anytime. Even simple physics stuff like velocity = length/speed isnt absolutely true. its just the theory most scientists think is the most plausible because it worked most of the time in reality.

If you tell a scientist that paranormal phenomena are real, he will run tests and studies. If these come back negative, or if they arent testable at all, wont a scientist say "granted, maybe what you tell us is real, but nobody else can prove it, test it, or observe it, therefore why wouldnt we be skeptical?" - whats wrong with that approach? I'll give it to you most scientist probably dont live up to the ideal. But it isnt answering the second part of the question, why the enlightenment approach makes more sense than theoretically ideal science

I would be very careful with that wording on a forum where a lot of young users with emotional problems are around.

I struggle to put what I read on books into my overall world view, or better yet the view of myself - how thoughts work, emotions and so on. I like books I can put into categories for specific stuff like, "the sedona method" or "the power of now" for more shallow-level emotional problems, while the spirituality books are more deeper. However, most of these books come with there own perspective on life, like the sedona method has these categories for emotions, while in another book emotions are defined completely different. Another classic example is books about enlightement vs. books about stoicism like meditations. How do you integrate this? Or I see Leo has tons of books about enlightenment on his book list, what good can it be to read all of these perspectives on enlightenment? In theory its better to know more than less, but in practise which perspective do you take? I cant put it into words very good, but the problem is basically this. I see when I read a book (for example the sedona method) the next few weeks maybe I see all through this perspective. Then some more week go by and I read another book, now the sedona method is forgotten and I see everything through the models presented in the new book - it just seems so random! Wouldnt it overall be better to stick to some few books, and read them more times over?

I guess the core of my problem is that I understand this in theory but in practise it just feels like I confuse myself more and more by ingesting more information.

This sounds even to me stupid as I write it but I havent been laid in 7 years or had anything with any girl really and every attempt I made ended in rejection and it just feels hopeless that anything is about to change for me in that area. As a result I developed depression that gets better or worse over time and my confidence is always low, even though I have friends make good money at my job, but its just that area. The thing is I tried a lot of stuff already, I meditate daily, tried 5-htp, I read some self help books, or I start no-fap and I maybe feel better for about a week and feel like everything is going to be different now - until my depression sets back in again. I know relationships wont change anything about my happiness long-term and its stupid to depend on something like that for self confidence. I know all of this on a logical level. But it doesnt do anything for me, the loneliness and bad thoughts always creep back up when Im not constantly on the guard. I used the sedona method to feel better and it works, but it gets tiring to having to do it multiple times per day, and then always comes the time where I break and give in and go back to pitying myself again, and mentally masturbating about what the problem could be with me. I dont know it feels good to me on some level, which is messed up. Im wondering if its maybe time to go into therapy or get on some kind of medication for me, since nothing seems to stick.

On the video ideas page I saw "Do looks matter?" with the first point being, "Revising my view". Does this have anything to do with the Incel movement (Involuntary Celibate, hold the view that looks matter above anything else in modern dating, that 80% of women go for top 20% of men etc.) that is gaining massive followers in the internet right now?

All kinds really, not only the hot ones if thats what you are implying.

@see_on_see: On the topic of psychedelics, I have a lot of experience with MDMA but I take it primarily to dance and feel the music on a deeper level. It also gives me a glimpse of how social and happy I could be, but thats usually instantly reversed the next day when my serotonin is gone haha. I had some experiences with 2-CB but it was also a party-setting, I'm afraid to try a full-blown psychedelic so far because I'm already suffering from panic attacks and I am worried it will make my mental problems worse. I dont feel like I'm in the place to do it right now, but I plan on doing a light dose of mushrooms sometime. @Wind: Thanks for the tip, I'll definitely read into that because it sounds like something that would resonate more with me.

Yeah I'm trying not to identify with any role because I know its a limiting belief but I know from experience I will go about pickup the "robot way" so I just avoid it altogether. I guess I am somewhere slightly on the autism spectrum. Its also why I will continue to do meditation, I feel it balances out my hard left-brained, scientific thinking, in that regard Leo is doing gods work for me because I would have immediately dismissed this stuff if it was said to me in mystical words by some yogi, people like me really needed that western/scientifc perspective on it at first.

Its correct that I probably should go out and approach more women, however I cant go back to PUA. Its not for me, besides all the things already said in Leos rant on Pickup that always rubbed me the wrong way the real number 1 reason I cant do it is because as an IT guy I'm a very pragmatic, logical person. So when I first found pickup I thought "Wow, a step by step guide for attracting girls? perfect for me", I ended up mentally masturbating about every single situation and whats the best way to respond to it word-for-word which of course failed, because this is something that has to come more naturally, which I see clearly now. I cringe at myself weriding girls out by calling them and trying to play out my script, and panicking if she said something unexpected. So I would maybe approach girls but let it flow without thinking too about making errors, "hook points", etc. nowadays. I see how it can work for some people who are more intuitive, but not for me. Thanks to everyone for all the very detailed answers by the way, I enjoy reading them !