Joseph Maynor

@Prabhaker what do you think of Leo's video on positive thinking? It's one of my favorite videos of his. Maybe read the transcript of the video, One is posted for it. I'm curious. I'm getting good results from practicing the tips in that video. I look forward to your response. Positive thinking is one of my best new personal development hacks. But maybe I'm mistaken. Check it out!

@saish No. in one of his videos Leo talked about doing a creative thinking course. Maybe it got shelved. I hope not. I'll pay good money for that one.

Yeah. I wanna purchase the creative thinking course! That's the one I want. When is that one coming out? I sound like one of my own clients. Gimme Gimme Gimme! Now now now! Remember that one Leo? What's the status on that one? I'm sure he's got plenty to do, so I don't wanna seem pushy.

@Telepresent What do you think about my paragraph 5, the final paragraph in my original post. The point about Descartes was kind of a side point. More of a touch of history to build context.

@electroBeam I'm looking at his massive content of thought, over 300 videos where he espouses thousands of propositions and such. But let's not get distracted from the issues-at-hand. I don't wanna turn this into a side-show debate or lose focus. Let's return to the issues in my post. I'll address your recent post tomorrow, I notice you took the time to do a good one. And I appreciate that. I want to consider it carefully. I respect everyone here. I don't argue for argument's sake, I argue to improve my life. There's a key difference. A value I try to live by. I'm not stirring-the-coop merely to goose the hens, I'm trying to gain insights to improve my life and thinking. And it's happening! Slowly. I really do appreciate your responses to my question. Let's grow together. My mission is growth. I'm big-time into it! Please re-read my original post again. I think I made some pretty damn good points! Especially the last paragraph. Read that one again. The very last paragraph: Paragraph 5. Ring any bells?

@Leo Gura Yeah, we disagree on epistemological grounds. One day I wanna discuss those with you. Are you interested, or would you prefer not to? Not in this post, but later. Are you open to having your epistemological views challenged in general?

@Leo Gura What about all your thought Leo? You have like 300 videos containing thought. Why doesn't the charge of overthinking apply to you too? I'm curious. I wrote a couple of lines. You have published volumes of thought! Am I wrong? Are you asking us not to believe you? That sounds totally weird and odd to me. Thanks for responding though. And I admire your voluminous thought too. Were you hopelessly lost when you created your videos? Let's not have a double-standard here please. A single-standard is good enough for the two of us. You see -- consistency is a beast! Am I right? It's the oldest and most profound tool for refutation. You gotta be consistent with your own standard. If I am overthinking, then so are you, massively. Would you accept that Leo? Have you been hopelessly lost in thought yourself? Few people seem to want to address my points on their merits! I'm a bit surprised by that, I must say. I feel like the crazy uncle who feels sane.

Emerald. Just found out she has a YouTube channel "The Diamond Net". I'm gonna watch all her videos too! Wise and deep. My kinda guru.

So now rational debate is demonizing! Oy vey Truth! Do you really believe that? Have we gone back to Medieval Times here? I've watched all of Leo's videos, some many, many times. I'm still awaiting a rational response, a legit response, from you! I'm a good guy, I promise. I took the time to lay-out my points very carefully, clearly, and succinctly above, as you and others can read for yourselves. Everything is layed-out in the open on my end, I'm not hiding any balls. There's zero evidence of malevolent intent on my end. There's zero evidence of dogmatic claims or hand-waiving on my end. No demonizing, as you have insinuated, might I add without any foundation at all. That's 3 allegations you've made against me without providing a single reason to support them! Thanks Truth! I am still awaiting a good faith response from somebody on here. Hopefully I will get one! Nobody wants to engage in real argumentation because that's where we start to risk having to change our cherished beliefs. It's fear of having our golden assumptions unsettled, is it not? I lost that fear as a Philosophy major many years ago. Fear of arguing is the breeding-ground of dogma. Instead of following evidence to our conclusions, we settle what we want to believe first, and then try to shore-that-up the best we can with cardboard and chicken-wire. The problem is, you better hope nobody comes along and challenges your precious conclusions, or you may be left up a creek without a paddle. That's scary, I understand! But it's the breeding-ground of dogma too. And -- ironically -- Leo has spent plenty of time castigating religion over the same kind of dogmatic attitude! Am I wrong? Isn't what's good for the goose good for the gander here? Why the double-standard? I'm curious. Please enlighten me.

@electroBeam If there is no judger, then what are you doing in response to my question? Is judgment that mysterious? The mechanics of logic are different from the mechanics of the universe! Says who? You? Wow, that's a judgment there, is it not. See the irony? For a man who doesn't undestand that he judges, that sure is a doozy, is it not! Where's your evidence for that lofty conclusion? I have more evidence that I judge than you have of that claim, I kid you not! Judging is observed mentally, it doesn't come thru any empirical portal. What's so confusing about that? Please enlighten me. Calling my claim "silly" doesn't strengthen your argument at all. It's name-calling. But at least you provided *some* reasons for your conclusions, and I respect that. And what are the mechanics of logic, may I ask? I have a degree in Philosophy and I am entirely baffled by that claim. You seem to judge that proposition to be reasonable to accept pretty confidently, do you not? Do you even accept that you are making that judgment, or are you still confused about what the word judgment means? Let's get real ok?

@Truth You gave no reasons for your conclusions Truth! In other words, your conclusions lack any foundation. I expected more from you. Anybody can say -- is not, is too! That's not an argument. You gotta give reasons for your conclusions. Am I wrong? Otherwise you're dealing dogmatically here. We don't want to be stuck in Medieval Times in our discourse, at least I don't. Maybe others do, in fact, I'm beginning to scratch my head and wonder!

@Leo Gura Zen-stick slap? What am I, an ornery child Leo? One who writes really well for his age, perhaps haha. I beg your pardon Leo! That's not an argument nor is it persuasive. That's ok. You seem to have no problem advancing arguments when they serve your lofty claims and conclusions. Sounds like something that a religious person would say when their cherished beliefs are challenged. It's in the book! Go read the book! See, right there, it says in the book! God created the Earth 4000 years ago, see, the book! Well sir, we have evidence that the Earth is billions of years old. Zen-stick slap! Ok, I guess that's like the Chan master's punch in the face, I get it. Oy vey, the irony! Ok Leo, maybe I should take your word for it then. The master has spoken, I stand corrected now! Zen-stick slap? Gimme a break! How arrogant and dogmatic a response from you! I thought you were supposed to be "Mr. Openminded"! I would have expected such a response from a religious fanatic, not the one Leo Gura. Go read yer bible sonny! Well, I've done that daddy, and . . . Well, then GO read it again! Yes sir, because you says so, I'z will. Guud! I hope you welcome diverse views on this forum Leo besides your own. We don't all swallow-down your epistemology like tablets from Moses. I quite disagree with your views on epistemology in fact, if you care to ever have them challenged. Maybe you don't! If that's the case, I'll deal with other issues on here. After all, this is YOUR forum, and I respect that.

@Emerald Cool! I'm gonna check out your content on your channel. I'm so excited! I've watched every single one of Leo's videos, many multiple times now. You and Leo are going to ensure I never get any work done lol! I love this stuff! And I'm learning so much. Can't wait.

@Natasha Can you explain a little more about body-mind? Sounds interesting!

@Prabhaker Doesn't it make sense to draw a distinction between the individual ego and the social ego? Seems like you are referring to the social ego. My current understanding is that the social ego is societal in nature, and everything else is the individual ego. I realize these distinctions may be more or less problematic (or more or less useful depending on which lens you are looking thru for which purpose). I'm sort of a newbie with all this stuff, but not really too. Please correct my thinking if you see it differently.

@Epiphany_Inspired Good point. My idolizing only extends to their ideas not to their lives due to the effect that their ideas had on me. Of their lives, with the exception of Wittgenstein, I know little about.

Not reading responses, writing responses.

Let's say someone put a gun to your head and said you have to label yourself as a type (or combo of types) or die, what would you say? Remember, no loosey-goosey: you are gambling with your life. And I assume anyone who talks about enlightenment as a serious topic of daily discourse falls into the category of Buddhists. Don't nitpick that category please. Think of it as a wide net. Gimme some labels! Let's get down to some brass tacks here. I wanna nail you folks down. And if it's a combo of schools, say that. I'd rather have an answer than no answer. Remember -- No weaseling out! Weasels die. No hedge-words. And no lying just to save your skin either. Be honest. Let's say the gunman has you hooked up to a lie detector machine. Describe your influences and/or types please. I think y'all get what I'm looking for. And if you can't do types or schools, do teachers. Something's better than nothing. You can give me a list of teachers, no? I wanna learn about you and your differences.

@Nahm I'm not sure. I can't believe Leo's concept of enlightenment until I experience it for myself though. But I have had an ego-death experience where I lost the concept of myself as a thing. And I do practice being in nothingness and watching my input portals (thoughts and senses). But I have not experienced the crack that Leo talks about where you lose your sense of self entirely. And I'd be interested in hearing from anybody on here who has actually achieved Leo's sense of enlightenment fully.

My monkey-mind is very negative. Does the monkey get more cheerful as you do personal development and kick-up more positive default thoughts than negative default thoughts? Does the ratio ever favor the positive thoughts with some of you more advanced folks? I wanna trade my negative monkey in for a more positive one! I think my whole world would change.

@egoeimai Well, do it then. I'm curious. I wanna see what people's blocks are to compare them with my own. I've got some big ones, as I've plainly shown.

@Epiphany_Inspired Maybe this is what causes people to become celebrities or "successful"! Positive monkey-mind spirals. Just a half-baked thought.

@Nahm I'm definitely not a fan of nonduality. I don't accept duality either or the idea that one or the other has to be true (this is an example of a false choice fallacy). But I have had an ego-death experience in the sense that I no longer cling to a notion and feeling of myself as a thing, and I do practice being in nothingness, meditation, and watching/monitoring my thoughts. I do not believe all is one. And I don't think Leo's concept of enlightenment is possible. You can't lose your self entirely. That's a fiction. Maybe 85%, but not entirely. And I would never believe that or espouse that unless I experienced it directly and firsthand myself first. Otherwise it's a pipe-dream at worst and hypothesis at best. And I don't mistake hypotheses for truths. Until I experience the crack for myself, as Leo has referred to it as, I will continue to believe that Leo's concept of enlightenment is a fiction. Nobody else's testimony is really persuasive to me because I can't really climb into their mind and verify it for myself. But I still keep an open mind and welcome testimony, naturally. I never stop listening. To believe it, I must first see it for myself firsthand, especially with something as radical as Leo's concept of enlightenment.

@Nahm Would you say you have achieved Leo's concept of enlightenment? Have you experienced the crack that Leo talks about in his discourses on enlightenment?

@egoeimai You can do it! You can do it!