caelanb

Hello, so I making this post to point something out. It is by no meant to be an attack on Leo, or actualized.org, but just a heads up, warning, or criticism of Leo videos from what I've seen from his science and philosophy videos. I do find a lot of Leo's points nuanced and interesting, even though many can be quite radical. But anyway, this post is mainly about the quantum physics videos Leo made to prove metaphysical ideas (however, it extends to all the other scientific philosophical videos), that are apparently based on science, however, if you would ask a expert, professor, or someone who really understands the subject matter; in this case Quantum Physics, what Leo says is not actually correct. Here is a video by a professor named David Farina who has BA in chemistry a MA in science education. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, just read the description. This video essentially debunks the claims (the ones that are in the title, and probably others too) that are now called Quantum Mysticism (considered to be pseudoscience according to physics and professional academics), which uses Quantum Physics to try to prove certain mystical world view, such as materialism (the world being physical) is not real. Which in fact, according to scientists, quantum mechanics does not at all prove that the world is not physical. The twisting of of scientific theories and the like by people who try to promote a certain world view, that is not correct is apparently pretty common according to scientists. In a different video, for example Leo uses a quote by Paul Feyarabend, a philosopher of science, who has a had a lot of criticisms about his work (etc.scientific America article). The main criticism from the latter article is I think; "Feyerabend attacked science not because he actually believed it was no more valid than astrology or religion. Quite the contrary. He attacked science because he recognized--and was horrified by--science's vast superiority to other modes of knowledge. His objections to science were moral and political rather than epistemological. He feared that science, precisely because of its enormous power, could become a totalitarian force that crushes all its rivals". There are many criticisms of Leo's scientific videos that I have seen, but these are just a few. And so, this is why, I think it is better, to ask a real professional about whether or not the scientific - philosophical claims that Leo makes about reality and the world, are based on science, are truly based on science and just a pseudo scientific. Because that can be very harmful for people watching the video, due to the fact that they could be being deluded into thinking that what is being said is what science actually says too. A great way to possibly handle this that Leo proposed in the comments of debunking science video part 1; is having a real scientist on to talk to him face to face for a part 5. This can really help to prevent any claims that are factually wrong in science from being made. Unfortunately, Leo never made a part 5, and even 4 for that matter. But would be great to have one. All in all, I very much appreciate Leo's nuanced perspectives, and am thankful that he uploaded his videos (even though it's hard for me to grasp it's claimed truthfulness). But, when the videos aren't actually based on real science, and claim to be, then it makes me annoyed. Because it makes, in my view, actualized.org less trustworthy, due to the miss information that is shared. And this applies to all of the science based videos from Leo that have connections to philosophy (which is most of them) and even just science videos. This is just my perspective, based on my understanding scientific miss information, accurate information and critical thinking. Hope I'm not missing anything. Thank you for reading.

@Preety_India I was comparing both websites to one another. Onlyfreedomatters imo is generally more towards orange, while actualized.org (according to Leo) is yellow/turquoise. The forums themselves are not comparable because Onlyfreedommatters does not have a forum. Tbh, Idk what stage this forum is at, maybe orange

Hey guys, a while ago I found this website for personal development that is very similar to Leo’s. It talks about spiral dynamics, consciousness, free will and that juice stuff. However, it seems to be more stage orange focused because it has programs on body building and making money, but still very interesting. It does not seem to be getting updated very often because the last article was written on July 16, 2021. I read an article on consciousness, and free will. It's pretty much exactly the same thing as Leo teaches, you can check it out if you’d like. I’m curious what you think about it. It's called onlyfreedommatters. Here's the link

Hello, I have recently watched Leo's how to be funny video because I wanted to know how to increase my humour (which is and always has been pretty low). In the video he provides different exercises in order to increase ones humour. I am wondering how to go about practising these things. I have just started doing the first exercise today; starting one sentence with the last word of the previous sentence. However, during the first exercise, I found myself being delayed a bit by proper grammar, not by if the sentence made sense or not. A sentence can make sense or not and have proper grammar or not. Anyway, I am unsure if I should start all of the other exercises provided right now, for example, the second exercise, this is for two reasons. 1) I am so unfunny that I don't think that I'll even be able to do the visualization exercises, my life so mundane. Thinking for a moment of my day to day life, there is nothing remotely funny that pops up in my mind that happened during the day without the input of someone else making a joke or something like that. So it feels futile to attempt the virtualisation. And 2) I've heard that it's usually not wise to start to many things at once. That being said, the first exercise is only 10 minutes of my time per day, but I have also just increased my meditation time from 15 minutes -25 minutes daily to 60 minutes daily. Any tips? Thank you.

@Nahm That's cool! How is it in comparison to the more physical stuff if you don’t mind me asking? Is the part with the therapist being manipulated by her partner's energy real, as well as the episode ‘thank the past’? ‘Thank the past’ seemed kinda bs to me because they were just talking. The energy thing is a woohoo and newagie to me as well, but after seeing what it was doing to the couple it was more convincing. I feel like the energy they speak about and experience is just the heat that the body naturally gives (or some other part of thermodynamics), but after watching the scene it kinda challenged the feeling I had (I don't think heat can make them do what they did). I’m assuming you have experienced most of what the show demonstrates with your partner. How did your partner other think of it? I think their opinion was based more on the stuff that she sells, so they may have been extrapolating it into everything she is in. According to them, her products are bs, so I’m guessing they would probably assume that the show itself is BS too. I know my friend did see a bit of it though, I don’t remember what he said, I only remember what they both told me, which was after he said he had watched it. Also, I don’t think they have had direct experience of energetic sex or the more newagie things on the show, so they likely lack direct experience. That sounds mind boggling coming from someone who was not in the show. Is the kinds of erotic blueprint quiz at the beginning legit too (energetic, sensual, sexual and so on)? Also, would the arousal and possible orgasim someone can get just from watching two people do sexual things together or reading something that is sexual count as of sexual blueprint? I don’t think I have never heard of anyone close to me saying they have tried energetic sex, nietter have I heard of it just in everyday life very often. Though, I'd probably hear about it if I watched some Youtube video from some spiritual person about cultivating energy somehow. I’m surprised Leo has not spoken about it yet, or maybe he did in his ‘How To Get Laid’ series, I have not watched the whole thing, but I am assuming Leo predominantly focuses more of the physical part of sex in his video. Do you use physical “sex” to point at energetic sex? Are you talking about just the heat that your body gives off which you can feel if you get close enough to a person's body? Isn’t that just entropy (heat, which I guess is a form of energy)?. I can feel a little bit of warmth when I put my hands close together, but it’s very small and they have to be almost touching. I don’t have a significant other to do this with, but when I get one, I guess I’ll try. ‘Hey, so would you like to have/try energetic sex?’, lol, it would be interesting to hear a response from someone after being asked that question. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘feel the exchange’, are you saying that you are just feeling the heat coming off the other person’s body? Is it as good as the sexual sex/orgasms that people ussualy have? If so, it seems hard to believe, but what do I know, I’ve never tried it. It seems very arcane. I’m unsure what you mean here. @At awe Cool! Have you tried it? Can you compare it to a more physical way of sexual stimulation or are they too different, if you don’t mind me asking?

I added one of the songs to my Spotify playlist; it had a good feel to it in my opinion, thx Leo and the DJ. I will say, that woman is very physically and sexually attractive imo.

@Nahm Perhaps I don’t love my parents as much as I should. But since it happened a long time ago, I’ve kind of let it go to a certain extent. Do you mean to hug them more? Could be. Maybe a mix of blame, frustration, impatience and annoyance, or only one or a few of them. They sound pretty accurate; negative emotions towards my parents. When it comes to actually eating casually day to day, I don’t think I experience those emotions, however, at least not that I can remember. I have found that if I eat mindfully (or at least what I think is mindful), to the point where I feel next to little stress, then my nose doesn’t get very runny, it is significantly reduced. The thing is, it takes a lot of slowing down to do so. I have also found that if I actually distract myself somehow from what I am eating, to watching something for example, it helps too. Pretty much (based on my current experience), when I am hungry and I taste food, sometimes I start to eat faster, and the nose issue comes in. So, anything that makes me slow down (either distraction or slowing down a lot) has helped, but as soon as I accelerate, the runniness comes and I have to clean out my nose. It also occurs when I brush my teeth, so it’s not exclusive to eating. Thank you for the recipe, but tbh I am not a super big fan of blending my food or drinking shakes. I prefer to eat my food without blending. A few years ago, at the beginning of my weight gain I did make shakes, but I did not enjoy them very much so I switched to no shakes. I think the Loophole shake is similar to what I used to do, I added dairy milk though. I don’t exactly remember what I put in my shakes though, but peanut butter… you can’t forget that lol. Do you have a Mediterranean based diet? There is, from what I have heard a lot of research supporting it. Fruits, veggies and a bit of steak are part of it, so you must be following it to a certain extent. I don’t snack, I just eat three meals a day. What do you mean by contingency and balls here? Maybe I am just projecting on them how much I think they care. A possibility is that I think they should show more sympathy for what I am having to deal with, but they have not properly communicated the sympathy that they feel. Or maybe, they communicated the little sympathy that they have which is not a lot. What do I apologize for? Blaming, being frustrated, annoyed and so on with them? That would be difficult to do. However, I feel like I could live with a little bit of negative emotions because they have not been bothersome, but the nose is something that has been bothersome. I’d have to think about how to apologize to them, and what it would be about, and since they have done so to me, then maybe I should do the same to them. I think to me, it’s just that the nose issue deserves more of an apology than what I have done to them. Plus, they never really asked for an apology, so they might be confused about what I am apologizing for. I mean it sounds nice, it seems difficult and very abstract though, even if I attempted to do it, I think I would probably have the negative emotions come back later. The first thing I thought about when I read rejoicing and celebrating is partying together or something like that, but I don’t think that’s what you mean, it’s more of an inner thing then an outer thing. Also, the shared being that you speak of would make almost no sense to my parents, and only little to me, I’m assuming this is referring to non-duality? Even if you still had the same nose issues after doing this, would it be better than not doing so?

@Nahm I’m not sure what you’re saying here. What is ‘one’ and ‘one’s’ referring to? I'm kinda struggling with this part. This is because if the time was not there in the first place, or it was adjusted to reduce the stress if it got too tight (it was at certain meals, but not this meal), my nose would be fine and this thread would not have been started in the first place. This is assuming that some other event would not have triggered the same response sometime in the future to happen. The biggest roadblock/challenge for me in forgiving whichever parent was there at the time, based on my interpretation of what you are saying is what I just said (‘_’) above, which is essentially the crux of the entire story, just off the top of my head. Agreed, I’m probably leaning more towards the not so perfect side because of how sh*tty I am curing my issue. A little bit of self-deprecation hopefully won’t hurt in the long run. I see. I think there are two different emotions that arise at two different times. Blame/frustration is one of them which I experience while thinking about the response that I get when I eat. The other one, which likely occurs while I am eating, is possibly the emotion that triggered the stuffiness and runniness, though I am not sure. This is because when my nose remained clear whether I was stressed or not as I ate many years ago, I experienced the same emotions that I do right now (or at least that’s what I remember), it’s just that now certain physiological or/and emotional events that I experience in my body seem to trigger the runniness and stuffiness in my nose. Honestly, I’m not sure how I can experimentally go though that which you described. Do I just think about how I feel towards my parents relative to the event and then somehow go identify, accept, and let go of the emotion letting the next more positive emotion on an emotional scale arise and do the same thing? If so, considering how weakly I feel the emotion of blame when I think about whatever triggers it. And how little time I have spent sitting on my own feeling into my emotions, this would be very difficult to do, but who knows I’m just speculating. I guess dealing with blame (or whatever emotion arises) will help me forgive my parents for what happened, but then, would I do the same thing for whatever emotion (if any) arises when my nose actually begins to get stuffy and runny? I feel like the latter would be more physiological and/or neurological than emotional, so there may not be any emotion that comes up, and if there is, it may not actually be triggering the issue.

@EmptyVase The problem is that I don’t usually stay in that state, I just make a joke or two and then that’s it. When you are in flow for comedy and humour, I’m assuming that the funny ‘lens’ is turned on and you easily see the funny in everything, even when most people wouldn't? I have changed the exercise that I do for humour to just trying to imagine myself being funny in different situations during the day, while interacting with other people. And it is very difficult; my mind struggles to find something that is funny, and when I do, it’s more like a hit or miss. Would you recommend telling yourself such a thing as ‘I see funniness’ many times for 5 minutes straight in order to help ‘prepare’ the lens of humour? You can push the latter too far though (5 minutes would very likely reach that point), because after a while, a certain psychological phenomenon that I have experienced in the past usually happens (I don’t remember what it is called though); the meaning of what you are saying is lost. So, saying a sentence to try to prime yourself seems pointless if you do it for too long. Do you think priming is helpful, or should you just try to look for funniness in day to day activities without repeating anything to yourself beforehand? I looked at the emotional scale and there were quite a lot of emotions, though I think I have seem wheels with much more emotions on them. Tbh, I don’t think I can differentiate between all the different emotions that are on the scale just by feeling, or at least I have not been able to do so yet. There are also some emotions that I may not have felt before but that is probably unlikely, I just have probably not been able to identify them. How do I practise this? Wouldn’t I have to find a way to trigger each emotion and then be able to identify whichever one comes up? Or is it more that I have this wheel at my disposal most of the time so I can try to identify an emotion that I feel whenever it comes up? The latter seems like it would work better, but idk. I’m assuming the goal of the emotional work that can be done using that scale is to get to a point where you can feel into, identify, and let go of whatever emotion arises in any situation you are in? And that would be a part of a journey towards emotional mastery? Why are negative emotions usually the harder ones to deal with? Usually, the higher you get on a scale measuring most things, the more difficult it becomes to manage whatever arises. For the emotions and this scale though, most people would find it more difficult to deal with the emotions that are lower on the scale than the ones higher. Anyway that’s maybe just how the scale is set up, I’m not sure. Is the emotion at the top of the scale, is it referring to the absolute love that Leo talks about a lot, or is it referring to the relative love? If it’s the absolute love, then I would assume (according to Leo) that you would cease to be a human being anymore, because the absoluteness would transcend you above your finite human form, but the relative love would likely just make you feel strong positive emotions for whatever finite thing you love. At least this is how I understand it to be.

@JuliusCaesar I’m curious who Leo does not use omnipotence, omniscience or power when he speaks about god, he just sticks with infinite consciousness/intelligence. Nor does he really speak about being able to affect reality through power. DO you possibly know why? To be honest by that point I feel like it would be just a coincidence that whatever you are hoping for to happen has happened. If someone actually did a command 100,000 times, most people (including me) wouldn’t take that as evidence that you are affecting reality, it would be considered just a fluke. My uncle used to do lucid dreaming, as well as my friend (for him he said it was pretty easy) I think. I have read a bit about lucid dreaming and what I think you are getting at is trying to ‘get yourself’ to lucid dream by being more conscious about your intentions about wanting to do so. Is this correct? Other ways that I have to help one do so are to write your dreams in a dream journal, and do reality checks (though I think I’ve mentioned them before in this thread). Would these also work? When you say some effect, do you mean a little bit of an increase in your ability to notice that you are dreaming when you are dreaming, raising your likelihood of lucid dreaming? I guess you already commented on this just above. I’m just a little confused how the godhead is not the lowest level of brain waves, or even no brain waves at all. This is because the brain waves themselves have a biological bases, and if the godhead doesn’t (have a biological basis) and is present at a low level of waves it seems as though you're saying that the godhead has a biological basis, but this is contradictory to what I have heard which is that the godhead is absolutely nothing, it has no biological basis because it invented biology, it exists and does not exist everywhere at all times. Maybe I’m misunderstanding what you’re saying, I just have not heard Leo talk about the relationship between brain waves, and thus the relationship between the brain waves and the godhead, he has only said that the godhead transcends everything. Maybe you’re saying that you can only access its power (the ability/intelligence that the godhead possesses) at a lower level of brain waves, but I would think that it would have to be at the lowest level of waves because it is the baseline of all of reality. I am speaking with the proper (or somewhat proper) terms as if I know wtf I am talking, but it’s only in a conceptual sense, but I hope you understand.

@Nahm @TheSomeBody @Mada_ I got a neti pot for Christmas, so I’m going to give it a try and see if it helps. I will admit that I have been slightly procrastinating to use it since I got it, because I fear that it will not work. And if it does not, then it would be unfortunate. But if it does, then yay:D

I hope I didn't miss any of the other responses from previous pages because I answer them in parts; this thread is very long. Also, sorry for my grammar mistakes. @JuliusCaesar What Leo is teaching seems to be very close to pantheism (in my opinion). I have not heard Leo speak about power, only consciousness, and that it is infinite. I can sort of grasp what you are talking about when you say dimension, but even that is a little bit abstract, all I am really familiar with is 3 dimensions and time (if you count that as another one). I see what you’re saying makes sense to me from a logical linear perspective. Consciousness is the substance of that which is thought into reality by infinite power (omnipotence). This is pretty much pantheism as I understand it. And if it is true, Pantheism is likely the most correct philosophy, or maybe that is an oversimplification and requires nuance, I don’t know. True, but I think Leo has made another video about 5 MEO MALT, which does the same thing. Makes sense, pretty much the same thing as conventional drugs I guess. Though some drugs don’t impact certain people at all, which is quite an interesting thing; Frank Yang says that psychedelics have no effect on him at all. Maybe he is spiritually gifted (term I’ve heard from Leo). I think it’s very strange that one of the most powerful psychoactive substances would not affect certain people at all, while just straight meditation sends them to a super high state of consciousness. I have never heard of 25I NBOMe. You ordered one pound of LSD, isn’t that a lot? I have also never heard of GC/MS, I’m assuming that it is used to test psychedelics. How do the experiences that each psychedelic offers differ? Was your intention to have an ego death, or was it something else? Is ‘creator of the universe’ that you experienced the same thing as the delusions of grandeur that many psychiatrists speak about in the use of psychedelics in medicine? How the f*ck do you experience a delusional ego-death plus infinite love? That sounds like a rather confusing thing; hallucinating that you have died. How do you remember such a thing if you had no ‘ego’ that could put it into memory? Most scientists, academics and even laymen (like me to a certain extent) would think what you had was a delusional experience of some sort. But if they were in the field of studying psychedelics then they would probably be more open to this interpretation. However, I haven't really heard psychedelic therapists use the words infinite consciousness and love very often when describing what they have heard people say. They mainly speak about psychedelics in a scientific way; ‘this class of psychedelics affects this receptor and people usually get this type of subjective experience from it, and it seems to work pretty well with helping people in this way, and so on’. I have not heard any psychedelic professionals speak about literally being God when being on a psychedelic, they mostly say it was an expanded consciousness that was experienced. Isn’t it f*cking terrifying to experience an ego-death? I would assume that it is. In my life, I could not really imagine it could really be. It may be scary or relatively peaceful. I have heard that it also depends on how much you try to grasp things that could impact the experience. I am curious if it feels any different to experience actual death when leaving the world vs experiencing an ego-death on psychedelics, or during meditation (such as maha-samadhi). People get sad when talking about death (and say things like 'that's horrible’ especially if the individual is close to them) and if it is the same thing as a psychedelic experience of ego-death, only you don’t come back. So if you experience some ego-death and come back, would that not be experiencing the same thing as a person who experiences actual death, you just come back and are able to maybe learn something from it, idk. Or maybe these are all very different experiences. To be honest this is a bit airy-fairy and outlandish to me, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. Not saying that it is not true, it’s just hard to believe which I am sure you understand. I’ve heard many scientists and academics say anecdotal evidence is a bad source of evidence (which is true for many things), especially when it comes to a person's experience on psychedelics and lucid dreaming I would assume, but I’ll put that aside. But essentially, you are saying you were able to tell the future from your lucid dreams? Taking religion into the conversation a little bit, this experience that you had which made you realize you were God, is the same or similar as those that all of the major religions profits and the like experienced as well? If so, I am confused how all religions are so radically different from one another if this experience feels pretty similar across most of the world. However, I have heard that a lot of the experience is influenced by culture too, so that is a very important variable to consider as well. If this God that you describe is true and it connects all religions together in a way, it would great to understand how this is so, in order to be able to see all the different religions in a way that is not so separating, because one religions says one thing, another says another and it gets really confusing. This would lead me to a level of understanding could benefit me and others if religions enters a conversations that I so happen to be in. And, then eventually bringing in atheism and theism (and all the other isms and agnostics) into the understanding. However, I would assume it's going to take a lot more work that I can foresee, so I don't know how far I'll get with it. I’m lost here, there are too many paradoxes lol. The unconscious and the conscious part is what?

Update, my friend and his girlfriend told me that Gwyneth Paltrow (just realized that I spelled her name wrong in the previous post) is full of sh*t and that what she sells doesn't really work. So, I don't know if that would apply to the show, but I am assuming yes to a certain extent because, you never know what kind of bullsh*t could have been put into it. It's very deceptive though because the show seemed very legit. Thanks for the early (I guess) warning though.

@EmptyVase For me, it’s mostly that the joke can be expressed a little bit too aggressively or if someone is physically embarrassed (a person getting literally beat up for fun) in some way that turns it off. This even applies to comedians that I enjoy watching and find funny, but they usually just use words (in a slightly aggressive form at times) or physical contact (such as if they are in a movie). I guess I could question my repulsion to it, but it just feels kinda wrong to me for comedy to be made from the embarrassment or abuse of someone or many people. I think I know what you’re talking about, or at least I’ve seen it before. James Corden (and his cast from the Late Late Night Show) seems to be really good at this. He has a general outline of what he’s going to talk about, however he goes off script (or at least I think he does) and has some playful banter with the rest of the cast on his show. I really enjoy watching it, my brother thinks it’s fake (set up), but if it is, it’s pretty well done, because it comes off very smooth. I've shown it to my dad and he enjoys it too, and it seems pretty natural and free flow to me, but you may have different opinions. For me, when it comes to being funny, I don’t really feel any free flow. It is mostly me capitalizing on someone else's words and using sarcasm to make it funny. For example, if something looks terrible or not good, I turn it around and say that it looks beautiful. It is pretty easy to do and it does not require very much effort. But, I guess it doesn't require very much free flow either. Even if you are in some free flow, you’d have to have some structure (grammar) in order to make it make sense. Saying random words isn’t funny most of the time (‘donkey master laugh crying for help’), however I feel like that would be the highest level of free flow you can have. I guess the exercise that I have been doing hasn't been achieving its goals; I say stuff in a relatively good free flow (saying stuff that makes sense or doesn’t make sense, with proper grammar) but none of it is funny, it’s just random sh*t. I hope that makes sense. Uhuh, makes sense, I have not watched Mr.Bean very much but I know what you are talking about. Making jokes to be funny is probably a more acceptable or common way of being funny because you don’t see very many people like Mr.Bean around in society, but you do see many people (such as comedians or people that are humorous) making jokes to be funny. Yeah, I try to watch comedy that is funny to me, I don’t enjoy watching comedy that is not funny to me. However, sometimes it can be enjoyable to watch a funny show with someone who thinks it’s funny as well. I notice sometimes that if a person tries too hard (in my opinion) to be funny, for example by incorporating a voice that feels a bit too forced in order to try to be funny, it is usually a turn off for me. Great example of this is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgJcyqswcFM&ab_channel=TheLateLateShowwithJamesCorden. However it is not always black and white, if I enjoy the jokes, then it can be pretty good. True, it can go from what you said, imagining an apple, to full on hallucinations. When you say just flows, are you referring to entropy (the disorder in the universe)? If not, I’m not sure what this flow is, perhaps it is the fact that sh*t happens from moment to moment (because of causal reactions of the past). I’m not sure how you can access that flow and use to be to funny if it doesn’t really have any order to it because it’s just random sh*t that happens. I have noticed that in myself, feeling good makes me feel like being more funny, therefore making me more inclined to deploy the technique of sarcasm for example in making jokes. I’m not exactly sure if I understand my emotions properly, I most likely can work on my emotions and will see some improvements. Some emotions at certain times seem to be harder to feel; if I am meditating and I hear noise in the background that one of my family members makes, then I can sense a bit of frustration/anger but not very intensely. Either the emotions are not very strong, or I am suppressing it somehow. But other times, they come out very easily; watching a movie and there is a happy scene in the movie/show, and I can get emotional to the point where I am almost about to water my eyes. @flyingguitarist I guess that could work yeah, but that may be a challenge if you have never been drunk before.

@Carl-Richard Lol, I’m a little late, you commented on the video like 6 months before I knew about it. I took the video (without watching it) as an oh sh*t, Leo is wrong about how Quantum Mechanics applies to reality because this man Dave is to a certain degree an academic and must know more about how Quantum mechanics actually works and the correct way in which it can be applied to reality. And you definitely saw it in a 180 degree perspective as I did. I feel like this shows my ignorance with these deep topics because I can get swayed by different views so easily. Interesting to see the massive polarity between you and Dave in that comment, my mind interprets that as being that one of you two is massively wrong. Thanks for showing the comment. I’m curious, what language is your browser set to? It doesn't look familiar. I was thinking of bluntly mentioning it to him. Saying something like ‘there is something called construct awareness, and it is …’. This could help or not, he may close down even more, but wtf to I know. However, if there are any comments under the video that bring up issues with his video, then he’ll probably deny things as being anti-science or some pseudoscience (at least from what I’ve seen). Maybe, but still there are probably a lot of relatively psychologically healthy people that watch Leo and that may become depress or suicidal due to what he says in some of his videos (however, you can probably make the argument that they weren’t psychologically healthy). Or just be turned off by his content from the negative things he says about society and people (having problems and such). Interesting, maybe my psychologist has heard of it. I’d assume that most people with an education in developmental psychology have heard of it too then. Is the MHC model itself at any level? So then, there are some similarities between the two. How does one study the levels that are like 1-3? It seems like it would be very difficult to study them, kinda like trying to study and make a model of the first 3 stages of Ego development. You can’t really survey a child on his ego development because of how young they are. Is it helpful to put yourself on a level on the MHC model? And if so, how does one accurately do so? As they say, the dose makes the poison. Yeah, I'd agree with that, fruit, or anything high in antioxidants is usually a better choice than alcohol. However, do you think that there are any benefits of drinking alcohol that outweigh the negative effects of drinking it? According to NCBI.gov, phytochemicals are generally thought to be safe for consumption. What do you mean by ‘poisoned by common vernacular’? Is this model modelling all forms of human cognitive communication (from Leo’s teaching, to between the members of a gang in a dangerous city)? Or is that not correct? I see, so then a lower level of cognitive understanding trying to grapple with a higher level of understanding is like me trying to understand some highly complex topic in chemistry (something that I have been faced with), my mind does not connect the dots, therefore it does not compute and seems like a bunch of random stuff being said (while calling the higher level annoying and possibly saying wtf is the point of doing this, lol)? Though I do understand that it is important for certain things. @8Ball I don’t think that is 100% accurate because no one can fit perfectly in one stage (what I have heard), unless you are talking about a specific facet of spiral development someone is at (e.g. moral). So, then he has some good videos? Should I watch the flat Earth one?

@Nahm Inspect the nose symptoms that I experience? What is meant by 'inspect'? Let thinking of others go with respect to the situation? Not for my life in general, right? But the thinking that ‘someone else put in a time limit that I purposely (and stupidly) did not manage well, leading me into a situation that I feel symptoms of daily’? If that’s what you mean, it’s challenging to wrap my head around that, because it is, kinda, what happened. Are there any good ways of doing so? Okay, I thought you were bringing it in. When I think about eating I get a little bit annoyed because I know that whenever I eat I get at least a small amount of nose related issues. It varies in intensity depending upon how quickly I eat and the stress levels that I am experiencing while I do eat. I also get a little frustrated, because my parents seem to care much less about the symptoms I experience than I do (they just say ‘I’m sorry, but what do you want me to do about it?’). I do understand their position to a certain extent, because they and I can no longer do anything about it (change what happened). Well, if I chose a different way of thinking about the situation then it may not be accurate to what really happened. That’s what I would suspect, because the way I think about it now comes from how I saw/see it. If I look at it in a different perspective then I may be painting a pretty picture even when the real story may not be so pretty. Would there be a way that I could look at in a better way that actually fits the event and to remember it in a positive way, and thus leading me to reduce my symptoms? How do I do so and actually believe it ( have my story right now of what happened that I believe quite strongly because I have held it for many years)? So then, I stop thinking about what happened and start feeling into the emotions that I experience when I am having nose issues? I do also seem to experience my sinuses working slightly differently than they did before the event occurred (could be placebo though). It’s not radical, but it feels a little different, however that is probably irrelevant.

@Elevated What is this integral sexually thing? I’ve never heard of it. Is it the integration of sexuality and spirituality? If so, it sounds like a weird thing, I'm not sure what that would be focused on, and what its goals are, kinda pseudoscience, but what do I know. It was interesting, at least that was my impression. But the fact that you bring up some dangers that you have heard from other people makes me question a little bit the therapists that they bring in a bit. It did seem legit though. One episode was a little bit too out there for me, so I can see how it would be considered pseudoscience. However, I am curious whether the entire thing was or wasn’t, it certainly seemed like most of the methods used worked for the volunteers that were brought in. @Preety_India This is the description from Netflix, ‘Courageous couples journey toward more pleasurable sex and deeper intimacy with help from Gwyneth Paltrow and a team of experts in this reality series.’ So yes, it is a reality tv show. However, I think it is focused on helping people, because you see people's successes during and after the show. It’s not meant to create drama and the like, or at least that’s not what it seems to be focused on. I’m not exactly sure why Gweneth Paltrow is in the show to be honest, she just talks with the volunteers and experts. I guess the times when she speaks with the volunteers and experts are insightful, but they seem to be just asides.

@EmptyVase I can’t not take something like that seriously because it’s too inappropriate for me (or at least it's extremely difficult). I don’t mind jokes, teasing, and roasted people, but when it gets physical, I can’t not take that seriously, it’s just f*cked up to me, just not really funny. I watched most of it, but not all of it because of what I just said, but I decided to stop because I was not enjoying it. Like when he smashed the desk, I was thinking ‘that’s a little harsh, why is he doing that’. That’s all. I mean it was not terrible, but just not my type of comedy, I guess, but someday I may find it funny. Are you talking about the free flow that talk show hosts and comedians have? That’s what it seems like to me you are referring to. Okay, lol. How do I tune into that playful mood? Do I just try to make jokes about everything? Which I am alright at I guess, but not great. This sh*it feels very difficult (especially when it’s hard to tune into humour), but maybe it’s only because I imagine myself being world class at humour. I don’t think I have a connection to any creative flow of existence (I'm not exactly sure what that means), when I am not stressed (if that's what you mean). You do have to have some structure to make something funny in any context though. By imagination, do you mean the ability to think of different ways to make someone or many people laugh?

@JuliusCaesar I see. And by being omnipotent do you mean transcending your own finite consciousness into infinite consciousness? What I hear Leo says to do. What happens to your finite state if you leave it for a while? Honestly looking at the comments, Dave seems like a very logical guy, and is willing to dismiss a lot of things that the scientific community regards as nonsense. In this matter I’m more on Dave’s side. With that being said, believing in this stuff (which I know is not helping) makes you seem like a crazy person, like you said. And because I don’t have any non-dual experiences, it’s essentially a belief at this point. For all that I know, all the non-dual mysticism stuff could be BS, and Dave may be correct, certainly seems more plausible considering everything that science is able to explain about the world. However, there is still much that is hard to explain. Carl-Richard did leave a comment about 7 months ago. Way before I was aware of this video. And I posted it mainly because I was like, ‘hey guys, I just found a debunking video of Quantum mechanics and mysticism’, so I thought all of Leo’s videos were BS’. From what I can see from the comment, Dave didn't agree at all, I think you’d have to write a paragraph explaining all of this to Dave and his followers. However, one thing I am confused about is that, if I am more than Dave about these ideas, it doesn’t really make sense, if they are true that is. Because I am definitely not as educated as Dave is, and thus am more likely based on common sense to fall into non-dual mysticism delusions about quantum mechanics. So, I am above and below Dave in a way (more open minded, but then less intelligent). @8Ball@Carl-Richard Generally what I understand about Dave based on what has been said and SD, is that Dave and most of the scientific community, assumes that anything that has a bit of mysticism (yellow and turquoise, possibly coral if that’s a stage too) in it must be stage blue nonsensical beliefs and dogmas. Which makes it convenient for them to ignore all the not so easy to explain stuff, I guess. But if the nature of mysticism and non-duality is abstract, then even doing experiments into it would conclude that it is not or not real. And thus is kinda pointless in a way. I would assume it is. But on the other hand, Leo makes go sound like love and bliss so I don't know what he is actually trying to say. This honestly sounds irresponsible to me (coming from a man who professes to be responsible with psychedelics), because of the experiences he has described in various psychedelic trips. They sound pretty excessive. And if people are to take that advice as a prescription, they’d likely f*ck themselves up (which is a big problem if independent bodies, they are not liable for hurting or damaging others). Have you done this yourself? If so, how is it? I may try some in the future, but a very small amount, I personally have no experience with psychedelics (or any drug at all), so I’m not sure how it’ll go. I have tried lucid dreaming in the past. I did reality checks during the day, and wrote every once in a while about my dreams in a dream journal, but it did not work though. However, I will say that my reality checks did get hijacked by my OCD a bit so that is probably the reason it did not work for me, and possibly wasn’t consistent enough about it, though I don’t remember exactly. Anyhow, I’m wondering how the phrase “I remember my dreams' would help me. I don’t think my brain knows it is dreaming when it is dreaming (or even what dreaming is), so asking it to remember something without that it knows of no inherent meaning doesn’t seem helpful. However, I could be wrong. Do lucid dreaming and taking 5 meo dmt have the same effect? I feel like they do two very different things. I may have repeated a few things, but I hope it makes sense to you. @Verdesbird Which school of ideas are you talking about? There are probably many schools and universities that actually teach things that are very similar to Leo. So, clearing your mind of those would not be helpful in any way (unless you're just believing them, which I am to a certain extent). Thank you.

@Nahm I’m not sure what you mean here. Are you talking about some non-duality? I’m not sure how that can be applied to my psychology in this situation. So then what do you recommend me do? Feel into every emotion I experience while I am eating or whenever I am having the runny nose symptoms? And this would be understanding it? I can see how that works, I just have just not had enough compassion is what you’re saying? And you can only understand something through experiencing it? And so in a hypothetical situation, if I was able to understand where they were coming from through feeling into my emotions then all of my problems will likely go away? I would want to do the same thing as they did, so get the kid to get somehow, but I would probably regret the situation that put the kid through a situation that led him/her to have a chronically annoying symptom (if it happened). I think the latter because I am experiencing it on a daily basis and it’s causing a bit of suffering, and because of this I would probably regret it if I was them. He/she wants to lose weight, be skinny, and chase related unhealthy body image goals, the common stuff with eating disorders; What I think it was for me. However, it did slightly change a bit from when it first came about (it was more exercise related), however, it’s the general reason. Side note, my parents also thought that Leo was the one who I influenced eating issues from (because he is a pretty thin man and I started talking to them about him approximately the same time (within a year of I think) that my eating issues arose). I’m assuming emotional and physically. Well, to be honest with you, I don’t really have any long term visions. Just taking courses in a field of interest but not anything like a life purpose which Leo talks about. I am thinking of asking for the Life Purpose course for my birthday or Christmas, but I doubt I’m gonna get it. But yeah, I have no long term vision, and I am aware that I could be shooting myself in the foot (nothing truly grounding me I guess), but I don’t see many other options that won’t be f*cking terribly difficult to pursue (or at least none at the moment I don't). It doesn’t feel good to me because it causes me physical symptoms, is that what you mean? The aversion that you’re talking about is me saying 'something happened a long time ago’ (if so, this must be a strong one, because I keep on talking about it) as well as me not having felt into those emotions I feel whenever I am experiencing the symptom? @Johnny Brake I tried this once for some other purpose, but it did not work. I would say I have a relatively plant based diet, with the exception of meat (red meat or fish) once a week, dairy daily and eggs every couple of days. Though, I never had this problem when I was eating way more meat and dairy at other times in the past.

@Farnaby Do you mean not being in fight or flight mode when you say the nervous system is relaxed? Or do you mean being in some sort of meditative state? I do feel pretty calm when I socialize with people (not in fight or flight), however, sometimes I get kind of ‘excited’ when my emotions carry me away (unusually happened later on during interaction. I think you are probably right, I don’t give myself enough credit for my humour, because I do say some funny things every once in a while, though I'd like to increase it I guess. But, when I say tips/advice I guess I mean tricks that I can use to help turn on my funny filter and make it easier to come in and out of it, such as staying calm as you said. @EmptyVase Tbh that video is a little f*cked up. I have not been doing that as an exercise. I've been doing the sentence stringing one and I don't notice any improvements (I don't make myself laugh more than I did when I began), though I have only been at it for less than on month. But isn’t it true to a certain extent? That one is honestly a little bit confusing. You said not to use it as a joke then (as part of the joke)? So I just don't use it. @Bjorn_Wyrd What do you mean by non-derivative? Being funny is also a very subjective thing in my opinion, so it’s hard to judge humour by honest standards, those standards wouldn’t be agreed on by everyone. I agree that how you say something is as, if not more important than what you say. I’m not sure what you mean by working with rage and loneliness. Are you saying to make jokes about being the latter? Which may negatively impact your confidence and begin to give you self destructive feedback for creating humour out of rage and loneliness about yourself? I could only imagine how long it takes for a comedian to have an entire hour of content ready to be performed. That's Cool. What entities are you talking about? I see, that’s a bit dark. Comedy is your area of study? How much have you gotten away with when being funny? What do you mean by awareness, knowing your audience and being aware of how people are taking your jokes? @universe And if I think for 1 hour and come up with something mediocre at best? Is this still good? Seems almost like in this situation the cost is larger than the reward. But, I guess I may surprise myself also.

@Carl-Richard I couldn't find your comment, even with the 'find on page' function. I don’t think Dave has a phd, he’s only got a Bachelors and possible a masters but I'm not sure. But essentially, what you are saying as I understand it is that based on his logic one needs a phd in mysticism and quantum physics in order to be able to truly make educated judgments about both and also make connections between both? Looking at all the comments, I can kind of tell which ones are Dave fans and which aren’t. I was also thinking you would comment on Dave’s construct-unawareness rather than him not knowing much about mysticism, which would point out based on what you have said could be called his blind spots. Kind off topic, but what did you think about near the end of the video when he showed comments (off and on the forum) of people getting extremely depressed and nearly suicidal? I myself know that Leo does not advise taking your own life, however, I do remember in one or two of the videos he literally says, “you should just kill yourself”, which can be taken seriously by many people. Leo’s condescending attitude (at times arrogant and negative sounding) can be harmful and Dave shows this in the video. Dave may have shown them to give support for his claim that actualized.org is a cult run by Leo, however, the comments shown still deserve merit in my opinion. Leo’s attitude in my experience and opinion can turn people off of his work, such as my parents. For example my dad said (something along the lines of) ‘he sounds to me like an unhappy person who is frustrated at life due to a bad childhood or something and is giving off his frustration through his video’, note that my parents have only seen a few videos, but they disagree with most of the things they heard from him. My parents are not fundamentalist religious people btw, however they grew up going to church a bit (which they themselves weren’t big fans of) but nothing extreme. This side note was longer than the main response, lol. Interesting, I think I meant is this model well studied and understood in the scientific literature to the point where it can be taught in schools? Because if it is so useful, there would be great benefit to making it more mainstream (however it may already be to a certain point, which I am not aware of). I have issues seeing how MHC can apply to SD because there are only 8 stages in SD, and 15 stages or so in MHC, but if it is applied, would it help one understand how cognitive development evolved through the stages? Makes that one's needs to be more developed in order to make connections between different fields. Which number level did you place Dave at? I’m not sure what level sub-meta systematic cognition; low construct context awareness is. Yeah, I would agree with that, those are obvious even with nearly zero nutritional education. There is one study I remember hearing about 2 weeks ago that showed that consuming a glass of red wine per day is actually healthier for you than not drinking any. This is due to the antioxidants in red wine. There are probably many more that have come to the same conclusion but I have not found them yet. And also, they don’t put chemicals in alcohol beverages from my knowledge, unless you get some sketchy one which most people don’t drink, but if there are, could you provide an example? But I will not deny that alcohol itself is toxic to the body, however, a little bit of it, such as the quantity that is in red wine, is not bad for you. I see, that makes sense. I’m pretty sure many scientists have been able to make connections between quantum physics and mysticism at level 15-16, or at least it seems very likely and I'd hope so. I’m not sure what you mean by this.

@Nahm You do understand what I am saying though, that a situation happened a while time ago which seemed to have changed my physiological reactions to stress, right? All in all, what I understand is that you advice me to change the way I see how I look at the situation that happened? In a way that is more empathetic to the perspective that my parents had, of love, of them setting a limit to the time I had to eat, which may have been the only way that they had to make sure I ate/get me to eat? And if I see that situation from a perspective such as that one that may relieve my symptoms? Based on my summary, what is meant by change my perspective? I'm not sure if that means to just think of a different one (which I have thought about the previous perspective due to it being mentioned, though I don't notice a difference in symptoms) or something else?

Thank you very much for the advice! @BlackMaze I don’t quite have the time to read books at the current time (plus I have a lot of other book recommendations from a lot of people about many different subjects, that’s my problem though), but I do watch funny comedy talk shows like Jimmy Fallon, Kimmel and James Corden. I enjoy those a lot, but I’m not great at thinking in those comedic frameworks (however I think their scripted to a certain extent), so I cannot replicate them in my own creative ways very well. I understand that in order to be funny in the moment you have to not be serious, but I have to be serious about trying to increase humour because then I won’t actually focus on improving it kinda like what@Nahm is saying I guess. @AlphaAbundance One thing that I am realizing though when doing sentence stringing exercises is that I am decent at creating random sentences on my own, because no one is listening to me or anything (not that they're funny though). But, if I do the same thing with other people around me, and hope that something funny will come out of my mouth because of the exercises, the thing will happen, I’ll either say something that makes no sense and it is not funny, or something that is offensive, and on the rare occasion something funny. @EmptyVase I have never heard of Eric Andre. Uhuh, this is Leo's visualization exercise right? I mean context dependent humour. They are able to say something funny in response to what has happened or a question that has been asked, which reflects their spontaneity in my opinion. This one doesn’t really resonate with me as much, feels a little bit too blunt if you know what I mean, but I guess if I worked on it I could find a way to make it work for me. @FlyingLotus Joke writing is a little too much for me at this time, I don’t think I wanna make my practise so serious as to start trying to write jokes. However, I may be losing out on some potential growth, so that may change. But thank you for the general outline! Those videos are pretty good though, lol. @flowboy I think I want to be funny because I am curious to see if it will make my life better, because I wouldn’t consider myself a very funny person. And also, it’s kind of a small thing I can do to help self-actualize, that isn’t too abstract and metaphysical. There could be other reasons, but that's what comes to mind at the moment. @Thought Art Exactly what I suck at doing:D @universe Even for the questions “Where are you from" "What do you do for work", it would take me a while to think of something funny that I can use as a response to those questions. This being the case, spontaneity is a weakness for me, and therefore I am pretty bad at thinking of something funny or sarcastic that will make people laugh if I am put on the spot or chose to put myself on the spot to be humorous. There was an exercise from a CoC article I read which used these same questions, which asked you to answer them in a way that made people more interested in speaking with you, in order to help make a good first impression. I did that exercise and honestly I got to nothing. The same applies to being humour with responses to questions like this. Holy sh*t, it take a while to respond to everything, LOL.

@JuliusCaesar I’m not quite sure how you would go about isolating all the possible variables when doing psychic stuff. This is because magical abilities and the like are not as tangible as physically, therefore it makes it more challenging to design a hard nosed objective approach with controls and placebos. I’m not sure what you mean in the last part, willpower/personal occult abilities, and faith. I see. Makes sense, I guess the problem with what most people do in order to prove or disprove this is that they do not even try to have a direct experience of the 3rd person account that is described partly because you said it is very difficult do it, and also because they may be too close-mind and see it as airy-fairy. When you logically understand, do you mean be conscious of (as Leo says a lot) or just able to create a mental framework about what is being spoken about? Because from my understanding you can logically understand something, however that does not mean you are conscious of it. For example, I can explain what is god according to Leo to some person, because it logically makes sense to me. However, I have not had any awakening as one might say or consciousness of this being the case, I’m just telling someone else what I have heard many times and understanding from Leo. And also, from my understanding, it is impossible to grasp god with language or any mental framework, as Leo (and many other mystics and spiritual teachers) have said many times, which seems contradictory to what you said about grasping anything logically. Yes, I understand that they are not just balls bouncing around in a box, I just oversimplified it a lot. It’s so strange how stuff seems so logical and linear on a macro-scale and is actually quite fuzzy on a quantum scale. However, I used to think that was how atoms worked back in HS/before I heard about quantum physics. How so? PS: I don’t respond to all of the responses a lot of the time because it takes me a long time to read, comprehend and then to write up a response, so I split my responses into multiple days.