Forestluv

Discrimination based on race = racism No discrimination based on race = no racism. That is a literal definition of racism. It’s quit a stretch to say that trying to prevent racism is authoritarian. That is like saying police officers that try to prevent murder are authoritarian. Green isn’t as bad as blue/orange fears. Green is actually quite lovely. ♥️

The counter weight to free rider is that when people have their basic needs met they tend to want to grow and develop themselves as per Maslow’s hierarchy. They want to get education, do personal development, set goals, start projects etc. Of course not all people, yet many people. So the productivity decrease due to free rider is offset by the productivity increase due to greater opportunity, empowerment, accessibility, higher potential.

Those authoritarian hippies are so ruthless. . .

Peru was my favorite.

Beautiful.

I think we need to be careful conflating absolute and relative. In an absolute sense, all perspectives are equal - there is a singularity. Yet we live in a relative world. The danger of conflating absolute with relative is that it spawns "Both Sides-ism" and false equivalencies. The underlying energy is often desire to maintain status quo and resistance to evolution. A mature holistic view is highly integrative: it will consider and integrate multiple perspectives from intellectual, empathic, spiritual modes. It will integrate both individual and collective. Importantly, such integrative views will not value every input equally. There are aspects of relativity. This gets into what was discussed earlier with centrism and balance. A high conscious balanced view is not the centrist view. A dramatic example would be with slavery. In a dualistic framework we could create pro-slavery and anti-slavery categories. From an absolute perspective, slavery is neither right nor wrong - right/wrong is a relative construct. Yet in a relative context, slavery is clearly wrong. The problem with conflating absolute and relative is that absolute is used in a relative nature to cancel out the opposing view. This is a false equivalency. One may say "We are only kidding ourselves if we don't see it from the slaveholders side as well as the slave side. We need to consider both sides". There is value in considering both sides and there are nuggets of truth in all perspectives, yet an integrated holistic view will not weigh all perspectives equally. A centrist view during that time would be the mid-point. A centrist might say "Slaves should be allowed to have two days of freedom per week, in which they don't work and can leave the plantation". . . A more modern example is with same-sex marriage. Fifteen years ago, the centrist position was that homosexuals should be allowed domestic partnerships, yet not marriage. However, this is not the conscious balanced position - which would integrate multiple perspectives from religion, politics, social science, physical science, LGBTQ etc. The conscious balanced position would be in favor of same-sex marriage. The conscious balanced position is not restricted to Both-sidesism and false equivalencies motivated through personal identity, deflection and desire to maintain status quo. The balanced position is much more integrative meta than that. In our current context, the conscious balanced position is not that the scale is even, everyone has their own equal perspective and Trump just expresses himself differently. There are a lot of selective filters needed to maintain that position.

100% physical vs. 100% nonphysical is a hyper-duality. Saying that reality is *partially* physical is a big breakthrough. Going from 100% to 99% is a much bigger jump than going from 99% to 1%. 5-meo is both physical and nonphysical. We can create a pure physical reality with a physical brain, physical neurons and physical neurotransmitters. Nothing wrong with that. It's not a war between two sides. . . Yet staying within a physical vs. nonphysical construct, we will be limited to an all physical construct. . . For example, if one creates a duality of beautiful or ugly and believes that everything is ugly, it is a limiting contraction. They will be missing the beauty. And they will be missing an infinite number of inter-connections between beauty and ugliness.

The grave-ity is such a downer. . .

You are making a distinction between real and unreal - which is fine. That distinction can have practical value. It's easy to conceptualize the inter-relatedness between real and unreal in the comfort of one's own living room. As you say, it's a lot more difficult to conceptualize when one has fallen off a cliff - then things get real fast. Yet intensifying the story through subjective experiences related to personal survival does not increase the truth of the story. What *is* regarding real / unreal *is* regardless of interpretive filters. . . I had a nightmare in which I fell of a cliff and it was very real. . . It just so happens one of my greatest fears is falling off a cliff. . . For me, lucid dreaming is one of the best ways to explore real and unreal. There are many facets and integrations of lucidity and wakefulness. Do you think in the next 200 years, we could create virtual reality in which people cannot distinguish between real and unreal?

I've been thinking about the psychology of deflection lately. It is a common defense mechanism to protect an underlying vulnerability and a way to control a narrative. We all do it to some extent. For example, a person may feel uncomfortable looking at their own selfish intentions and may deflect to avoid the issue. This dynamic can cause all sorts of problems in interpersonal relationships. For example, a guy might arrive 20min. late to dinner and his gf gets upset and tells him "You were very inconsiderate. You showed up 20min. late and didn't even text me". He might defensively respond "What about the time you forgot my birthday? That was inconsiderate". It's really hard to resolve underlying issues with this type of deflection. All politicians do it to some extent. For example, during a debate a candidate may be asked about racial comments he made ten years ago. He may avoid the issue by talking about M4A or say "What about my opponent? He said worse racist things". It doesn't take a high level of consciousness to see this dynamic. I would say KellyAnne Conway has a high skill for deflection. She uses key words within the question as grounding to deflect upon, so it sounds like she is sorta answering the question, yet not really. In the below video, an expert debater analyzes KellyAnne's tactic, why it is effective and her backup deflection tactics when her primary tactic fails.

I think Bill Clinton and Warren are very articulate speakers. Warren has worked as a teacher most of her life and I think she has strong communication skills. Warren is not my overall #1, yet I would rank her the best at being able to clearly explain complex, nuanced topics to a general audience. She is outstanding in this area - she has natural skills and extensive experience explaining complexities through her teaching. I saw Bill Clinton speak in a small venue around 2003 and he was outstanding. It wasn't a campaign event. He was speaking about his work in Africa to help with tropical diseases and HIV. He was very knowledgeable and he integrated several dynamics, such as political, social, medical and philosophical issues. Hilary Clinton had too many personal filters for me and I didn't resonate with her. Biden is losing his cognitive abilities. Bernie is much more stable and coherent than Trump. In general, I think he does a good job at communicating his ideas, such as M4A. For example, I thought he spoke clearly during his FoxNews townhall. @Mason Riggle I would be curious about how Trump would be diagnosed after a thorough psychological evaluation by trained professionals. Yet on the other hand, we already know something is amiss in Trump's mind. It's like when someone's car breaks down it's pretty obvious. We don't need a car mechanic to tell us our car has broken down and isn't working. @Scholar Ooohhh!! The egoic psychology of advanced criminal minds and interrogators is so fascinating. Thank you for that juicy link. I can't watch it at work now, yet I will later tonight. . . One skill the best interrogators and investigators have is nonverbal communication. There is part of our brain that is aware of, and interprets, nonverbal cues such as facial expressions, voice tone, voice cadence and body language. There can be hundreds of very subtle nonverbal cues to integrate. People can get trained to due this - for example to detect when someone is trustworthy or untrustworthy. Yet the best investigators also have a natural skill at this, couple with intuition. Yet on the flip side, the stakes are high for criminals and they also have developed skills of masking nonverbal cues to cloak their dishonesty and nefarious intentions from detection. It's a really interesting dynamic. . .

There is already sufficient evidence. It is against the law for a president to solicit a foreign country to investigate a political opponent in an election. Trump himself has admitted committing this crime. He then again committed the crime in public view. We already have the direct evidence. An impeachment trial can reveal the mechanisms have how extensive the crime was. As well, a trial can help educate the portion of the public that cannot yet see clearly. . . It is as if a person admitted he committed the crime of murder and tried to hide it and then committed a second murder in plain view for everyone to see. Yet his friends and family cannot admit that he committed a crime or that murder isn't really a crime. A trial can help such people see clearly. For example, there may be lawyers that testify that murder is indeed a crime. There may be witnesses of the murder. Yet this is secondary evidence since the person has already admitted committing the crime and did it again in plain view. It is against the law for a president to solicit a foreign leader to investigate a political opponent in an election. Trump is shown in the phone call committing this crime. Trump admitted to committing this crime. It doesn't get more direct than this. The part about Biden is the crime. All the other stuff is a distraction. It's like a man getting into an argument and murdering his wife, then saying "the evening was not just about the murder. He prepared his wife dinner and took out the trash. And they also talked about scheduling their son's summer soccer camp before he murdered her. And the neighbors didn't like this guy and wanted him to move out of the neighborhood. Oh, and what about the other guy across town that murdered his whole family?". . . All of this is distraction from the direct evidence of the crime and that the person admitted committing the crime.

It’s impersonal. I’m pointing to something prior to self constructs. At a personal level, I'm impressed with their abilities and development at such a young age. It’s great to see young people exploring consciousness like they are. Yet, it can all get deconstructed to Nothing and re-constructed to Everything.

@AleksM How did you know he was speaking English?

@AleksM I wasn’t referring to skill development or ability.

@Leo Gura Hmmm, so that means if I observe my own psychological dynamics then subtle forms of Trumpism will be revealed in my own mind. That’s a tough pill to swallow. It’s much more comfortable to observe Trump. Relative to Trump devilry, I’m an angel ?

?

@Focus Shift I’m not familiar with contemporary Orange personal development speakers. The only reason I’m familiar with JP is because he appears a lot on the forum. I’d imagine some of Leo’s videos from a few years ago would be good. If I were to create a healthy Orange coach to help blue people transition to Orange - I’d just leave out the Green stuff and the coach would focus on personal growth, goal setting, how to achieve personal goals, self motivation etc. - yet in a healthy way, without harming others.

@Focus Shift Nice recontextualization for an Orange/Green.There is a different resonance when combined with imagery. There is an extra boost of inspiration and emotion with the imagery.

@Emerald I see a lot of guys that want to use JP as a pull up to orange - yet that comes at the price of a green poison pill. Do you know of any good male orange role models without the green poison? Tony Robbins comes to mind, yet he is getting old and I’m not sure if younger men would resonate with him.

I like that perspective. I hadn’t thought of it like that. I’m not so interested in how enlightened sages would experience/interpret psychedelic bells and whistles such as different realms, spirit guides, fractals, aliens etc. I’d want them to see/experience deconstruction to Nothing and re-construction to Everything. Then I’d ask “Wudda ya think?”

Trump: “As I have stated strongly before, and just to reiterate, if Turkey does anything that I, in my great and unmatched wisdom, consider to be off limits, I will totally destroy and obliterate the Economy of Turkey (I’ve done before!).” Trump is seriously mentally ill. If someone’s Uncle was this delusional, the family would come together and do an intervention to get him into a treatment center. If this was a pilot or doctor, he would lose his job. If a bus driver was this delusional, I’d get off at the next bus stop.

@Peo In terms of SD baseline consciousness, I would say green is where things generally start clicking with psychedelics. I was at upper orange / lower green when I first tripped. Yet I went into it humble and open. I really wanted to expand and I was teachable. My first trip took me into Turquoise and obliterated my orange anchors. Transcendence of Orange in one shot. . . Yet I also had years of personal development and meditation before that first trip. There might not be the same impact on other people. There are a lot of variables at play.

Tumors are in conflict with each other all the time. Big tumors kill little tumors so they can get more resources and continue growing. We wouldn’t call the big tumors doctors because they are killing little tumors. And humans as cancer is just an analogy. No analogy is perfect, they all collapse under enough scrutiny

They look like high conscious youths exploring different conscious states and realms. It is often referred to as “5D”. It’s great to see young people explore consciousness and expand. Yet they still have development along a timeline and they haven’t yet directly experienced Absolute Infinity / Mu. For example, they are nowhere near Leo’s level - yet have a good chance if they keep going deeper and broader.