Forestluv

First, it’s not my “opinion”, it is established scientific concepts with a consensus in the genetics community. I didn’t say you turned it into a confrontation of personalities. You turned it into a confrontation of ideas. Ideas you don’t understand. And you were not interested in learning about your misconception. I spent over an hour trying to explain it to you. It’s actually quite simple, yet you became highly defensive of pre-conceived beliefs and refused to learn. You learned nothing. You are still repetitively repeating the same things in the other forum. Do you want to learn or be right? If you want to learn, you will need some humility and open mindedness.

I’d say flow states are quasi glimpses into nonduality.,Much closer than standard dualistic mindsets. Yet flow states are a type of autopilot. Other nondual states, especially on psychedelics, have a much higher level of awareness.,It can be intense and seem fascinating, whole or scary sometimes.

You weren’t quoting a professor. You were mainly quoting a chiropractor with surface level understanding of genetics. And as I’ve said many times, I agreed with the key points, yet your main problem was extrapolating that inappropriately. Yet it’s like once you make a statement, you are unable to update it for some reason. You are defending beliefs simply to defend beliefs to be right. That is a huge barrier to learning. You are literally refusing to learn. You would rather argue than learn.

No they were not. It appears like this to you because you don’t understand what they and ai are saying. You have set this up as a confrontation of beliefs. This is one of your misconceptions I tried to help you understand this. Trust me, after 25 years of study, this these concepts are incredibly basic. I could easily explain it to you in minutes. I tried for over an hour. You are not open minded and curious. You turned it into a confrontation and war of beliefs. We are not opponents. It’s not me vs you. We are in the same team. I don’t want to argue and win, I wanted to help you learn about genetics - yet I can’t because you are stuck in irrational ideas that I disagree with other geneticists.

@Andreas I can see how it can look like that. Yet it’s not just some mysterious “out there” state of consciousness. On another thread you showed interest in genetics. I’ve spent 25 years studying, researching and teaching genetics at a University. I could have cleared up a lot of your misconceptions. You could have elevated your knowledge and understanding greatly. Yet took a defensive and turned it into a “you vs. me” dynamic and tried to talk me down without having taken a high school genetics course and you think you have good understanding after watching a partially accurate YT video and misinterpreting quotes in tertiary news sources. I could have taught you the stuff you are into - objective scientific genetics. Yet you were closed-minded and dismissive. It’s not about woo woo ideas on actualized. You have a closed mind that is rigid and not curious. I’ve taught science to over 1,000 students and I’m telling you that you aren't teachable - in anything. Spirituality, genetics - whatever. You seem to have a lot of intellectual potential, yet have some blocks to get past.

That is indeed a bar that you will need to cross. I know how hard it can be. I spent 20+ years and my career within the objectivist paradigm you are contracted within. As difficult as it is, it can be done. I would say the two most important components are open-mindedness and curiosity. The effort is well worth it - I’m telling you this as someone who made the same arguments as you for over 20 adult years. You can’t see that you are contracted within a paradigm. Expansion beyond that objectivist paradigm is more liberating and mind-blowing than you can imagine. You believe in other minds you see as great. I did the same with scientists like Sam Harris. Yet in doing so, you limit and squander your true potential. For you have the potential to expand beyond those limited minds. Yet you will need to take responsibility. You’ve got to want it, be open and curious. You have no idea how much your mind can expand. It’s not about me or Leo or some mathematician. It’s about you. How far do you want yo expand? How high do you want to go? What levels of genius do you want to reach? Those are questions you need to answer. If you want to reach your potential - open-mindedness, curiosity and observation. And so far you have shown very little. I spent a lot of time trying to explain genetics to you and in the end, you defended your beliefs and showed no openness and curiosity to learn and expand. Similarly, people have tried to show you post-logical concepts and you show the same behavior. You just aren’t teachable. This is not a mind that is open to learn and grow. If you would like to read about such a mind, read up on Leonardo Da Vinci. A book on him was one of my turning points. Da Vinci is a great example of a mind in which logic and science was within a much broader awareness and mastery. Science and logic was within a more expansive holistic genius. Yet you will need to be the one to take responsibility to expand beyond your comfort zone and grounding. At this time, it appears you are extremely entrenched within a contracted mindset and highly motivated to defend that mindset. It’s as if your ego’s existence depends in it. It took me 20 adult years to crack through it. I hope you can do so earlier in life because what lies beyond is magnificent. Beyond what you can imagine. As well, at 17 years old you prefrontal cortex is still developing for several more years. Your brain will develop higher capacities for nonlinear and abstract thinking.

Sounds like the self trying to maintain control of the narrative. . . “If I surrender then I could do horrible things and never apologize!! Well we can’t have that!! I better stay in charge here” Ime, it doesn’t work like that. There is a natural flow of life that appears.

♥️ ?

@Giulio Bevilacqua Thoughts ate wonderful to observe and work through attachment and identification. There is no better way than with thoughts. One thing I find helpful is to mediate by my bird feeders. I can observe that thought impulses are like bird chirp impulses. Yet there is attachment and identification to thoughts, not bird chirps. It’s fascinating to observe that dynamic. After a while, thoughts become like bird chirps. If I don’t get attached or identified, they are no problem. Then they usually simmer down. Yet stopping thoughts isn’t a goal for me, that would just make it worse. When the arise, I am given the opportunity to learn and observe attachment/identification. There is no better tool for this than thinking. Another thing I do us observe the silent gaps between thoughts. Sometimes the gaps ate small, yet they often lengthen when I put my attention on them.

I can’t imagine fully surrendering without psychedelics. I think I would need to be in a dark room solitary confinement for an extended period - some heavy suffering. For me, to get that last bit of surrender, I can have no control. There is no way to make it stop, even if I wanted to. Yet after a mind has been through it several times, it starts getting easier, since there is less egoic resistance. However, it’s much easier to fully let go. For me, sensory deprivation tanks work well.

@Leo Gura Do you think that some mind-bodies naturally resonate with psychedelics more than others? My mind-body was in full resonance from the beginning and that guy in the video is resonating with elf beings on low doses. Yet, some mind-bodies are more like “meh, that was a waste of time and effort”. It seems like most people could benefit from a few trips, yet I wonder if some people have natural traits and resonate 20x better with psychedelics.

3:09:49 , Portland, Oregon ”The development and growth from a bad trip also helps puts the difficulty of the Sunday long run into perspective” Yep. And my second Ayahuasca ceremony was as hard to complete as my toughest marathon. And they both took about the same amount of time. Yet time seem to go on 4-eeever with both.

I did not. I’ve said many times that psychedelics carry risks and one should take care. Yet in the big picture, psychedelics are much safer than alcohol. Many social studies support this. I would put the risks of psychedelics a bit lower than marathon running. I’ve run over 50 marathons and have undergone far more adverse effects than psychedelics. Plus, the health benefits of psychedelics far outweigh the relatively minor risks ime.

@Druid420 When my Gran approached death, I was simply present, supportive and loving with her. I allowed her to talk about what she wanted to. She tended to talk about her memories in life.

@Etherial Cat I go through a similar dynamic at times ♥️ ?

I didn’t find him insincere. To me he is sincerely creepy, melo-dramatic and dark. And he seems to sincerely want to steer people into a storyline. For me, his unspoken vibe over-powers the words. That’s just how my mind-body resonates with him, others may resonate differently.

To me he seems creepy, melo-dramatic and dark. And he seems to be trying to steer listeners from one storyline into another storyline. The type of thing that would give me bad dreams at night. . . Just my impressions.

?

Do you think that once the egoic noise dissolves that psychedelics can heightened one’s natural spiritual abilities? After 60 or so trips, there seemed to be a shift in my mind/body’s relationship with reality. I don’t contact beings or go omniscient - yet I often get taken to hyper empathic paranormal zones. A couple times, it’s like I have a type of magic wand.

@Vinnie Great video ? I find it interesting that he only uses low doses of psychedelics.

Yes. Having fluid conversations can be challenging.

Same thing, a trick of the ego. That is. . . "we really don't know who is right, but my method of figuring is more right than your method of figuring. . . (so therefore I am right).". . . A psychological self can be oh so sneaky. . . Notice how the ego wants to set the rules for the correct method of figuring and what counts as evidence. My mind did this for 20+ adult years and knows this dynamic well. . . This is still within an external objective universal truth dynamic. Again, I am not saying it is "wrong". What you are saying is very useful in certain situations, yet the problem occurs when the mind completely contracts itself within this dynamic.

My impression is that beliefs in an external objective reality are a source of grounding for your mind-body and there is a lot of resistance to shaking that grounding. My sense is that if I push harder the mind will try and reinforce that grounding. Notice how your mind has been reinforcing and defending your beliefs in an external objective reality. There is no curiosity or interest beyond that contraction. So I think I would do more harm than good to keep pushing and it is best that I just step aside. The last thing I want to do is push you further into a contraction. If you would like to expand awareness, observe the attachment and identification that is going on here. Notice how strong the sense of "me" and "you" is. Lastly, I am not saying that you are "wrong". This is a very important point. I am saying I think your mind is contracted within a psychological dynamic. That does not mean you are "wrong". If you perceive what I write as saying you are "wrong", it will make it harder to expand. You are not wrong here. It is not a matter of being right or wrong. It is a matter of contraction and expansion - increasing one's level of awareness.

My statement was in regards to Leo's image. You stated what Leo's image meant. I responded that I gave it a different meaning. So the two of us have given Leo's image two different meanings. I say that in a relative sense, we are both right. I can see your perspective. From your perspective, you are right - Leo's image has that meaning for you. Yet it does not have the same meaning for me. Trust me, that is not what my mind-body experienced when I saw Leo's image. I am NOT saying one of us is right and one of us is wrong. I am saying we are both right in a relative sense. How can the meaning you gave Leo's image be objectively and universally true if that is not what I am experiencing? Are you saying the meaning my mind gave to Leo's image is wrong? Your mind seems to be highly contracted into an objective universal mindset. I am trying to crack that shell so you can expand. If you don't have interest in expanding, please let me know so we don't waste each other's time.

To me it seems like he has indicated to you over and over that he doesn't want to be in a relationship, yet is open to friendship or casual sex. He may want to keep you around as a friend or for casual sex. What is your intention here? Are you open to friendship or casual sex? My impression is that you want to be in a relationship. If it were me, my response would depend on my feelings. If I still wanted to be in a relationship with the person, I probably wouldn't respond. Or I may respond out of courtesy that I am not yet ready to interact as friends and that I need more time and distance - and that I will contact you when I am ready to be friends. Yet I would avoid engaging in a fantasy that maybe we can get back together and have a relationship. He has already indicated in many ways and many times that that is not what he wants. No strategy is going to change is orientation from friends/causal sex to a committed relationship orientation. He would probably be into some casual sex, yet my impression is that is not what you want and you would get emotionally attached. Just my impressions. . .