Forestluv

Based on my experience living in both poverty-stricken and affluent communities, I would say both money and love would be helpful. They are not mutually exclusive.

I would also predict that outcome. Your description of social abuse rings true to me as well ??

@Identity Some people are good at making flimsy arguments sound sturdy. Here, let’s say that there is a correlation between race and IQ. That does not mean genetics has anything to do with it. That is an assumption. The correlation could be spurious or there could be an underlying cause. Perhaps genetics, environment or a combination of both. To show genetic causation - one would need to show an association of actual genes. For example, if a cluster of specific gene alleles are associated with low IQ AND blacks have a higher frequency of processing that gene cluster, THEN one could make a genetic-based argument of genetically/relevant racial differences. Yet no one has showed that. It’s easy to spot when others are making “rational” arguments that are actually irrational. Are they providing evidence of specific gene differences or not? If not it is just speculation. For example, imagine there is a correlation that Canadians consume less gelato than Italians. I then said it was due to genetic differences. Wouldn’t that seem irrational to you? It could also be because Italy is a much warmer climate and gelato is a big part of Italian culture. To show a genetic component, we would need to show actual genetic differences between Canadians and Italians that alter their gelato consuming behavior.

From a genetics POV: this is not a simple single gene trait like cystic fibrosis in which 25% of siblings will inherit the condition. It is a complex trait in which many genes and environment plays a role. In these situations, we expect a low association between siblings sharing the trait, since there are many variables. It is more like schizophrenia. There are about 40 genes associated with schizophrenia and many environmental inputs - yet no one gene or environment event causes schizophrenia. Multiple inputs need to synergize for the manifestation of schizophrenia - for this reason, a person with a schizophrenic sibling is only mildly more at risk - even if they lived in the exact same environment. Looking at whether two siblings both become enlightened is not very helpful in complex traits. Regarding family studies, what you would want to look at is whether identical twins tend to both become enlightened. If there was no association between identical twins and enlightenment - that would argue against a genetic component - yet the same argument cannot be made with regular siblings - that data is much weaker due to the extensive genetic differences between regular siblings

And what evidence is that? I’m not aware of any evidence that shows a significant causal relationship between intelligence-associated genes and race. Many algorithms have been developed to examine this and I am unaware of evidence of a causal link. I would be very interested in that evidence. If you are referring to a correlation between melanin producing genes and IQ, that is very different. First, corollary evidence is the weakest evidence in science. There are many spurious correlations - such as margarine consumption is highly correlated with divorce. Yet there is no evidence that margarine consumption causes divorce. Similarly, even if there was a correlation with race and intelligence, that does not provide any evidence whatsoever that there is a genetic component associated with race causing IQ differences. My understanding is that scientists have analyzed genome-wide association screens and no significant associations between particular alleles of intelligence genes and race have been found. That is the key genetic evidence. Without that, it is speculation, not evidence. It is easy to argue against that belief system since that belief system is based on speculation, not on relevant genetic data.

Haha, yes. That is a great metaphor. . . Isn’t a house of mirrors a form of illusion?

If you believe enlightenment is “seeing the ‘world’ as a complex matrix of hubs of energy that are just made up of matrixes within matrixes within matrixes” and you self-describe yourself as being able to do that, then your subjective experience will be that of being that belief of enlightenment. If that belief of enlightenment changes to being able to perform high-level calculus, you will no longer have the subjective experience of being that belief of enlightenment. I think what you describe is a high level of consciousness. I would observe if there is an underlying belief of what enlightenment is.

@sausagehead It sounds like there is still an assumption of a self in your post - based on the usage of “I”. Notice how you use the term “I” above as if it is a real thing, a real entity. Exactly what is that “I”? To deconstruct the psychological self, I would spend more time and effort observing your own psychological dynamics as they appear in the mind. As well as self inquiry. What is your “self”? Is it your thoughts? Is it memories? Feelings? The brain? The body? In this area, I’ve found it more helpful to observe and dig into what is actual, then vague abstractions and concepts.

@Identity If you want to make a genetic association, then you have to associate. . . actual genes. Genes involved in intelligence - not genes involved in melanin production. There have been no association between melanin producing genes and intelligence. In contrast, genome-wide association screens have identified over 1,000 genes associated with intelligence (“intelligence” based on classic definitions of intellect/IQ). Those are the genes of interest. So far, it does not appear that allelic frequencies of any gene clusters are significantly associated with a particular race. Until one can show that, I think there is a very very weak genetic argument. If you want to make a genetic argument, you need to base the argument on actual intelligence-associated genes - not melanin-producing genes. There is zero evidence that melanin-producing pathways have anything to do with intelligence. They don’t even occur in the brain for goodness sake.

Direct experience of not knowing is deep, yet be aware if the mind then tries to reject knowing and embrace not knowing. This can create a new duality and attachment.

This is the deepest thing you touched, imo. I would change “minute” to “moment”. “I feel like i waste every moment that I'm distracted, yet I don't know what that moment should have been occupied with.” Notice the distinction between future desires and this moment now. There is a desire to be somewhere else. To move toward that place. Yet that “place” is within a time construct. It is an ambiguous place that isn’t actual. “I should be doing something to get somewhere”. The mind will try and build a stable somewhere in the future. “Ahhh yes, this awakened being explains it - yes that is the place to go. I shall do these practices to get to that place”. . . Yet that place is not Now. All future places have something in common.: none of them are here and now. . . The mind-body once again is left scratching it’s head “I should be doing something to get somewhere”. You don’t know how each moment should be occupied because your mind is assuming there is a destination in the future you should be moving toward. Yet the destination is now. The journey is the destination. To me, your uncertainty is a good sign you are close to a realization of the nature of Now and beingness. I sense that your mind-body is strongly oriented toward moving toward a destination and trying to figure out how to get to a somewhere that doesn’t exist. That somewhere is here and nowhere. It is not to be found in the timeline. Only Now. You are on a journey in which you have already arrived - right Now. Whatever arises right Now. This is it. Observe the feelings and thoughts as they arise. Observe, learn and embody.

I see learning and unlearning as one. Construction - Deconstruction - Construction - Deconstruction of distinctions. Back and forth we go. Yin and Yang. A mind fluid with this is also quite nimble. This is a mind that cannot easily be taken hostage by an ego and thought stories. When a mind can go both forward and reverse, it is far less likely to get stuck in subtle attachment. Most people spend years trying to deconstruct a few thought stories. They don’t want to look at them and experience discomfort. Imagine being able to deconstruct a thought story in minutes, even seconds. It opens space for new construction, new learning. Yet that new learning can easily be deconstructed as well. Back to nothing if the mind so desires. That is a liberated mind - beholden to no idea, knowledge or concept.

Yes. That is an understanding of distinctions and consciousness in the context of learning. I would also add the other “direction”. We can also unlearn by deconstructing distinctions. That is also the nature of consciousness. . . Unlearning is powerful at times.

Mu

Of course, it was a combination of talent and training. What if he worked equally as hard to become a world-class soccer player? How would that have turned out? What we are saying is people have natural talents and natural non-talents. Hard work is part of reaching the pinnacle of one’s natural talents. LeBron James could have been an average nba basketball player just on amazing natural talent. To actualize that talent to its highest potential he had to work hard. Yet he was not going to become a world-class jockey regardless of how hard he worked. I don’t understand this part of the thread. . . It seems really straightforward that humans are naturally aligned to have certain abilities and not others.

Was it weak minded for Stephen Hawking to become one of the greatest physicists in history? He could have dedicated his whole life to becoming a soccer player and would have been awful at it. Noone would have ever even heard of him. How is pursuing his talents and not his disability weak-minded?

@kieranperez Recently, researchers have shown psychedelics stimulate neurite-genesis in cell culture. That would change the behavior of the nerves. Also, another group has looked at the decoupling of the DMN during a trip and it’s re-coupling after the trip is altered. Whether these alterations are “good” or “bad” likely has something to do with the person, contextualization of the trip and environment, integration etc. If someone is tripping in a jungle, gets lost and spends a week in terror trying to find their way home. . . that’s a lot different than someone tripping at home in a meditative environment and spending the next week integrating through meditation, contemplation and yoga.

Epigenetics alters the expression levels of human genes. For example, epigenetic modifications may increase the expression level of a human cortisol gene. Epigenetics won’t change the underlying DNA gene sequence. Only the expression level of genes.

@NoSelfSelf Why pursue things that the mind-body is not suited for? I could probably be able to bench press 250!lbs, yet it would take years of dedicated work, I would likely undergo multiple injuries, need to take anabolic steroids and sacrifice most of my life. I know guys that can walk into a gym with zero training and bench press 250 lbs ten times without breaking a sweat. I’m not one of those guys, I’m much better suited for other things in life.

Not so fast grasshopper. . . Once the mind goes trans-egoic, lots of space opens up for new stuff to flourish. Yes, it’s still all a dream, yet the dream takes a new turn and becomes very interesting. When a mind is no longer spending 99% of it’s time obsessing over trivial crap - there is A LOT more space. Imagine going a full day without a single thought. Do you really think that will be a “normal” day?

@DrewNows It was painful at the time, yet now it seems just like a bad movie I watched years ago. Yet there probably is some deep down residue I haven't fully cleaned out yet. What you wrote about "mattering" rings true. I often went through a cycle of uncertainty whether I mattered to her and whether she loved me. It was a weird dynamic. As you say, I did matter to her - yet in a distorted way that was very different from how I am oriented. I can see the dynamic much better now, yet at the time I was swimming in uncertainty.

This has not been my experience with narcissists. Ime narcissists are the opposite of empathy. They do not know what others are feeling. They can be extremely jaded and cynical. For example, there was a time with a narcissistic gf in which I suddenly had a realization that our relationship was about to end. It was an empathic clairvoyent sense that this time right now was the last time I see her or there might be one more time. I tried to reach out to her and asked for us to both work on this together. She was on her cell phone and kinda rolled her eyes. . . We also had a lot of magic together and intimate times and I "saw" it slipping away like sand in an hourglass. It's hard to explain - this wasn't just I feeling or thought. It was a sixth sense. All of the magic and beauty was slipping away and I reached out to connect with her. She wasn't there and the sand continued to slip through the hourglass. I was powerless. My body started to tremble and cry. This was overpowering my mind-body and it was 100% authentic. She looked up at me and went into "demon mode". She started mocking me . . . "Oh there you are with your crocodile tears. You poor baby. What a faker you are. Here you are pretending to cry like a baby and tonight you will be online trying to get laid". She said it in such a sinister way. She knew how to drive that knife deep into me. To an empath in this vulnerable position, I can't explain how manipulative and harmful this is. At times, it was so painful that I asked her to physically hit me rather than put me through this agony. I would have much preferred physical surface harm than deep soul harm. That knife goes deep. I don't think a narcissist knows what the other is feeling. I don't think she actually knew what I was feeling. I think she was so cynical and self-centered she did not know what I was feeling and actually believed I was faking it to manipulate her. That is how it works in a narcissist's world. They use emotions to manipulate others. So when they see the emotions of others, they often assume the other person is faking it to manipulate them (just as they do).

I've been looking into developing on the empathic line. My sense is that each human is on an empathic spectrum, yet that spectrum is not linear. In terms of SD, "tier1" empathic development can manifest as absorbing the energy of others - feeling what others feel. This can lead to confusion about what are my feelings and what are their feelings. In an unhealthy dynamic, the empathetic person can take responsibility for the feelings of others and detach or try to people please. A healthy manifestation would be a sense of emotional connection, feeling "vibes" and a type of soul connection. Yet, I'm starting to get the sense there is a trans-personal realm within this empathic line of development. I'm looking into how to explore this development. This is beyond setting up personal boundaries so energy vampires don't suck you dry. It comes after that is in place - up into Tier2. The vast majority of articles online I've read address "tier1" levels of establishing boundaries to protect yourself. I'm now more interested in what comes next. To develop these abilities as far as I can. The below articles gave me a sense of a transitional level. They both address the importance of boundaries as a foundation and give us glimpses into the next levels. . . https://www.psychedelicadventure.net/2016/04/being-empath.html https://www.openhandweb.org/what-spiritual-empaths-and-catalysts-might-learn-from-each-other

Regarding empath : narcissist dynamics. . . both can be manipulative and controlling - yet in very different ways. The energetics within the empath and narcissist are very different and there can be an attraction that leads to very unhealthy relationship dynamics. For example, really bad gaslighting. I read a lot about the empath : narcissist dynamics and how an empath can establish boundaries and a shield to protect themselves. What I'm finding is that when the inter-personal manipulative dynamics are removed, the empath show goes on. It seems that new healthy empathic phenomena can arise that is pretty cool. I think this is one of the keys - setting up personal boundaries. Yet ime there seems to be more going on. Once those boundaries were established, the empath show goes on. The empath is now liberated to develop their "abilities" and develop along the empathic line of development. A year ago, I thought this was "airy fairy" stuff from woo-woo Green people. Yet I'm starting to see that there is something to this - some type of higher mature level in this area. Similar to the intuitive line of development.

@DrewNows I’m still new to exploring this and I actually don’t know that much at this point.