Forestluv

Yet why would you use an orange-level critical thinking tool to address that? There are much more effective tools at higher post-intellectual conscious levels.

Ruh roh. . . I better get on a 5D frequency and head over to the Lizard Lounge to clear this mess up. Thanks for the heads up, Joe. I totally got fooled on this one. I haven’t reached Coral yet.

Wait a minute. . . if Cetus is stage Blue then who the heck am I communicating with over an inter-dimensional Turquoise channel?

Yea, I realize I went on too long. I trimmed it down.

@Paul92 I've found that relaxing the mind-body is really helpful. Spending time in nature, yoga, relaxation exercises, listening to heart-centered nonduality speakers etc. Also, I've found direct experience is key. Too much analysis and conceptualization just made things worse for me. The practices and direct experience were helpful.

@Paul92 I've found that relaxing the mind-body is really helpful. Spending time in nature, yoga, meditation, hot baths, relaxation exercises, listening to heart-centered nonduality speakers etc. Also, I've found direct experience is key. Too much analysis and conceptualization just made things worse for me. The practices and direct experience were helpful.

@kev014 I've been in this space before. It can be hard to contextualize and integrate these types of trips. For me, sometimes the theme of a trip and insights are crystal clear - for example being shown the Oneness of opposites. There is just a "getting it". Other times, it's a weird energy dynamic without clarity. Here, I just try to be open. I've found if there was some energetic something, a frequency, being, guide, lesson whatever - it would generally show up again later. Other times it's just a wacky experience that ends up in a glass jar in the cupboard and doesn't really get integrated.

Ime, I've found that certain types of substances help with certain tasks. Tasks that involve details, analysis, left-brain, "getting shit done" stuff I'd rather not do. . . Here, nothing beats a low dose of adderall. Tasks that involve big picture thinking, integration, left-right brain synthesis, creativity and human connection. Here, nothing beats a low dose of LSD Tasks that involve solo work that involves contemplation, introspection and immersion/awareness in the moment in which insights arise. Here, nothing beats Modafinil. I rotate the three, based on the activities of my day,

I sprinkle a little bit of freebase ontop of a little herb like parsley. Vape at 428 degrees. You may get a similar effect tho. Blissful, without deep awakening.

It's a relative term and I don't associate any relative morality to the term. If I was pressed to answer I would say "separation".

@MsNobody I've found microdosing and meditation to go well together. In the past I would have had no problem breaking the "rule" since I knew I would be stable on a microdose. I figured the rule was set up because they organizers don't want anyone getting into a bad place, freaking out, being weird and disruptive etc. I knew I wouldn't be like that so I didn't have a problem with it. Yet after doing an Ayahuasca retreat, my view has changed somewhat on this. At the ceremonies, the shared energy within the collective consciousness was really important. One person's energetics could alter the collective and adversely affect another. The only rules were that everyone had to drink at least some Ayahuasca and no individual could leave the grounds. This would throw off the collective conscious and adversely affect individual conscious. At first, this seemed hokey to me and I was like "whatever", no big deal. Yet after the ceremonies, I "got it" at a deeper level because I had direct experience with my own individual conscious, the group conscious and other individual consciousnesses in the group. During one ceremony I went into an insanity zone that was horrific. I brought a benzo in case this happened. I reached for the benzo and there was an extremely strong message "Don't do it". So I didn't do it. After the ceremony I told one of the an experienced person this and he looked at me shocked that I almost did that. Not because of my own personal welfare, yet because of the impact it could have on the collective conscious energetic dynamics. I never believed in this type of thing until I directly experienced it. For me, the issue is the collective conscious dynamics and how I may affect it. I have mini-dosed in a deprivation tank. That is against the rules and I really don't care because I knew I would be ok and there was no collective conscious to be impacted. Similarly, I have mini-dosed in social situations such as a concert - against the rules. Yet, I didn't think there was a sensitive collective consciousness in a concert or movie theatre that would be thrown such that altered energetic affect others. For me, a vippassana retreat would be a gray area because it is a highly sensitive collective conscious of awareness and energetics. A microdose might not have much of an effect, yet LSD is also a potent energetic amplifier. I would be more concerned about the effect the LSD has on the collective conscious and other people's individual conscious more than the effect the microdose would have on my own. Who knows, perhaps the microdose would contribute positively to the collective conscious.

I understand. My example assumes the existence of a person. To me, it looks like you have become aware of the illusion. After spending one's whole life in "real", it can be very unsettling to realize "illusion". Yet I think you are going from one extreme to another. I consider this "halfway" there. In terms of steps: 1. All is real 2. All is illusion 3. Illusion is Real and Real is Illusion. For me, getting stuck in "step 2" was really uncomfortable. Once I realized the illusion for real, there was no turning back. I could never unsee it. I went into a tailspin. The problem with getting stuck in step 2 for me is creating a new story. This is why I like the color analogy because I had no attachment. 1. Colors are real (I spent most of my life realizing this) 2. Colors are illusion (I learned this in neuroscience - colors don't exist - the mind creates them in the brain). 3. Colors are both illusion and real I did not have a problem with step 2 because I did not create a story about how awful this was. I didn't start thinking about how life no longer has meaning because colors aren't real. I didn't start wondering how I can live anymore if colors aren't real. I didn't think about how I can never love colors anymore. I didn't look at painting and sunset with depression because I now knew that the colors were illusions. Therefore, I could easily go to step 3. I can look at a colorful painting and know that it is colorless. I know it is just wavelengths of colorless light. The colors are an illusion. Yet I also realize the colors are real. I'm looking around my room right now at all the colors. They are so obviously real. There is nothing more real than the colors I am looking at. How can I say otherwise? It is the most obvious thing ever. It's a no-brainer. So the colors are both illusion and real. Illusion = Real. Now, I don't even think about it. The colors are beautiful and I can fully immerse myself in the colors. Knowing the colors are both illusion and real ADDS depth to my life. I can relate to people in a different way. I relate to animals a different way. We all have unique experiences with colors and it's so beautiful. It is MORE beautiful than when I thought colors were just real. From my POV, the suffering is arising not because of the awareness of illusion. Rather, it is due to attachment to ideas about what illusion and reality now means. Everything you have said so far is extra meaning you are ADDING. Just like if you started thinking how terrible it is that colors are just an illusion. I know how hard it is to get through. This was one of the hardest things for me to work through and at times I didn't want to live anymore. Yet when I got through it, much deeper appreciations, loves, connections arose. There is MUCH more once "step 3" is reached. Indescribable magnificence. We are both One AND Separate. Direct experience with that was so profound it brought me to tears. It is indescribably beautiful. You and Me are both you and me AND One. Love and sorrow are separate and united. Notice how you are dividing love and sorrow in your mind. They are separate AND One. The experience of both love and sorrow as one is among the deepest most beautiful experiences of my life. The illusion aspect is only a big deal due to attachment to the other side - real. One is only a big deal due to attachment to the other side - separate. Sorrow is only a big deal due to attachment to the other side - love. It is the attachment. A coin is both heads and tails. If the mind insists that the coin is EITHER heads OR tails it will not be able to see the coin is BOTH heads AND tails. Right now, you seem to be arguing for one side. You seem to keep saying "Well, yea but look at Heads. Ya, but there is still Heads. But how can it be Tails if there is Heads?". That mindset will not allow you to see both heads and tails. Concepts can be helpful to an extent, yet I found it helpful at times to shut off the thinking noise in my head and get out in nature. Ime the deeper realizations are not intellectual or conceptual and I need to relax that part of my mind for the deeper awareness to arise.

@Ellenier I'm not sure about conversions. You say you have freebase? Have you tried vaping it? It only takes a tiny amount (about 2mg), it's easy to manage and can go pretty deep.

@Paul92 I think you are "halfway" there. For me, this space was really uncomfortable and it seems to be super common for people. There is a realization, there is absence of meaning. Then mind often interprets that has there is no meaning. Yet, that is just adding meaning. Saying there is no meaning is a story - it is assigning meaning. A lot of suffering can arise from this. For me, this was a halfway point. The second half is to drop the story "there is no meaning. everything is an illusion" etc. It's really hard to do, yet very liberating. For me, life began to turn magnificent, magical. One thing that helped me at this stage. . . Consider that colors are an illusion. Nothing has color. Your mind converts wavelength of light and just makes up color. A dog creates only a few colors in its mind. A mantis shrimp creates hundreds of colors human minds can't. I love colors. I love colorful art. I love walking through the forest in autumn when the leaves are changing. It's so beautiful. Do I think "these colors are just an imagination in my mind. they don't really exist". Of course not. When I am in an art gallery and my friend is admiring the beautiful integration of colors do I turn to her and say "Sorry to break the news to you, but those colors don't exist. They are just an illusion your mind makes up". Of course not. We enjoy the beautiful colorful artwork together. For me, letting my mind take a break was really helpful. To turn off the mind for a while and give it a break. During this stage I spent a lot of time in nature. At first I sat on a bench in sadness. Then I started noticing the beauty around me. The colors. The sounds. The trees, birds, streams. I was like a kid again climbing trees and observing dragonflies in awe. It's really beautiful. When I sat on the bench analyzing everything and going deep into awful storyland, I missed all this beauty.

@Paul92 Sending you some positive energy now. I’ve appreciated your thoughts and hope your day goes well.

You had many opportunities to do so. I know how hard it can be to look at. I've been on the other end of this. You don't seem open or willing to look at this and I respect that and will stop pressing you on it. Yet I want to be clear: in the future if you want to criticize me that is totally fine. Yet say your criticism to me directly. Doing so indirectly through passive aggressiveness is an unhealthy mode of communication imo. If you would like discuss this further via PM, I would be happy to do so.

Joe. I went through your post line by line and clearly explained the game that you were playing. You don't seem open to looking at this and I understand. I have been in this situation myself. You are asking me to stop pressing and I respect that.

Joe that is totally fine. Yet, indirectly calling someone bad at their life-long career, biased and unable to see these deficiencies because it threatens their ego and that they want to protect the Egos of others are big accusations. Personally I don't care. I think it is the trying to cover it up and shift responsibility for ones passive aggressiveness that can cause the greater harm. I've seen this so many times. It causes harm to others Joe. It is not a decent way to treat other human beings. If you want to criticize me or anyone else, then just do it directly. I can take it. Just cut the games.

If you want to call me a bad scientist that makes overly hasty judgements, is biased and that I cannot see that due to my own Ego and wanting to protect other Egos, that is totally fine. Just say that. I don't care. Don't play these manipulate passive aggressive games. This is not about moderation. This is about honesty and being upfront. Passive aggressiveness is really unhealthy and causes harm. I personally don't care about what you think about me. I'm calling you out on this. If you want to say it. Then say it to me straight up.

You know what you were doing. I am standing up to you. I doubt many people have. If you want to call me a bad scientist that makes overly hasty judgements, is biased and that I cannot see that due to my own Ego and wanting to protect other Egos, that is totally fine. Just say that. I don't care. Don't play these manipulate passive aggressive games. Have the courage to say it directly to me. Passive aggressiveness is for cowards.

@Joseph Maynor How big of a sample do you need to make such a judgment in your scientific work as a professor? What was your intention of this question? Are you genuinely asking how much of a sample I need to make in my scientific work as a science professor? Were you really curious and open-minded about this? Or did you already have a pre-conceived belief that I made an overly-hasty judgement? My guess is you look carefully at things thoroughly before coming to over-hasty, dismissive conclusions. Why wouldn't the same attitude apply here? Is this an honest "guess"? If this was an honest guess, you would not make the next statement. The second statement is dependent on the first. You're inclined to want to dismiss -- that's a clear and obvious bias. Here you actually state I am inclined to want to dismiss. The original "question" and "guess" was not a question or guess. The underlying assumption and agenda is that you believe I wanted to dismiss. You are now indirectly saying that I want to dismiss and that I am biased. Just say that Joe. Don't play manipulative games. If you think I was making overly-hasty judgements based on biases - just be honest and upfront and say so. I was a philosophy major and I try to correct for my biases all the time and be fair to opinions even when they're hostile to my Ego or other Egos that I have a vested interest in protecting. What does this have to do with anything? If you think I am being biased and unable to see that because it is hostile to my Ego or other Egos that I want to protect - then say that. Don't play these passive-aggressive games. They are very manipulative. I was just a little taken aback by your initial response, but maybe I have an over-idealic view of how good scientists behave in my own head. Again, you stated earlier that I was a scientists and how good science is performed. You are indirectly saying I am a bad scientist. I couldn't care less about that. But if you want to say that, say it to me directly. Don't play manipulative passive-aggressive games Joe. I know how this game is played and you get ZERO, Joe. Sorry, you cannot bully me with passive aggressive tactics. If you want to accuse me of making overly-hasty judgements, say that I am biased and cannot see this because of my Ego and Egos I want to protect, then tell me that directly. Have the courage to stand up to me face to face and say it to me directly. Don't cower behind passive aggressive tactics. And when I call you out on it, don't wiggle around and sarcastically call me an angel and that I am over-complicating things.

It seems you are not open to looking at this dynamic and have retreated by sarcastically labeling the observer as an angel. This sarcasm is yet another egoic dynamic to avoid looking at the first dynamic. I've played this games before Joe, I know them well and it is fine. What I wrote may be helpful to others. As I said, this is a very common tactic. I would consider it a moderately manipulative egoic dynamic to control a narrative. You get zero from me, because I know exactly how it works.

I welcome this dynamic. As I said, your comments and the underlying psychological dynamic is much more interesting to me than the video I originally commented on. I think it is helpful for others to learn about this psychological dynamic. So let's observe. . . Notice in the original statement there was a question "How big of a sample do you need to make such a judgment in your scientific work as a professor?" Do you think this is a question in which the questioner is genuinely curious about how much time the other person thinks they need to make a judgement?. Well, we will need to examine the next statements. . . The questioner next makes "a guess" on how the other person would behave. "My guess is you look carefully at things thoroughly before coming to over-hasty, dismissive conclusions." Notice the shift right here. The questioner adds in a "guess" that the other person (being a science professor) would look carefully at things before making over-hasty, dismissive conclusions. Where on earth did "over-hasty, dismissive" conclusions come in? This is where the assumption of an over-hasty, dismissive conclusion is introduced. The following sentence "You're inclined to want to dismiss -- that's a clear and obvious bias. " clearly indicates the previous question was not "a guess". The questioner solidifies the assumption and now speaks of it as fact - the other person is inclined to want to dismiss and goes even further by calling it "a clear and obvious bias". This is so incredibly clear cut. It is right in front of you. An "uncertain guess" has now become a fact. The other person is inclined to dismiss and is biased. The questioner goes on to say "Scientists are supposed to correct for biases like that. ". Again, is an obvious assumption that a the other person has mad a over-hasty dismissive conclusion. Notice how the questioner no longer treats it as an "uncertain guess". I can't see how anyone could interpret this differently. The questioner has no idea how much time, effort and thought the other person put into the statement. The questioner is making this conclusion on an assumption. When this is revealed to the questioner, he doubles-down on his position with "I was just a little taken aback by your initial response, but maybe I have an over-idealic view of how good scientists behave in my own head." Again, can't you see this ENTIRE position is based on an assumption? Without the initial assumption that the other person made an overly-hastily dismissive judgement, the ENTIRE position of the questioner crumbles. The statement "of how good scientists behave" is based on an assumption a scientists has behaved badly. There is clear is day. In fact, your assumption is sooo strong that you have zero interest in the answer to your initial question. Why? Because you have already answered it with the assumption. How could you be taken aback without the assumption? Why were you taken aback? Because you are assuming a scientist has made an overly hasty judgement. Without that assumption, what is there to be taken aback about? This is a super common egoic dynamic, especially in hyper intellectuals. But for those that have worked through it, it is sooo obvious. You are not fooling anyone. I can see you!

I said @10min. and did not specify a length of time or amount of content. You asked me how long of a time period and then seemed to assume this was an insufficient time period / content and that my impression was dismissive and biased. . . To me, that indicates that the original question you asked was based on an underlying assumption and was not genuine. . . Notice how you first asked the question, then shifted to "my guess is" and then shifted to the assumption. . . in which there is no longer a question or "a guess". This is a common psychological dynamic a mind plays to conceal underlying assumptions. Yet, when one has played that game before, it's really obvious. . . . When that surface-level dynamic is revealed, one can then explore a level deeper. In this case, notice the use of "your scientific work as a professor" and then "Scientists are supposed to. . . " then "I was a philosophy major and. . . ". Notice the underlying personality dynamic. The next level deeper would explore the subconscious "energy" fueling that dynamic. Yet a mind would need to become aware of the more surface level dynamics before digging deeper. If the first two dynamics are subconscious and avoided, then it is not possible to dig deeper. Thank you for this. This dynamic is much more interesting to me that the original comment I made about the video. That one was fairly generic. There is a little more "juice" to this one.