Forestluv

@Florian I don’t know much about Kanye, yet Trump aI t changing. He is locked into his personality.

Ugh, that is what a lot of people said in 2016. . . If Trump gets re-elected, that means Americans don’t hold Trump accountable and Trump gets the green light. He would become much worse in a second term

That this is a real question shows how far the U.S. has fallen.

In addition to intellectual constructs of no objective right and wrong, I’d also recommend direct experience of no right or wrong. For most people, this is much more difficult to access and realize, since it is a deeper level of self surrender and powerlessness. If the mind is conceptualizing about no right or wrong, it still has internal narrative control. Take a psychedelic and save years of time.

Of course it makes sense to a mind that believes in its own misunderstanding and conspiracy theory. No one is questioning their authenticity. Alex Jones sincerely believes his views are true, yet that type of stuff doesn’t fly here. It’s not an anything goes forum.

It’s not as simple as “internal” and “external” since nearly all living organisms are in a symbiosis with viruses. There is some truth in what you write, yet it’s also not quite accurate how it is framed. I’m interested in discussions about viruses and microbes - I’ve participated in several on the forum. Yet I Don’t want to derail this thread.

I tried to discuss it with him several times. Viruses can be visualized under microscopes, similar to bacteria. Viruses are not “theory” in layman’s terms. It’s not as simple as “a cure”. There are effective vaccines and anti-viral medications. Similar to antibiotics against bacteria’s. That’s not why he was banned. He was given multiple warnings. Spreading misinformation like microbes don’t exist, microbes can’t negatively impact health, the coronavirus is a hoax by scientists. etc. is not considered “healthy challenging of mainstream media”

One of the best self-inquiry questions is "What is existence?".

You asked about what qualifies as a conspiracy theory. I replied that there is a range of degrees and there are grey areas. The conspiracy theory under consideration in this situation involved denying microbes exist, health impact of microbes, coronavirus hoax etc. I'm not suggesting you believe that. This situation can give you an idea of what is over-the-line in terms of conspiracy theory and misinformation. This gets into a tricky area of what is a "fact". There are many grey areas of theories with ambiguous "facts", yet to the holder of the theory, they are rock solid "facts". This gets into issues regarding an objective, external, universal reality. A good explanation of this in Leo's video on open-mindedness. In basic terms, yes - evidence and facts are fine - yet it can get tricky in some contexts.

It’s not binary, there are degrees of conspiracy theories and misinformation. There are grey areas, yet lines need to be drawn - even if they aren’t drawn perfectly. Posts denying the existence of microbes, denying microbes can negatively impact health, the coronavirus is a hoax by scientists etc. is over the line. This is in the same league as flat earthers, yet causes more harm.

Borat responds to Giuliani controversy. Giuliani should have immediately come out with a statement that said “I knew this was a staged prank and I was playing along. Get a sense of humor people”. Then poke fun at himself like it was a SNL skit. Yet Giuliani’s avoidance makes him look like a creep, the comedy funnier and gives the story legs.

Conspiracy theories that microbes are a hoax is a different ballgame. The existence of microbes is not someone’s personal opinion or knowledge. Spreading anti-microbe misinformation and conspiracy theories is counter to consciousness work. And it’s harmful in the age of covid. He was given many warnings

It is a comedy skit - yet the main character isn't aware they are being played - they think it is real. In this case Rudy. Rudy thought he was being interviewed in an interview setting. He thought the "reporter" and "interview room" was a real interview. Of course an interview room has cameras and lighting. If there was not cameras and lighting, Rudy would have thought "He wait a minute, there aren't any cameras or lighting? How can this be a real interview?". He didn't know he was being played. That is the art of this type of humor. Borat is a master at tricking people into thinking his stage is real and creating absurdity. He is the G.O.A.T. at this. Only cameras in the bedroom were hidden and had natural light. The cameras and artificial lighting in the "interview room" need to be obvious to trick Rudy into believing it's a legit interview. Without the cameras, Rudy would have realized "How can this be an interview without cameras?".

It really is Rudy and he wasn't paid. Rudy thought that this was a real interview and the young woman was genuinely flirting with him. This is how Borat makes comedy movies. The kicker is that the main character thinks it's real and has no idea he is being played (in this case Rudy). Borat is a master at luring people into bizarre traps. Borat fans love this aspect of his humor.

I've seen the framing of "America is not a democracy, it is a republic. The states decide elections, not the majority vote". This is true, in a sense, within the Electoral College, Yet this framing can be distorted such that a *state* could give it's electors to Trump, even if the majority of people in the state voted for Biden.

It's amazing what Borat can get away with

Also before humans were invented.

Yea Trump's small gains with black and latino voters seems to be insignificant in light of his massive losses in female suburban voters and white voters. Gaining 1 million black and latino votes doesn't really matter if he loses 10 million female and white votes.

I reached a level high enough in a 2nd language that I was thinking directly in that language without translation - yet it was on an "as needed basis". My default would be my native language. For example, even though I was living in a Spanish-speaking village and could communicate directly in Spanish, I would still wake up thinking in English and would need to "switch" to Spanish. As well, if I was walking alone on a beach, my mind might think directly in Spanish or English or a mix. I don't think my mind was conditioned enough in Spanish to think directly in Spanish as the default language 24/7. I wonder how much of an impact the age of learning the second language is on continuity. If a German child learned both German and Japanese as a child and then lived in Japan for a year, I imagine it would be much easier for the mind to think continuously in Japanese 24/7. Yet if a 45 yr. old who had only spoken German their whole life, learned Japanese and lived in Japan for a year - I imagine German fragments would appear in the mind at times.

Duplicate thread topic. Although the framing is different, it's the same topic. Please direct comments about Hunter Biden to the below thread.

According to SD theory, once a stage has been transcended a being has access to that stage and all lower stages. For example, a being centered in Tier2 would have access to binary thinking, spectral thinking and relativistic thinking - and they could use which ever mode of thinking is best for a given situation. Yet this doesn't mean that the being as access to EVERY aspect of lower stages. Different beings have different abilities, skills and preferences. Could Wilber prefer to be in a 'lofty' state of consciousness few people can relate to? Sure. Could Gabor prefer to stay grounded in 'real life' human issues? Sure. . . . Yet as an individual human being, the being has limits. As Ken Wilber, the being is not Gabor Mate or a frog. I would only be able to 'test' if Wilber or Gabor has access to aspects for the aspects I have access to similar. One can only 'test' the level of another's language fluency in languages they are fluent in. I'm non-fluent in Chinese and partially fluent in Spanish - thus I couldn't test one's fluency in these languages. . . In the 'languages' I have fluency in, I would need to directly interact with the person to get their sense of fluency. For example, I've seen several interviews in which Ken was asked a softball question in the "empathy language", yet he answered with intellect. Gabor would have hit the ball out of the park. This suggests that Ken may not be fluent in empathic beingness. It's also possible that his preference was to speak the "intellect language" in these situations. I don't know for sure. I would need to sit with him and directly ask him if we could communicate through an empathic language to see if he is fluent. And the imagery I write of is just within one lens within one theory (SD). It is not objectively 'right' or 'how it is'.

Yes. Yet I consider 'personality types' to include many influential factors such as genetics, childhood rearing, life experience, society etc. In theory, the attachment / identification to a personal construct is transcended into Tier 2, yet there is still an expression of a personality. I'd also say that each being has a range of perceived personality. Some people have a wide range and fluidity - others are more narrow and static. A conversation with Marianne Williamson, Deepak Chopra, Russell Brand, Gabor Mate and Ken Wilber could include a detached meta view of the personality construct and each being is simultaneously an expression of a personality. Imo, one of the most common misconceptions about Yellow is that it is a certain thing and looks a certain way. It's not until a mind visits yellow that it realizes "Omg, there is A LOT of diversity here in Yellow-ville!".

@Hardkill Sample size is just one factor. If the underlying methodology is limited or flawed, sample size doesn't matter much. Suppose we want to gain insight into the mechanics of Climate Change. We examine 23,534 climate change studies conducted in the U.S. with over 1 million data points. That is an enormous sample size, with some valuable data. Yet extrapolating that data to forecast global climate change would introduce noise and would not be as accurate as a smaller sample size that including global studies. As well, it is comparing apples to oranges. He is using data about primaries, not polling data. And I haven't seen him release his methodology. If he is making claims that he has a statistical model based on an enormous sample size of data - then I'd like to see the methodology and data. And I'd be curious about expert statisticians peer-reviewing his work. In regards to whites claiming "Blacks love Trump". . . I've noticed a lot of white Trumpers tokenizing blacks. Imo, to reduce the cognitive dissonance of their racism. It's similar to a Trumper getting called out on Twitter for saying racially insenstive things and then posting up photos of them with black people to prove that they aren't racist. People that are non-racist don't behave like that. They don't feel the need to prove to the world how non-racist they are. Imagine someone being told "Dude, some of your language seems sympathetic to pedophiles" - and the person responds by posting photos of him spaced 6 feet from children to prove how un-pedophile he is. That would be odd behavior. Non-pedophiles don't act like that.

I agree that Gabor has yellow form - in particular yellow with strong integration/embodiment of Green beingness such as empathy and emotions. Another yellow form would be Ken Wilber who has more of an intellectual/conceptual/academic meta understanding of Green. As well, it's somewhat rare for yellow males to have integrated/embodied Green beingness. It's more common in yellow women. Yellow men tend to be more conceptual. For example, Gabor does empathy as a mode of being and understanding. Wilber would have more of a meta conceptual view of empathy (from my POV). There can be various expressions of Yellow, similar to Tier 1 stages. For example, someone centered in Orange could be a highly motivated businessman that desires personal recognition and wealth. Another expression is an Orange scientist that doesn't care about personal recognition and wealth. The orange scientist is motivated by gaining knowledge and facts about the physical world and winning debates. Two different expression of Orange.

Combining SSRIs and psychedelics has significantly increases risk and safety concerns. We don't give advice about how to combine SSRIs and psychedelics on the forum since it is considered an unsafe practice. As a general reminder: on the forum we advocate for responsible usage of psychedelics for the purpose of spiritual and personal development. Things like bragging about monster dosages, recreational party use, sourcing, posting while high, misuse of psychedelics, such as suggesting the combination of SSRIs with psychedelics is no big deal is discouraged and may receive a warning.