Forestluv

Y’all, don’t turn things so sharply personal, especially when someone is reaching out for help. We all have issues we are working through. Let’s be respectful and kind to each other. The OP hasn’t been on this thread for a couple days and its devolved I to personal name calling.

@SunCat Some of it. I don’t have time to watch every 30min+ video users post - especially for arguments that have already been discussed ad nausea on the forum.. There have been hundreds of “Russiagate” posts on the forum expressing your view. This isn’t new stuff. The view of “Russian interference is a hoax by Democrats” gets into conspiracy theory territory and misinformation - which will likely get locked down and warnings if persist. There needs to be a more nuanced view to make the cut on the forum.

What is a birth gender?

I didn’t say vertical constructs of learning is all there is or that every person has equal abilities. Not everybody can be Kobe Bryant. Kobe was amazingly gifted AND put in immense effort, work and practice to develop his expertise. Yet if we are going to create some type of “thing” to be mastered, its silly to say no work is necessary for mastery. You are correct from one perspective. You can stay within the truth of that perspective or can expand. How would me agreeing to the truth within this perspective help you or others to expand? It doesn’t. Imagine someone has just realized the truth of their left hand, yet cannot see their right hand. How is agreeing that they have a left hand helping them to realize they also have a right hand? To expand, we would need to say “Yes, from within left-handness, the left hand is true. Yet you are missing something. Look away from the left hand for a moment and look here at the right hand”. The difficulty is that a mind becomes attached and identified to the truth of their left-handness. They will not want to set that down and look in another direction, because they see that as saying their left hand is false and they are wrong. As well, the mind may be skeptical, cynical and fearful. It may think “You are trying to trick me into believing their is a right hand. Show me evidence BEFORE I look away from my left hand and look toward this “right hand. You think you are so smart and special because you can see what you call a right hand. You are so arrogant. You aren’t better than me. I know as much about hands as you do. I should be the one teaching about hands. My left hand view is as mportnat as any other view. Don’t call me a left hand dogmatist! Don’t censor my left hand views!!” This seems silly when we speak of hands because it has no elements osprey self identify, attachment and survival. Once that is added in, it is much harder for the mind to see. The bore mentality is super common in areas like religion, gender, politics, spiritualuty

How can what is happening Here and Now be a trick? A worrisome thought is a worrisome thought. A feeling of anxiety is a felling of anxiety. A feeling of calmness is a feeling of calmness. They are all true as the ISness they are. However what is appearing now is not always practical and healthy to the person. It depends on the context of truth. Someone saying “There is a God in heaven” is someone saying “There is a god in heaven”. That is truth. You seem to be asking if there is an external, objective universal reality that is true. Leo discussed openness, skepticism, falling victim to conspiracy theories etc, in his open mindedness video. In a nutshell, a mind that is open will be able to work it out because it is open to relative truths. People that are in fundamental religions, cults, conspiracy theories etc are closed minded. If they were open minded they would not have stayed within groups that are dogmatic, closed minded and prevent relative truths from entering.

We create these distinctions, aspects and ‘want they are’. Nothing wrong with that. It’s an amazing exploration and we gotta do something in life. Yet, Form = Formless. ISness = ISness.

Yes, this is a place for =>discussing<= not a place for dogmatically pushing one’s agenda. If someone learns downward facing dog in Yoga, that is awesome. And it’s great to discuss how downward facing dog is important and integral to the practice of yoga. Once someone learns downward dog, what new opportunities of expansion open for them? There are also of new things to learn at this point. This is a very different orientation than a mindset of “I just learned downward dog and know all of Yoga. In fact downward dog shows that Yoga is bullshit and there isn’t even yoga”. In a yoga class, that is problematic. It’s not the content of the downward dog posture, it is the mind’s relationship with it and how it is presented to others. Deep spiritual insights can be presented as poison. When I was learning Spanish, I oftened had breakthroughs that I shared with other students to help them. Yet I understood there was a lot for me to learn and I didn’t act like I was fully fluent and tell Spanish speakers that I’m right they are full of BS. From my POV, this mindset of tens manifests in mental dynamics of wanting to be right, in charge and resistance to a perceived authority. Yet this is relative. A person that has a brain tumor will have no problem seeing a euro surgeon over a pre- med undergrad student. It’s ego based, survival oriented.

Why is it so hard to see that there is evidence of Russian interference and problematic ties between Trump and Russia . . . AND see that Democrats politicized, and at times misrepresented or embellished events, for personal gain? Why is it so difficult for some minds to hold both of these ideas?

This is a great example what Im pointing to. Imagine a mind contracted within Paris and thinks Paris is Europe. Realizing that Paris is within France is a major realization and expansion. Yet the problem becomes when the person thinks this expansion is all there is and their new construct is is extrapolated as being full expansion. It’s problematic if they start promoting an agenda that there is no Europe. The problem is not so much content, because the content is partially true and an important realization. The problem is structural and the person’s relationship with the content within their mind structure. Partial truths presented as absolute truth are problematic.

This would be hyper restriction to a vertical axis which also restricts growth. Someone immersed in the horizontal axis will overly judge and criticize the vertical axis. I’ve spent 30 years and 10s of thousands of hours studying, researching, writing, presenting and teaching cellular biology. Along a vertical axis, a freshman student will be no where near that level of experience, knowledge and understanding. Similarly, if I go to China I am a newbie student learning Chinese culture and language. I am no where near the level of Chinese teachers on a vertical axis. I agree this has value, yet a newbie practicing does not make an expert. I often have students give presentations to the class about cell biology. They pretend to be a teacher higher up on the vertical axis. This is great training, yet just because the student is acting like the teacher does not mean they have reached that level. A freshman student pretending to be the teacher while presenting to the class does not have the 20+ years of study, experience, understanding and knowledge of an actual teacher. Not recognizing this is an act of egoic defiance and a block to learning. If I want to learn Chinese, I must realize the Chinese teacher understands Chinese better than I do. And this taking turns of being the teacher happens regularly on the forum. Someone may have new insights and realizations - and write a report for others on the forum. Others further on the main path may say “awesome insights! Thanks for sharing! Great realization, keep up the work there is more!”. The problem becomes when a student learning something new now all of a sudden thinks they know it all, becomes dogmatic and has an agenda. For example, a student that has a breakthrough of a difficult genetics concept - and then know think they are the master and have an agenda. That’s a problem in a classroom and that person needs a whack with a zen stick. As finite human characters, you can see things I cannot and vice versa. Tier2 ‘disagreements‘ seem boring at Tier1 - they don’t have the juicy self-centered competition to be the righteous winner. It’s much more fluid and exploratory.

@Tim R How can someone be stuck in their native language and never learn a foreign language?

You now know what it’s like for a conservative looking at ‘trans-gender’.

To me, you seem to be conflating horizontal and vertical dimensions. Horizontal transfers are of course important, yet you seem off balance in that direction. When I teach a science class, everyone in the room is both student and teacher. That is a horizontal dimension and has value. Each of us are both learning and teaching. The problem with that is it’s contracted. I am ALSO the teacher and they are the students along a vertical axis. This is also important. Without the vertical access, learning and growth is highly inefficient. Yet there is also a problem going too extreme to the vertical axis and contracting within that. Some people have a very difficult time with the vertical axis because it involves aspects of self surrender. Then perhaps you aren’t fluent in Spanish. Are you open to the possibility that Tier2 ‘disagreements’ can be distinct from Tier1 ‘disagreements?”. Might there be a pre/trans dilemma in which one cannot discern the two forms? Could I have had disagreements with Leo and other Mods that you cannot recognize because it doesn’t fit what you think a ‘disagreement’ should look like? I see the forum as a forest we are all exploring together AND a classroom in which we are learning and growing.

Of course not. You specifically singled out mods. It can apply to anyone. Imagine a basic Spanish student disagreeing with a native Spanish speaking teacher. That is very different than two native speaking Spanish teachers disagreeing with each other. They are at different levels. When a student disagrees with me about concepts of Genetics, there can be some value in that. Yet that is a very different dynamic than when I’m having a discussion with a fellow geneticist. In terms of learning, a problem arises when a student thinks they already know it all. They think they know as much as someone with 20 years of experience and tens of thousands of hours of research and study. And then try to argue as if any idea they hold is equivalent or superior. I see this all the time in science. Someone who has a wiki level understanding of cell bio starts lecturing me on cell bio. When I try to reveal the limitations, I’m labeled an arrogant academic that was brainwashed by mainstream science. Any partial inaccuracies I point out becomes “You are censoring me! You are tryin to cancel me! My idea that I heard from a YTuber is more valid than your 20 years of dedicated research and study of this idea”. And we end up with a coronavirus hoax meme infecting people’s minds. It’s like people spend a few days learning a handful of foreign words and now think they have full fluency of the language.

I think this could be helpful for people that are serious about learning and developing. Yet most problematic users refuse to spend 5min. reading the forum guidelines. There is no way they will spend 5-7 hours learning about how to use the forum, posting high quality threads etc. Most of the problematic users think they already know how to use the forum and that they are already posting high quality threads.

To me, you this is missing various context. In traditional debates, two people have opposing positions and debates. Yet once the mind expands into multi-perspectival, big picture, integration of ideas, experience, feeling etc. This allows for understanding paradox partial truth, and relativity. Someone might say “Awakening is a single realization of One singularity”. In one context, that is true and we could have a great discussion on it. Yet it’s limited. The same person could say “Awakening is not a single realization, it is a series of realizations leading to deeper understanding of One singularity”. The same person could say “Awakening has many forms and there are many facets to awaken to”, Or “There is no personal awakening since there is no person to awaken. There is only Nowness”. To many people, this would sound inconsistent and they want to know which of the seemingly conflicting statements is correct. Two people take two opposing positions and debate whether the Ox is a tail or a hoof. That’s very different than one person fixating on the hoof, observing and asking “is what you’re pointing to kinda long and stringy?” Imagine someone who is only aware that one language exists. Anything not spoken in their language will be seen as wrong. Now imagine someone who speaks 100 languages. They will be much better to understand a much wider range of linguistic context. He could tell others, “Actually, what he is saying is true in Chinese, yet you would need to learn Chinese to understand”. Many people don’t like that because they have a deep desire to already know, be right and defend their position. “There is no Chinese! You are so arrogant! That is woo-woo! You are inconsistent! You are censoring me! You are cancelling me!”. It is a much rarer mind that asks “Interesting. Perhaps I’m limiting my self and missing something. I’m curious what this so-called ‘Chinese’ thing is. Perhaps he is using the term in a context I’m unaware of”. I’ve often seen someone have an expansive awakening, yet contract themself within that new idea set. This can be a great stage of exploration within the contraction, yet it often becomes dogmatic and argumentative. A person grown in a religious home may awaken that the Bible is not 100% literal and true. They may realize that God isn’t a vengeful man in the sky. These are massive realizations of expansion, yet the mind can the contract into “The Bible is 100% bullshit and god doesn’t exist. I’m an atheist. Prove me wrong”. The mind loves to think in opposites, take one side. As a result, there is a now a new problematic mindset to solve. I would also consider mission. What is the mission of a forum? To learn calculus? Yoga postures? Train for a marathon? What level of instruction will we provide? There needs to be some threshold level to participate, a willingness to grow and rules against disruption. If a newbie goes to an advanced yoga class, it won’t be good for them or the class. They could get injured. If someone enters yelling Yoga is BS and Pilates is the one true way, that is disruptive. If someone insists that downward dog is the only position in yoga, that’s disruptive. If someone enters saying that the yoga teachers are so arrogant, always in agreement with each other, I now more about yoga than the teachers, this should be an anything goes yoga studio are all problematic. And some newbies think they can come in and start arguing with the yoga teacher during class over stuff they don’t fully understand. They think they know as much as the instructor. Like someone learning downward dog and now they think they are some yogi that can spout off their opinions as if they carry as much weight as a yogi that has spent years and thousands of hours immersed in yoga. That aint gonna if there are serious teachers and students. Learning is a balance between openness and questioning. Between groundless and grounding. If some wants to fight for their patch of grounding, it’s not going to work.

Your framing suggests that someone who kills 50 people gets rewarded for it. Of course that would be absurd, yet I’m not seeing much of that - at least not in the U.S. I see the U.S. as being much more punishment motivated. What would you say is the goal of justice? Why would we want to punish people? Do all people who commit crimes deserve punishment? I knew a war veteran who had severe PTSD. During the war, he was exposed to horrific atrocities. He returned to the U.S. with severe PTSD and was marginalized and stigmatized by much of the public. He did his best to help other vets that suffered. During his PTSD episodes, he couldn’t differentiate his environment from war and regular life and sometimes lashed out - he would scream at his girlfriend and even hit her a few times. Afterwards, he would suffer in extreme guilt and shame. He had no health care and the VA wouldn’t see him because he wasn’t suicidal. He got so desperate he ingested a bottle of pills and suffered terribly for two days, yet survived. He still couldn’t get into the VA. One night he had a PTSD breakdown and saw his girlfriend as a threat and starting hitting her. She called the police. As armed police officers arrived to arrest him, he went down into the basement and shot himself in the head. We need to reconsider how we view punishment. How can we put 100% responsibility on this man and imprison him for domestic violence. This man was ill and needed help. It all started with him trying to be patriotic and serving the country as he went to an unjust war and ordered to commit and view atrocities. Upon his return he is mentally ill, yet stigmatized by society which makes his mental illness worse. He is desperate for help, yet there are inadequate social services. Militarized police come after him. Who has contributed to this situation? The military industrial complex seeking profits and oil? A public stigmatizing our wounded veterans? Extreme wealth inequality with mega billionaires and no basic social services? A militarized police force? A traumatized veteran? Who do you consider to be the “savage”? It’s not so simple as “He broke the law and should be punished”.

I find what counts as ‘extremest’ or ‘progressive’ to be an interesting idea. For example, at one time same-sex marriage was seen as both ‘extremist’ and ‘progressive’. These days, would human-android marriage be an extremist Green idea or a progressive Green idea that will be accepted as normal in the future?

@datamonster It can be difficult to determine where to draw lines. That’s one reason I’m glad I’m not a parent. I’d get so frustrated with constantly having to draw lines in grey areas with my kids.

@Fran11 @Consept It brings to mind the balance between grounding and groundless. Order and disorder. In the context of SD, red is groundless ‘anything goes’ without rules and order - yet often in a harmful way to others. Blue came arose with the utility of rules and laws for social grounding and order. Perhaps as Green emerges, the pendulum may swing back into a new groundless, ‘anything goes’ relativity - yet a new form that is distinct from Red’s groundlessness. This groundlessness is more hyper relativity and fluidity. As an extreme example for strong contrast: imagine each person fluidly identifying with whatever arose with no grounding. Some people are cyborgs, others trans-animals, trans-plants - the next day one could be an alien, human, one of hundreds of genders. It would be like a groundless dream world. . . Having some categories and consistency in a timeline seems to have practical value in having a society. Yet who knows what things will look like in 100 years. It’s also interesting to think what conservative and progressive is. If someone thinks it’s a bad idea for everyone in society to just be whatever identity they want in the moment, is that a conservative view? It may be in another 50 years. Perhaps the progressive view is fluid trans-identity expression of Now. Yet how could society function? How could people have continuous jobs, schools etc.? Yet maybe I’m being an old fuddy duddy conservative.

I think this sounds idealistically good on paper, yet not so good in the real world. Unmoderated forums devolve into a toxic mess. Look what happened to Steve Pavlina’s forum. He had an awesome personal development forum, yet it was destroyed with a lack of moderation. When you say someone with crazy ideas shouldn’t get banned - is that unconditional for you? If someone posts 300 times per day crazy Jim Jones cult ideas, threatens others and refuses to behave - would you allow that?. An anything goes absolutist arena is problematic. Yet I would also say that where to draw the line can be very difficult and one can go to another extreme in which rules are overly strict. At the other extreme, any dissenting idea from a particular ideology is not tolerated - and this can lead to cultishness.

You left out the second half. That will recontextualize the meaning.

@confused “what do you mean by enlightenment exactly ?” Meaning is relative. It seems the ‘exactly’ part is trying to remove the relativity of meaning in search of an objective, definitive target. There can be practical value in that, yet it is limited. If I said there were an infinite number of enlightenment forms, it wouldn’t be satisfying to a mind in search one exact form of enlightenment it can attain and hold.

@datamonster I would draw a distinction between considering various perspectives from a meta view vs. being immersed within an ideology and promoting that agenda. For example, the recent video you posted was a meta view looking at a spectrum of ideology from patriotism to nationalism to fascism. And, how a mind can become conditioned to progress from one extreme to another. The Youtuber considered fascist views and spoke of them. That is very different than a YouTuber promoting fascist ideology and trying to recruit people into fascism. The YouTuber you linked spoke of this distinction at the start of the video. It’s not the ideology itself. It’s more about the mind’s relationship to the ideology. How tightly is the mind attached and identified to the ideology and trying to push that agenda? What harmful impact could that have on a community? A forum without rules will devolve. An ‘anything goes’ forum will succumb to entropy and devolve into 4-Chan. Maintaining a nice garden takes moderation and work. A gardener needs to pull out weeds. Yet of course the weeds will say “I’m not a weed, I’m a flower!!”. And this is relative.

I think it boils down to how people perceive what is actual and whether deviations from perceived actuality negatively impacts one’s self or one’s group. If I say I’m a pixie and start dancing in my backyard in a pixie costume, no one is going to care. Someone may see it as a deviation from actuality (he is actually a human), yet it doesn’t impact them. People at Orange would think a person should be able to do whatever they want as long as they don’t harm others. Yet if someone felt they were being forced to accept and treat me like I was actually a pixie, then they have a problem. Or if pixies become a marginalized group deserving of preferential job hires, a lot of people would be upset. . . Some people at Red/Blue may get upset because they see a pixie delusion itself as being some type of devilish immoral behavior.