Carl-Richard

I think if you had grown up in a society with a flourishing grand narrative, you would firstly be a different person, and secondly, you would be less likely to fall into the types of radical ideologies that you're experimenting with now, but if you still wanted to do that, maybe you should have the right to do that. Maybe that will be a part of the ideological portion of that grand narrative. It doesn't have to be Abrahamic fundamentalism.

Ideology by itself, if you reduce it down to a theoretical framework which you can adopt willy-nilly, isn't inclusive enough to get all your needs met. You need something bigger than that. You arguably shifted from focusing on one set of needs to a different set of needs. If you haven't already, watch the guy in the video explaining his 7 features of a grand narrative.

Nope, that is New Age spirituality — spirituality separated from its traditional backdrop. Spirituality is the search for the highest value (God, Truth, Consciousness, Goodness, etc.), and there are many other practices than meditation that are required for getting there safely. What Leo is providing on the side (personal development, psychology, philosophy) are a few examples. Meditation doesn't address all human needs, and without a grand narrative that addresses all human needs, you have to construct your own on your free time, and that is a process filled with traps. Whatever they stripped from Buddhism or Hinduism or whatever. They're virtually identical, just smaller scale. This applies to anything: politics, personal development, science, etc. Don't let yourself be discouraged by the lowest common denominator.

Yes. True. He has said he wouldn't like working with institutions. He likes to keep it close and cultish ? Same with government. Government 2000 years ago was garbage, and we had to make modifications along the way to get to something resembling functional government. Religion has been lagging behind in that process.

I'm just saying the need for a grand narrative is there, and an united world would in some way or another be united on the level of narrative.

It's odd to think that what New Age spirituality has been in just the last 50 years is what spirituality is supposed to be. That is very short-sighted.

You're not getting at the core of religion. It's not about "faith". It's about doing spirituality in a functional context.

Would you be against Leo's ideas and practices being consolidated into a tradition with codified practices and agreed-upon ethical frameworks, with proper institutions and large-scale communities, where you can easily go to other people for proper guidance and where you can be understood and encouraged by your friends and family?

I'm worried about the rivalrous games. This is my red herring: ? His name is Hegel.

You're not going to force it on anyone. You just need to have the right goal in mind and sow the seeds for it.

They tend to only pick the juicy parts, like meditation, and reduce all of spirituality down to that, which is dangerous. Spiritual people are not wise either. They reduce spirituality down to almost nothing, they dogmatically hold on to their "tradition", etc. They have the same problems. Besides, you're strawmanning religion by pointing at the fundamentalists. There are highly developed people who are pro-religion.

I don't understand what you mean.

Those are rare indeed. But do you ever feel like you're talking "at" people rather than "with" them?

"Rivalrous (win-lose) games multiplied by exponential technology self terminate. Rivalrous incentive has been the generator function of almost all the things humans have ever done that have sucked. Technologically mediated exponential suck becomes existential. Exponential tech cant be put back in the bag, so we figure out anti-rivalrous games or the human experiment completes. (Anti-fragility in the presence of decentralized exponential technology requires anti-rivalry.)" — Daniel Schmachtenberger

@Moksha Wow. Stairway to heaven.

Damn, what did you see? Last night before I went to bed, I had my window open, and I stared out into the misty and dimly lit scenery over by some buildings, and I couldn't make out exactly what I was looking at, but with my sleepy brain, I figured I was looking at some weird giant humanoid creature with long arms, like a character from a video game, swaying from side to side. I knew that it was probably just a tree or some other object obscured by the mist, but it was fun to see how my brain was able to create such a consistent and fairly solid image of something that was certainly not there.

What if the narratives are at odds with each other and lead to conflict?

That's the Schrödinger's Leo. You don't know the answer before you've opened his brain and peaked inside.

How do you unite the world without uniting under a grand narrative? If Tier 2 can't provide it, then people like ISIS or Nick Fuentes will provide it, and you'll be stuck trying to solve those "complex systemic issues" in some roundabout way.

Isn't that the aim of the Tier 2 or Game B guys?

Watch his videos.

@withinUverse I can't add anything that other people haven't already said, but damn that is some cool art.

The guy in the call gives a theory for why he thinks that happened historically (why people sort of fell away from religion in the way that it used to be practiced). It's basically just sociocultural development and a staleness of the old institutions.

I would actually say that most New Age spiritual teachers do not provide proper guidance, as they're not grounded in a tradition with an ecology of practices or a holistic understanding of the human organism (e.g. the Eightfold path). Besides, the accessibility problem is a real problem. No people I know in real life know anything about spirituality. It drastically reduces the chances of getting help. How would they help me with things like working through spontaneous ego deaths or kundalini symptoms? What do they know about the dangers of misapplying spiritual concepts or techniques? If I had always been under the supervision of a teacher in my local community who draws upon a well-established tradition, maybe I wouldn't have spent 2 years spiritually bypassing or another 2 years in absolute terror and rapture from overdoing meditation. It's interesting how we praise our institutions and traditions when it comes to politics and democracy, while pointing out how the alternative would be pure chaos and anarchy, but when it comes to something like spirituality, we're in the dark ages.

I accounted for that in the last paragraph. I know that most people don't make the distinction between perception and consciousness, but if you had made that distinction, I think you would see how the latter version is more consistent with your idea of solipsism than the former version. I see. I think the problem is that I don't ground my metaphysics in dictionary definitions Anyways, I'll give my perspective: I'll give an example. I'll also make a new distinction: "attention" is different from both perception and consciousness. It also helps to really picture it in your mind. Let's say you're meditating with your eyes closed and you turn your attention to the feelings of your feet. The feelings of your feet is a perception. What does the feelings of your feet arise within? Consciousness. Then, let's say you turn your attention to the sound of your breath. The sound of your breath is a perception. What does the sound of your breath arise within? Consciousness. Why is this a useful distinction? Because consciousness does not depend on any particular perception, feeling or sound. Whether you shift your attention from the feeling of your feet or to the sound of your breath, or if you remove perceptions from consciousness altogether (like in cessation), consciousness remains the same. Consciousness is the primary ground of which everything arises out from, and it's a boundless, spacious and formless whole. Every "thing", be it the feelings of your feet, or the sound of your breath, or the lights dancing behind your eyes, is a perception. So you can have consciousness without perception, but not the other way around (because again, perception is a subset of consciousness). Consciousness includes perception, and in a way it is perception, but the distinction is still useful for understanding how you experience the world. There is of course more to perception than this, but this is the basic distinction.