Carl-Richard

We can control the impact of tsunamis, hurricanes and viruses by being smart and taking collective action.

Meh. The naturalistic fallacy is pretty down there. ...OK? You trust cyanide? Ricin? Any other natural poison or venom? This is not a trivial point that you can just brush away.

I know you already technically conceded to the point, but here I go anyway: let's say that he, instead of being plagued by radical honesty, always liked to think deeply about philosophical topics, to the point where it served as a significant trade-off between other aspects of his life, but which nevertheless lead him to where he is now (e.g. understanding that there is a place for inclusive empathy). That doesn't exactly invalidate the insight, does it? After all, doesn't this alternative description ring a bell? I'm saying it's not that easy to separate things like personality or life experiences ("character development") from SD development.

That's an 11 hour video ?. What early trauma? "Trauma", "personality", "naturally fell into it" – sounds like life to me. I know you're making a broader point, but with regards to Mr.Girl, I would clarify that he has demonstrated aspects of Yellow cognition, which is after all what you'll pick up on in a philosophical discussion. Integrating all stages is a much broader project than just cognitive understanding (interpersonal, occupational, financial etc.).

This is like asking which haystack is the best for finding the needle.

A lot of self-help people here. If I had to pick a science popularizer, it would be Neil deGrasse Tyson (because Carl Sagan is not really Orange). Even though his teachings are very simple, I believe he is the more humble type of rationalist (a la Karl Popper): "we're not saying we know anything for sure – we're just trying disprove our own theories", which is maybe one of the reasons why he stays fairly apolitical and disassociates himself from the anti-theist crusaders like Dawkins, Harris or Hitchens. These people have a more absolutist, neopositivist bent (a feeling of certainty and righteousness) which uses science as a normative platform to say "religion bad." One of the few talks he had on religion (notice how careful he is):

This one has more Spiral Wizardry. Same set-up: convincing a Green to commensurate higher and lower perspectives, only this time the problem isn't a lack of empathy for so-called bad people (as with pedophiles or nazis), but rather the lack of ability to say "no" to so-called good people: "how can we empathically say no to trans-people?" This angle is obviously a bit more productive than the "learn to accept pedos" angle . It's a bit of a build-up, but there is a beautiful pay-off around the 45 minute mark.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/1409003/real-life-tarzan-incredible-story-of-the-boy-who-lived-in-the-jungle-for-41-years-after-his-dad-fled-the-vietnam-war/

If you approach it on a trait by trait basis, technically everybody has a bit of Yellow in them. However, I think this undermines the developmental aspect. You gotta look at the entire package, not just isolated examples. I wouldn't associate Vaush and his ilk with Yellow, but don't underestimate the complexity of Green. Mr.Girl is more or less consistently Yellow in this conversation and you see the contrast to Vaush's Green.

Ah great, now it looks like I plagiarized him in my thread about Systems thinking ?:

Annihilation is genuinely the scariest movie I've ever seen. What got to me wasn't really the gore (except the fucked up bear – holy shit), but the context or vibe of disorientation and gradual psychological deterioation (call it "psychological gore"), because it made me feel mentally unstable myself. It's like a nightmare trip.

For example, you're generally not horny anymore after ejaculation. It takes time to build up to the same level of sexual appetite, which is a hormonal process (among other things). It's more adaptable than say a menstrual cycle, but it's a cycle nonetheless: horniness -> ejaculation -> decrease in horniness -> celibacy -> increase in horniness etc. The overarching point is that everything that is physical is cyclical, and that there are many different cyclical systems, and that many of the cycles especially in the body influence each other. Repressing one system might create an inbalance in other systems and the system as a whole.

Hehe I guess all this controversy surrounding Mr.Girl and his unfiltered honesty has made me too careful ?

No problem . I'll just say that I wouldn't use this as an ideal example of Yellow (for reasons previously stated), but it's still a rare thing to see in these types of conversations. Postmodernism is typical Green. It's highly relativistic but lacks a proper meta-theoretical lens of hierarchy or progress, which is re-discovered in the type of evolutionary lens presented by people like Don Beck & Chris Cowan and Ken Wilber (and precursors like Clare Graves and Robert Kegan respectively) and various ego developmental and Neo-Piagetian offshoots (e.g. Cook-Greuter and MHC).

Yeah, I've gotten more of this sense lately as I've reviewed my stances on a couple of things (granted, the grifter label is a bit harsh). I found this particularly evident when watching his reaction to the Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson cafe talk of all things. This is not to say that I've done a complete 180 on either of these people (not at all), but after reviewing particularly JP's psychological stuff, I find that most of his points in that domain (in general and in that particular conversation) go way above Vaush's head (and Shapiro for that matter, poor guy), to the point where the entire video devolves into him repeating the same point of "he is making zero sense", "cognitive decline arc", "he is not saying anything of value right now", which is just childish levels of engagement, zero charitability, no self-reflection or willingness to understand. I was legitimately disgusted by that video. To clarify, I'm not siding with either Shapiro or JP on the ridiculous political takes about gender theory etc. What I'm saying is that the arguments that mainly JP brings up with regards to psychology (Shapiro is genuinely not worth mentioning here; he said that "CBT is the only legitimate therapy tradition" ) are deeply meaningful insights that are nested in the type of meta-theoretical understanding that is applauded around here. It's just a shame that he applies them in this way to fuel his politics.

This might have nothing to do with what you're referring to, but I think you can use it as a way to refer to different types of perception, cognition or consciousness that is also somewhat consistent with a physical understanding of dimensions. In our normal everyday reality, we tend to live moment to moment in 3 dimensions. The structure of moving from one moment of 3-dimensional experience to the next can be represented as a movement through the 4th dimension (time). Now, what the heck could the 5th or any higher dimension usefully represent? I think one example is psychic phenomena like precognition. Precognition is when you gather information from one part of 4th dimensional space to the next (from one moment to another) in a sort of discontinuous leap (a movement "outside" of ordinary 4-dimensional movement). This type of movement of information could be represented as a 5th dimensional movement. Why? Because it's is not a linear movement like the moment to moment 4th dimensional movement, but something else, something of a higher-order complexity. For example, to try to explain why you had that exact precognition at that exact moment is not as straightforward as for example trying to explain why you had the idea to go to the store when you saw that the fridge was empty, because the latter explanation is linear and local ("this caused this" etc.). On the other hand, why the hell did I dream about being chased by tornadoes during one of the biggest tornado outbreaks in history on the other side of the world? (this actually happened). When you feel the need to ask yourself "where did that information come from and why is it in my head?", it's a sign you're dealing with some higher dimensional phenomena (5th etc.). You can say that ordinary everyday thoughts tend to operate within the 3rd and 4th dimension, while discontinuous leaps (like insight, intuition, precognition) could be said to be of a higher dimensional quality. In summary, ordinary cognition is local and linear, and extraordinary cognition like intuition, precognition and other psychic phenomena tends to be global, non-local and non-linear. A closely related dichotomy is rationality vs. trans-rationality (and personal vs. trans-personal domains). I have a topic about some of my experiences of precognition (dreaming about future real-events) if you're interested: Now, what exactly is the structure of 5-dimensional movement? Why is it at a higher order of complexity than 4-dimensional movement? Well, people with psychic abilities (or people who self-report having regular experiences of psychic phenomena) tend to report that it's not "their" insight or "their" ability or even their "will". It's as if their ability is a part of a larger plan, something ultimately outside of their control (you can call it "God's plan" or "Love"). You also see this with artists who enter a state of flow, where suddenly they feel like they're channeling some higher intelligence that is not their own, and that they're simply a witness to it all. You can say that the post-4-dimensional complexity taps into the infinite intelligence of God at some level (in a sense that it defies explanation). After all, God's infinite being is an infinitely complex structure, and it transcends our ordinary, linear explanatory models (which after all are limited by our survival and evolutionary history; they're not at all capable of giving a comprehensive account of reality as a whole). So what is it exactly (the 5th dimension)? Well, it's simply the trans-personal and trans-rational levels of intelligence and complexity.

People often cherish the positive effects of nofap while ignoring the potential side effects like sleep problems, chronic stress, restlessness, bodily tightness, aggression, emotional numbness etc. Your body is intelligent and will tell you what it needs to maintain optimal functioning. The body follows natural cycles, and messing with these cycles (like the reproductive cycles) can impact other cycles like sleep. It's not just females that have a reproductive cycle. Male sexual behavior is also cyclical in its own way, which is driven by physiological mechanisms. Transcending these cycles cannot be done forcefully, only through growth. High consciousness people who are celibate don't have to work to maintain celibacy. It happens naturally. Don't got against your nature.

Does anybody know if Vaush responded to this video?

When I said "pretty sure he never said that", I meant to say that you took it out of context. Go to 12:23-14:11. He said those words only because he naively conceded to Vaush's framing, and he explicitly pointed this out ("I only said that because you made me say it"). He doesn't literally mean that he could personally travel back in time and convince ideologues to not be ideological. His point was that those wars weren't successful and that mutual dehumanization was a part of it. So Vaush made an uncharitable interpretation, he went along with it and so did you

He mentioned something very interesting in his talk with Destiny that might be relevant to this. He took some kind of in-depth, 400 questions personality test while he he was in therapy, and he said he scored very high on "naivety", i.e. he generally thinks that other people have his best interests in mind. This was a general theme in both discussions (more explicitly with Destiny) which can explain his willingness to say exactly what he feels without being too apologetic and of course to use the most provocative hypotheticals and sarcastic jokes, because surely, nobody will take what he says and use it against him ?

Pretty sure he never said that.

It's not that simple. The constructs in Big 5 are based on something called the Lexical hypothesis and a strict empirical methodology of factor analysis. MBTI is based on an idea.

His talk with Lawrence Krauss is the best I've seen. It changed how I understand his idea of "meaning." It's actually a meta-theoretical concept for understanding the relationships between subjectivity, objectivity, models, narratives, perception, cognition and higher-order meaning.

It's still good to know the specifics so you can distinguish good tests/models from bad ones. For example, there are more problems with MBTI than Big 5.

50 minutes ? Can I have tl;dr plz?