Carl-Richard

I don't care. I tried looking for it but I didn't find it. You gotta stop hugging topics immediately after they hit the news only to get your name on top. It's embarrassing.

For context, this happened: You know how the Nelk Boys claim "it's ok to have Netanyahu on without asking tough questions because we'll just have Bassem on later to represent the other side"? It's not ok. Not all people will watch both videos. And even if they do, the first video can experience a "primacy effect" where it traps people such that they won't be trapped as easily by the other video. If you were convinced by Netanyahu, got trapped in his "net", it will be disproportionally harder to trap you in the other net (Bassem's net). And the Netanyahu's video will naturally have more views, because it's Netanyahu, the most notorious man in the news at the moment second only to Trump, while basically nobody, certainly not airheads, have heard about Bassem. And people being trapped is not just possible but likely if the Nelk Boys' own knowledge is any indicator of their audience's knowledge, as you have no prior knowledge to counter it; the video is probably the only real engagement you've had with the topic; re-affirm that with TikTok attention spans. Even if it the first video isn't favored any more than the second, it creates division and more misinformation, because your channel is now a propaganda billboard where you trap people in different nets and they don't get challenged. "Nelk boys", more like "net boys". Also, we don't even have to think in terms of individual naive people getting trapped or not trapped (either/or) but simply as quantitative "regressors" (more graded) in that when you present a position in a strong and unchallenged propaganda format, you will increase the view of that position as strong and unchallenged in the space of ideas, and this affects people and how they think; if not making them flip decisively to one position immediately, it could tilt an overall mass of people ever so slightly in your favor. And that's exactly why any propaganda win is a win and why Netanyahu won regardless of what happened on that podcast (it would take a different type of podcast for him to lose, and he would probably not have attended that).

I haven't played guitar for months, and out of nowhere I came up with this: I tried to record it on video so I could remember how it was played later, that's why I look so focused looking into the camera all the time 😆

We usually think of internal vs external motivation in a human social context. External motivation could for example be when you're motivated by avoiding shame (which is an internalized form of social disapproval), or avoiding punishment (by another social agent). But you can of course extend it to include non-social contexts as well, e.g. avoiding pain (a form of punishment), or avoiding fear (of something that threatens you, e.g. a predator). When you extend it to include anything external to yourself, then you're at this metaphysical kind of internal vs external motivation. But one should keep in mind that the fact that everything external to you is a form of metaphysical external motivation, that doesn't devalue the importance of pursuing internal motivation in less metaphysical forms like in the social world (you shouldn't let people push yourself around too much). Doing what you want largely irrespective of shame, social disapproval or social punishment (but not fully independent of it) is very important for building your life and especially for finding your life purpose. Your life purpose fundamentally shouldn't be dictated by other people. It should be dictated by you. But of course, if you are a socially calibrated person that people can stand being around, then it will be in your own best interest and aligned with your wants to be somewhat socially calibrated.

It's unclear why it has to be allowed to do something or needs a substance. It's an idea, a form, a structure. That form or structure can be implemented in many different substances. For example, you can have a piece of cake being part of a cake, or you can have a piece of dust being part of the wind. Atoms are part of molecules, molecules are part of cells, cells are part of tissues, tissues are part of organs, organs are part of organisms. Organism-organs-tissues-cells-molecules-atoms is a holarchy. (Organism(organs(tissues(cells(molecules(atoms)))))). Every circle is a whole that contains more parts, which contains more wholes, which contains more parts, etc. (you can keep adding more either upwards or downwards, from organism and up or from atoms and down).

He was just dating his followers 😏

What are the anti-natalists so worried about? "We're imposing life on somebody who didn't choose it". They did not "self-determine" their existence. And in their existence, they don't self-determine everything that happens (only a part, if that). So they suffer. But if your self-identity is equal to everything that happens, then you self-determine everything. The model that describes internal vs external motivation is called "Self-determination theory". Internal motivation is about self-determined behavior, doing what you feel compelled to do by yourself. If you are the entirety of reality, then everything that happens in reality is you doing what you feel compelled to do by yourself. So everything that happens becomes internal motivation. It's determined by you. You are causing everything to happen, you are choosing everything to happen. Acceptance is allowing something to exist, and ultimately, it's about making something a part of yourself. If you deny something the right to exist, that is you resist it, you reject it, you don't want it to be a part of your reality. You want to be separated from it. You want to not be with it, be it. If you want to not be separate from it, to love it, then that's acceptance. Acceptance is just another word for love. When you love somebody, be it your partner or family, you accept them into your life. When your love is finite, you accept only some things but not others. But if your love is infinite, you accept everything. Accepting everything is loving God, loving yourself as all of reality.

The reason I use the words "internal vs external motivation" is because I believe internal motivation is very important for doing anything in life, but since life itself is intrinsically external motivation, you can never be completely internally motivated, so it's about finding a balance.

I reduced names used in the thread for clarity's sake (but not so much because I was externally motivated ).

So naming it "God" or "Being" doesn't really matter.

A part is a piece, a whole is a container of pieces. A holarchy contains parts and wholes where a whole is also a part and a part is also a whole.

Saying "that is the mind", that is the mind. "Being" is a name. "Only what is" is a name.

Whole becomes part and part becomes whole. Nested holarchy.

The whole the part lives in.

Everything. Yep, which is why it's a name for everything.

God doesn't dissolve (in the realm of the known). You can drop the name of God, but God won't be dropped.

That's true, we're not sure how much. That would require very specific studies.

God is a name for everything.

@Emerald described masculinity as "lofty". If there is one song that captures this, it's this one: If you don't get the highly abstract (lofty) idea they're working with (particularly relating to how they construct their guitar riffs and the general rhythmical ideas in the song), you won't get the music. It's also masculine in my "big yell" sense 😆

What's the difference between a healthy and an unhealthy person? A big factor is vibrancy, energy. Fiber and the other phytochemicals that usually come with it have many health effects (we have gone through some of them here; anti-inflammatory, pro-microbiome), so that's how it's causitive of energy. Is it the same as eating readily digestible carbohydrates? No, but many unhealthy people do that. If you want to be very detailed-oriented, do some ChatGPT for that possibility space.

At some point, you just have to accept that it's not even just possible but inevitable or already here, but you're just not trusting yourself or loving yourself or giving yourself the permission to be who you already are. Some people meditate without even truly believing that they can awaken, that they are capable of it, that they deserve it, or whatever blockage they have in their mind. This is the biggest act of self-sabotage you can ever put on yourself. And when they do awaken, they laugh because it was so stupid and obvious.

I'll try to notice these discontinuities. I notice them mostly with my "odd" dreams. You know how some gurus can "look you in the eye and know your past, present and future"? What if it's simply their visual perception that is so attuned that when they see your eyes (and face and body), they can see and deduce exactly what has caused those things, reading your karma like a shopping list, but it's indeed not as much separate from a "physical" thing but it's just their perception is so deeply detailed and profound? But then, how is that really different from essentially getting a massive download of information from the ether (as you're deriving a lot of information based on comparatively little information)? Psychics are maybe just psychos at physics 🤪 (partially 😌).

You don't have to, just acknowledge that while you avoid the negatives of fiber (bloating, etc.), you also avoid the positives. That's not my claim. "Digestion issues"? Is it bloating? Loose stools? General GI discomfort? These arguments don't seem very well-defined, maybe because they are anecdotes. Also, "digestion issues" is one thing. Some also experience symptoms like low energy and fatigue. That also has to be explained (and it can be, by e.g. a lack of fiber). But trying to "explain anecdotes" is different from finding specific scientific mechanisms. There might be interesting mechanisms associated with only consuming meat. But those have to be discovered scientifically. Paradigm: carnivore might avoid some of the negatives of fiber and some of the positives. And people report different things. And different people have different predispositions. If you clearly identify the symptoms and you identify the positives and negatives of each, I think that gives a clearer picture. Inflammation can come from non-dietary sources, and fiber has effects that extend outside its local effects on gut lining. I think the best heuristic you can use in health is "everything is interconnected". Then the details simply tell you how much.

A.k.a. 1/810, related to 1/81 and 1/(9*9) and 1/(3*3*3*3). Can any mathematicians please explain yourselves? Why are you doing witchcraft in my computer?

https://www.youtube.com/@essentiafoundation/featured