Carl-Richard

Elon is not nazi. He is Super Mario:

😂😂 You and @Schizophonia never fail to make me burst into laughter.

😂😂

Literally thought about that the second before I scrolled down to your post. There is this phenomenon in my country (Norway) where under virtually any TikTok video where the subject is only vaguely related to immigrants (and even when it's not related at all), people (probably mostly teens) will spam "Stem FrP", which means "Vote the Far-Right party". And maybe not coincidentally, that exact party has been leading in the polls for the last few months now for the first time ever.

I haven't gone all the way through academia so I'm speaking mostly based on feeling, but the truth is that unless you are starting your own personal business (but even then), you have to jump through probably just as many hoops and play just as many games in any other career as in academia. That's just survival in the 21st century. It's just that the thing that happens to many academics is they go into it a bit too idealistic and then they get bummed out and write a book about why academia sucks later, which is why academia tends to get a bad rap, but in reality, it probably doesn't suck that much more than other kinds of jobs.

I really just think it's because he doesn't know how to control his bodily movements, but that's maybe me not reading Twitter.

YES

It's not really about the products, although they do make things simpler. It's about the philosophy, the methods. The people at Blueprint, which the woman is a co-founder of, are true lights in the dark, and you can hear it in the video. I was mostly reacting to her as a person: her radiance, her vibe, mind and story. She has a lot: bright mind, vision, passion, 'good energy'.

"Am I allowed to have fun?" Cmon.

What would you need to find out to think it's a scam?

You feel better, think better, live better, much better.

There is an interesting dynamic where you will point out something like aluminium and evidence of harm or lack of conclusive evidence and decide "maybe it's good to avoid that", but then you move over to something else where you don't do the same evaluation of evidence. I see this with people going from plastic spatulas to wooden ones, or fluoride toothpaste to hydroxyapatite toothpaste, or from standard deodorants to whatever natural version that also has dozens of different chemicals you can't spell the name of. Where is the research on the safety of wooden microparticles? Where is the research on the safety of hydroxyapatite nanoparticles? Where is the research on every single chemical in the natural deodorants you just bought (and have you read all of it or any of it)? While being health conscious and discerning about what you expose yourself to is a good thing, the right course of action given a consistent application of standards is not always that obvious (except full elimination, while tanking the costs of that).

Don't worry, I can tell

I just thought about why some people tend to like natural drums better than programmed drums (which I tend to resonate with, even though my most listened song on Spotify for the last two years uses programmed drums ). When you listen to natural drums, you can tune in to how the drummer feels while playing it. You tap into the natural flow that the human body is capable of producing, with all of its theoretically speaking "flaws and inaccuracies". As a human, you are ironically more able to accurately resonate with those flaws and inaccuracies than the near perfect accuracy of the programmed drums. And even more importantly, you tap into the state of the drummer which is one of joy and creative expression. On the other hand, with programmed drums, there is nothing like that you can tap into. There is no true depth behind the sounds that you hear. It's just a flat, empty void. This is the same feeling I get when I ask ChatGPT about something difficult. You get this harrowing sense that there is nothing behind the sentences. There is no mind there that understands what is being said. There is nothing to tune into, nothing to resonate with. I hope they fix it with the next version 😛. Similarly, I think listening to another person speak and the degree to which you understand them depends a whooole lot on how well they themselves understand what they're saying. It simply doesn't cut it to read out some words in clearly enunciated language. If the person doesn't have a proper understanding, that is what you will tune into. The understanding itself reveals itself by virtue of what it is — holistically. You cannot reduce something like understanding down to pure syntax and word usage. Any such representations of the real understanding must come downstream from the real understanding to accurately evoke it. The way ChatGPT works is it takes such representations, that indeed generally come downstream from the real understanding, and throw a huge sea of them into a meatgrinder, and each chunk of meat is assembled and recombined together based on its training, nothing of which has anything to do with understanding. Shucks.

We'll see. Btw, you don't have to declare when ChatGPT is not used 😂. It's only if you use it 😉.

The general rule is that whatever somebody else is feeling, if you tune into it and either simply represent it in your mind or emulate it, you will feel it too. We have been given (as a blessing by God) the ability to represent reality within our minds to an astounding level of detail and accuracy, and this becomes very clear when comparing the products of humans in the flesh vs human mannequins in the computer.

(Made a post from here into a topic)

Cool initiative. I have some thoughts if you don't mind: Sitting in a position that is highly uncomfortable and that might even impede your meditation, trains willpower but not necessarily awareness (at least not optimally). Awareness is trained the best when you create the perfect balance between relaxed and alert, comfortable and uncomfortable. And awareness is arguably a more refined and fundamental way of addressing the issue of an unruly mind. You can train your willpower by hitting yourself with a hammer and trying not to flinch, but of course that's a bit crude and might actually hurt you in other ways. Besides, if you sit long enough in a meditation where you allow yourself to be comfortable and relaxed, you will eventually start to feel aches and pains in your legs anyway. That then turns into a training of willpower to keep sitting, but you're also in an elevated state of awareness. That said, do whatever you feel is best for you Maybe do the 30 days and then do another 30 days where you allow some relaxation and comfort and see how they compare.

You may think of genius as Albert Einstein or Nicola Tesla, but I also think, after some thinking, of for example Aurora Aksnes and the Buddha.

I just asked ChatGPT-1o what it thinks and I'm disgusted by the absolute sophistry it attempts to spew. Get us better AIs already omg.

Here is an exercise: take any extremely exceptionally "good" behavior and see if it does not fit the label of genius. Take any extremely exceptionally "bad" behavior and see if it does not fit the label of madman/madness. Here are a few: defecating on the street in broad daylight, winning a Nobel Prize, killing all of your family members, landing a rocket on Mars, living on only Mars bars for 10 years, living in a state free of suffering, living in a state of constant suffering.

Maybe a better question is: for all the things that people call Ted a genius, do they like or dislike those things? And for all the thing that people call Ted a madman, do they like or dislike those things?

Intelligence is one of many likeable things that you could ascribe to a genius. And even if you want to define intelligence as something objective, intelligence as a concept is still generally considered a good thing (people like it). Same with "profound insight into reality" as @Salvijus has written below.

A madman sees something nobody else sees, be it concrete things like object/sensory perceptions ("hallucinations"), or value structures or ways of being ("acting insane"). A genius sees something nobody else sees, be it abstract things like thoughts (or indeed concrete things like perceptions), value structures or ways of being. The commonality is being unusual, maybe also 'extremely so'. The difference is that the madman's unusual behavior is largely disliked or disapproved of by the common man. For example, if you hallucinate white rabbits or pink elephants, people generally disapprove of that. If you are neither willing nor able to tie your shoes without assistance or outside force, people generally disapprove of that. On the other hand, if your unusual behavior leads to or is associated with something that people consider a good thing (something they like), or certainly a fantastic thing (something they like very much), because indeed nobody else could've come up with it because nobody else can see it, then you will be accurately labelled a genius. For example, if you find a new technology, a new "accepted" scientific paradigm (more on that later), a new cure for a disease, a new way to make apple juice, or you're just really clever in most situations which astounds most people, people will generally like that, and hence, again, you will be labelled a genius. As for the Katana person, had he been doing unusual things that people like very much (e.g. playing Fruit Ninja IRL and filming it like a high-production action movie with the skill equivalent of 10 000 hours of practice, doing all the work except the filming by himself, fully self-taught, all with stunning world class execution) instead of what people dislike very much (chopping up police officers), I think he will accurately be called a genius. If he had instead been doing unusual things that people like but aren't necessarily blown away by, he would be called clever, creative, innovative, essentially the weaker components of genius. This ties into what I hinted to about finding a new "accepted" scientific paradigm. If you find a new paradigm or theory or way of thinking that people accept and thus like, then that is all good: you're a genius. If it's something they don't like, they will often call you words like "kook", "crank", "nut" and "crackpot". These obviously have a flavor of "crazy", "unhinged", but at the core, it's again being unusual. But the thing here is that these words are kind of a composite of like and dislike, because such people are often recognized as intelligent (which people like) but still deal with things that people don't like (in this case the paradigms, the theories). Had they not been considered intelligent (or had people just failed to recognize their intelligence), then it's more likely that they would be called crazy, mad, insane. When the intelligence is not recognized, that's for example the camp that Leo is sometimes put in.

Here are my thoughts: Mind and body are one. If your mind is solid while chemo is killing the body and the cancer alongside it, your body has a greater chance of surviving. Cancer is cells which have left the program of the body and become parasites. If the poison is delivered to both the host and the parasite but the host is strong, the parasite will be more likely the first to go. So by meditating and contemplating deeper, you are on the right path. But of course, investigate bodily pathways as well.