Carl-Richard

It's the awareness of the fundamental nature of thought as self-talk, talk as a play of symbols, and the representational nature of symbols. The word "cat" represents a cat; it's is not a itself a cat. As thoughts are spoken, maps are written. When you stop speaking, you get to silence. Why do we speak? Why do we make maps? As means towards an end. What is silence? What is truth? It speaks for itself.

Let go

Women tend to have an easier time letting go.

It's very tricky to try to imagine how other people experience fundamental aspects of the world differently, and that is where concepts like the Folk Theory of Essences are brilliant tools. I was personally struck by this when reading about the pre-Socratic philosophers and their metaphysical ideas. How do you go about interpreting something that comes from such a vastly different cultural context than your own?

Relative reality is speech. Speak because you're spoken to, not because you understand (my new favorite quote ).

Such a view would be reductive, bad faith, coming from a place of hurt instead of inspiration. I could give a more optimistic analysis of a member of the Taliban.

LOOOL

I've watched the entire thing before and it perfectly summarizes my point: a career in science is not synonymous with construct awareness. This is nothing new (there are countless examples, not just QM). Don't be afraid to watch it anymore than you're afraid to watch Richard Dawkins debating Deepak Chopra. It's the same level of worldview disconnect. If you have doubts about the legitimacy of this work, then you're free to focus on something else. That is also one reason why it's not a cult. A cult robs you of your personal autonomy. Actualized.org is about strengthening your personal autonomy. If you think that this is me gaslighting you, then sure, don't listen to anything I'm telling you. If you've formulated your own thoughts on the subject and you're able to understand the arguments that people are making, then it's no longer about "trusting someone". It's about what resonates with you. However, if your idea of sensemaking is to blindly appeal to an arbitrary standard of authority, then do that, but then there is no reason to argue in the first place. This is what we're doing here: we're providing arguments, and it's up to you if it resonates or not. The authority question is anyway irrelevant, because that clearly goes both ways (there are academics on both sides).

See the lights out on the water Come and go, to and from In the time it takes to find them You can live, you can die And nothing stops the river as it goes by Nothing stops the river as it goes All alone and all together Every day, come what may By the time we find each other We can live, we can die And nothing stops the river as it flows by Nothing stops the river as it goes

If you appreciate Daniel's ecoliteracy approach, look into Fritjof Capra, Gregory Bateson and Arne Næss. He draws a lot of inspiration from them.

Weed can fuck you up.

For people who voted Tier 2, who are your heroes? (or name some Tier 2 thinkers).

That was Tim Leary, not Terrence McKenna

The mainstream's reaction to the counterculture in the 60s says it all.

As opposed to what?

Lol you can see what other people voted

Epistemology tries to answer the question "how do you arrive at what is true?". It's not really a set of facts that you can write down and memorize. It's more like a skill or a 6th sense that you have to build up over time. The only way to begin is to open up some maps and start exploring, establish some reference points, widen your perspective. Study a diversity of historical figures, read between the lines and see the parallels in your own life and the world around you. What is the deeper lesson? Another crucial part is to study one's own mind, because truth-seeking always involves a truth-seeker. How does the mind play tricks on itself? What are its drives, its illusions, its biases? In what ways did the people of the past fool themselves? How are you fooling yourself?

It solves confusion about the big picture.

But is it maybe how the world works? Map =/ territory.

One way to experience the relativity of concepts like today/yesterday/tomorrow and early/late is to screw with your sleeping schedule. We instinctively define the beginning of "today" as the moment we wake up, and if you consistently wake up at night and you talk to somebody with a normal sleeping schedule, it becomes very easy to talk past eachother ("today? You surely mean tonight?").

If your addiction is a response to an underlying trauma or other dysfunction (lack of meaning, belonging etc.), address those first. Then become aware of the mechanics of cyclical thought and behavior, discover your goals and interests, and ask yourself if x behavior is in alignment with your interests. Maybe you're not giving yourself a good enough reason to quit smoking or giving up junk food. However, once you've convinced yourself to quit, the only thing that is stopping you is a lack of awareness of your own mental state; of the discrepancy between your interests and compulsive cycles.

Benevolent mass homicide through utilitarianism also hides a supremacist underbelly. It values a few over many, luxury over diversity, part over whole. The ethical path to sustainability is ecoliteracy. Humans need to learn, not get killed.

Stage Blue: it doesn’t really matter what you do for money as long as you're serving a transcendent ideal (God, the law, your country, your family). If there is ever a time where Blue will shoot someone for something, it will be in service of those things.

What about armed robbery?