Carl-Richard

Both ?

It's not so much about letting go of a specific value as reacting to the excesses of that value. For instance, you can work hard and think rationally as a green person, but you'll also be more aware of the limits of those things (the pros and cons), and it gets recontextualized within a Green frame.

I'm not even sure if I fully agree with Terence here, but I just like quoting him from time to time :

Then that is something different than what you were talking about initially. You have to elaborate on why you think that is problematic. "Patriarchy" is not this moralizing term that says something like "all men are evil". It's a pretty dry descriptive term: society is and has always been dominated by men (generally speaking). Why is that a problematic statement?

Let's take the JBP route: how many universities exactly? In what way exactly? Is it a part of the curriculum to apologize for being oppressors? Is it a culture? Is it limited to students or does it include faculty?

@Ry4n *Anecdote of one person* => "it's in the education system now going borderline mainstream". Nope, still fringe.

It's possible to feel a stone as yourself.

"So guys, I defeated all these nazis in debate. Now, do you want some God in your life?" ?

Relative/absolute conflation. The concept of hallucination is fine. It's just that some people (including scientists) have a completely vacuous definition of it. For instance, there are some hallucinatory phenomena that could be completely unproblematic in a clinical context and some that could make it completely impossible. You can also distinguish it from general "trippiness".

You said it's not a gender issue but an agreeableness issue. That is not true. There are many more factors associated with gender and the pay gap. I'll answer with a question: What rights do blacks have in america in 2021 that whites do not? If they have the same rights, why are millions protesting on the street? It's just not that simple. You can't take a single factor like laws on paper or agreeableness and try to explain complex systemic issues like gender or racial equality. Now, attempts to solve these problems may involve looking at single factors, which initially works as symptomatic relief, but in doing so, it hopefully leads to systemic change in the long-term.

Agreeableness is one factor. Reality is much more complex than that. Unless you have the numbers, I doubt that agreeableness accounts for all the variance in the gender pay gap. Monofactorial explanations is basically unheard of in the study of social systems.

Still after that though, I heard him give a pretty milquetoast take on consciousness on one of his podcasts.

While that is true, I could never see him having a discussion about Tier 2 metaphysics.

Start reading about the first feminists in history and work yourself towards today's feminism and see if you can find where they supposedly went wrong. Simone de Beauvoir is a good place to start.

I'm not enlightened, because I fear it, but I can tell you that there is nothing to worry about regarding "functioning". If anything, you'll function better.

Duh. There is no you ?

This guy streams his study sessions every day. Makes me genuinely more motivated to read every time it pops up.

@Leo Gura

My philosophy professor randomly put this in a powerpoint when talking about hypothetical vs. categorical imperatives He is such a funny guy.

When "trigger hallucinations" is used in this way, it just screams 1960s stuck-up news broadcasters and drug scare stories. The ignorance ?

There are no persons. There is no you. There is only God.

Meditation alone is curative.

If you're already solid Green, study epistemology and metaphysics. People like Kuhn and Feyerabend can be considered Yellow.

People are meeting hyperintelligent interdimensional beings in DMT trips yet people don't believe aliens exist. ?