Carl-Richard

When you say "Women's rights didn't work in Afghanistan", I would expect that you could atleast clarify in what way it didn't work, because I have no idea what you're talking about right now.

Yeah duh. But how or why didn't it work? Are you talking about the Taliban? You're being incredibly vague.

The point of the application process is to show that you're qualified. If you get offered the job, it means you're already qualified

What does that mean?

Great examples of systems thinking in this one.

Historically, we didn't have Women's rights either. We don't know how it will affect the world. The future is open for speculation.

except when you rely on accrued family wealth and nepotism.

This is a variation on the Dunning-Kruger effect: having gained enough knowledge to spook yourself but not enough to soothe yourself

That's easy: differentiate between the relative and The Absolute.

Charts like these are notoriously skewed to fit a particular agenda. I would suggest looking up every stat mentioned and cross-reference different sources (but of course, nobody cares to do that because it's essentially the image equivalent gish galloping). Also remember that groups like "frugivore" and "omnivore" are very generalized and do overlap in some areas and that many animals don't fit fully into just one category. https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Are_humans_omnivores_or_herbivores%3F

Stick to your experience.

It might be due to a decline in executive functioning rather than IQ per se, caused by things like the advent of TV entertainment and later social media. Executive functioning (EF) describes the ability to organize cognitive tasks, and increasingly sophisticated media technology outsources the tasks of the EF so all you have to do is to sit back and consume highly organized stimuli. The ultimate form of this is the format provided by the likes of TikTok, Instagram videos and YouTube Shorts (and some aspects of Twitter and Facebook).

Caloric-density might be an issue when it comes to getting enough of any given nutrient. As a vegan, you have an enormous amount of daily dietary fibre. I mean, there is a reason why you were able to eat until you were full and still lose weight. It's therefore possible to eat plants with say the correct amino acid profile (qualitatively speaking) and still not get enough quantity of protein.

Just some insight into how we're dealing with Covid-19 on a collective level quality wise. For example, now you know that you might catch the virus from somebody who is testing you, not simply because they were unlucky, but because there is a good chance they weren't following the correct protocols, caused by a lack of work experience or simple absentmindedness (common with the large proportion of newly employed young people) or stress from being overworked due to understaffing etc.

It literally is . Consciousness is everywhere simultaneously. There is nothing ultimately limiting it. Therefore, there is no reason why you shouldn't be able to read minds once in a while. It's not evidence in your eyes, but atleast you can see how it's possible.

Ok. so usually, people who are skeptical of psychic phenomena (or "magic") tend to argue that these things violate the locality of matter and spacetime. So what is stopping consciousness from being non-local?

Ok so I said I would review my time working as a Covid-19 tester in the summer. I worked there fulltime for about a month, and it was at the second largest airport in Norway. We tested all the passengers that came with international flights that didn't have the "corona passport". In Norway, it requires being fully vaccinated and having taken the vaccine in either Norway or some certified country (not all countries were qualified). It takes about 2 weeks of fulltime work before you're able to work semi-independently, and they had to hire a lot of new people in the summer, which sometimes caused the situation of there being almost nobody at work who really knew what they were doing. This was really only a problem in the beginning, but it didn't necessarily lead to much trouble back then because of the low amount of air traffic. Even so, the journal system allows for a lot of error correction and double checking, so if anything, it only means that somebody has to do a bit of extra work. I learned that they hire mostly young people without any work experience, and some of them are very relaxed when it comes to following anti-contamination routines (removing equipment carefully, using masks at work). We had one case where an employee caught the virus at work (this was in the news), and this lead to about 10-15 employees being put in quarantine for a couple of days, and we had to borrow people from other test stations for a while. If this happened later in the summer when there was a lot of more air traffic, it would've been pretty bad. There was one time where we had 1000 people waiting in line all at once, and the maximum capacity is 7-8 testers. It was so bad that the airport CEO felt the need to deliver the information to us in person I learned that the communal sector (or muncipality) is horrible at managing worktime schedules in general. On the one hand, they'll say they need more people taking extra shifts because of understaffing, but on the other hand, employees will complain about not getting enough shifts. When it comes to the Covid-19 test station in particular, there was always a mismatch between how many passengers we had to test that day and how many employees were at work (either too much or too little). This lead to people having to work overtime rather frequently and times where only half of the people had to even do anything at a given time. Other than that, it was a great work environment and I met some interesting people.

What does that mean?

Why are you not a materialist?

I never said that I had evidence for you. The evidence is always in your hands

I experience magic everyday

We're not obligate frugivores, hence we're omnivores Anyways, evolutionary adaptations primarily serve reproductive fitness, not longevity or necessarily even health (depending on your definition), so just because we can eat something doesn't mean we should. Just because our ancestors were able to survive long enough to reproduce doesn't mean that their diet maximizes health and longevity. This applies for everything; meat, fruit, vegetables. It should be theoretically possible to produce the perfect healthy food that is neither of those things. Anyways, my advice to you is this: don't stop experimenting, always listen to your body, and don't get stuck in rigid paradigms regarding food groups. I've tried eliminating and substituting most foods out there, and the answer for me was never "either/or". Sometimes vegan, sometimes a little meat. Now, that is just me. It's very individual. If it weren't for the fact that my hobby is lifting heavy weights (deliberate weird flex ), I would probably be fully vegan or vegetarian. Your body will probably feel fine on a fully vegan diet for a while, but don't be surprised if that changes.

It's not just that. It goes against the very metaphysics of Siddhis.

These are the weakest arguments though. I think the strongest argument for why you don't see psychic powers becoming mainstream is that being proficient at it is directly antithetical to pursuing egoic, low-consciousness survival needs. Siddhis are byproducts of working towards The Absolute. The Absolute is not anthropocentrically hyper-utilitarian like Stage Orange science is. The Absolute works for the integrity of the whole, and from that perspective, humans are at the same level as bacterias, cancer cells or viruses. It's not necessarily that you become less concerned about human problems, but it's rather that your psychic powers are not serving those problems. That is for example why the firemaking Chi guy from the other thread was visited by his master in his sleep when he started showing off, and it's also why subtle psychic phenomena that are more accessible to everyday people are not under "their control" per se (it happens "to them").

The point is that it's not as simple as "just do the experiment". Besides the myriad of other reasons to keep quiet, there is a lot of stigma around these things. It's a little bit like psychedelics. If you think it takes just one person to turn the world on to the benefits of psychedelics, then that is very naive. It takes decades of people teaming up and working behind the scenes before you even see a modicum of public sway in favor of the topic. There are many challenges to overcome. For example, research on psychedelics was illegal for the better part of the 20th century, and that didn't just change in a heartbeat.