Carl-Richard

Don't overthink stuff.

Awakening is more about seeing the true nature of the ego and survival. The ego still exists in a sense. Survival is still going on to various degrees. The difference is now you have the freedom to choose.

Physical survival is also egoic survival. You choose to identify with your physical body.

Of course he didn't go all the way. He dipped his toes in and flinched

I believe that most musicians are atleast subconsciously tapping into these mystical realms of experience, and some will inevitably find ways to conceptualize it through language and not just through their music.

Things start to become a bit complex when you start talking about hypothetical Yellow societies. Could they even exist? What would they look like? The expression of Blue (conservatism) of course depends on the cultural context: conservatism of today is not equal to conservatism of the past; Blue people living in majority Orange societies will show different beliefs than in majority Blue or Yellow societies. So you have rigidity of beliefs, but the specific beliefs in question are somewhat flexible (for example views on slavery). When society gets to Yellow, the expression of Blue obviously shifts, both demographically and ideologically, so you'll see much fewer Blue people and a much "milder" version of it. You could say the core elements of rigidity and ethnocentrism will remain while it gradually gets stripped of its contents. What that ultimately will look like is hard to say. If we assume in this hypothetical society that Blue's cultural influence is peripheral to the core functioning of societal systems, it will be limited to the level of individuals and turn into a local social problem instead of a global problem. Just like how very few people have strong enough dark triad traits to be limited to Red for life, there will be something like that relating to Blue, but again, the scale and impact of the problem will be minimized.

This is like straight out of Actualized.org :

Do you ever doubt yourself and think you're just a filthy little orange man who is deluding himself?

How do you know this? What if he is just basic?

I've had both the thing he is talking about and night terrors, and they're not the same.

The thing is that they actually do talk about this, but the words don't capture the gravity of the situation. "Ego death", "death of the self", "spiritual death and rebirth" very much feels like physical death from the perspective of the ego. The trick to avoiding that trap is to directly see how it's only from the perspective of the ego, but it requires being brutally honest with yourself.

Me too. The difference with me is that it happens everyday when I'm awake.

Learn to embrace it. It's a free ticket to enlightenment.

On a second thought, I don't think the holistic vs. reductionistic thing was a very helpful or accurate description :P. I was mainly contrasting the common mystical "justice" perception of karma with the word commonly associated with causality ("mechanism") while using it more as a metaphor than an accurate description, in order to create a guiding image.

Don't get stuck on materialistic terminology. It's a holistic mechanism, not a reductionistic mechanism. Karma isn't reducible to single units of measurement (e g. Newtonian forces), but it describes causal "trends".

Many atheists claim that they don't make any claims about reality (lol), but rather that they're just unconvinced and need to be provided with enough convincing evidence. This is a trick of syntax that is trying to mask the fact that they want everything to be done on their own terms, which is in thread with their underlying claims about reality, namely claims around verificationism and empiricism. One of their main claims about reality is "we ought to use verificationism as our primary methodological device for evaluating truth claims". They will counter this by saying that it's a self-evident fact that verificationism is directly congruent with truth, but that is just not true at all, and is also a claim about reality

Tier 1 inclusion: "We're inclusive, and if you're not inclusive, then fuck you!" Tier 2 inclusion: "We're inclusive, and if you're not inclusive, then we'll try to fix that."

Paradigms, my friend.

I don't know where you're getting that from and how you're being any different.

45:55-47:03 That is some profound shit coming from a boxer.

Interesting how Mike Tyson can say stuff like "no, you ARE God" and everybody think it's alright, but when Connor Murphy comes out saying the exact same things, everybody starts losing their shit

All these reactionary right-wing movements and toxic masculinity go hand-in-hand.

I would hesitate to apply a SD stage to a place in history where that stage generally didn't exist, especially if it's two or more stages removed from the cultural backdrop. The individual is always in a transactional relationship with the environment, so even if they are starting to push the edge, there is always something that keeps them back. A stage also doesn't really have any solid ground to grow on if it's more than 1 above the mainstream of the society, because revolutionary thinking is more or less always grounded in a reaction to the status quo. That is why the stages took such a long time to evolve, because they ultimately require a gradual change on the societal level from one stage to the next.

LOOOL How is "feminism phase" a non-ideological non-category?