Carl-Richard

They are nevertheless a source of mystical experiences. Psychedelics and meditation are just two technologies of many that saints and sages have utilized all throughout history to alter their consciousnesses. Jesus himself engaged in ritualized near-drowning to induce near-death experiences i.e. mystical experiences. Buddha starved himself to near to death to realize The Middle Way which lead to the The Four Noble truths etc.

When I was addicted to pot, I realized that I wasn't primarily addicted to the numbness of being stoned (at least initially). I was instead addicted to the way it fuelled my overactive, neurotic and philosophizing mind, and simply as a side effect of that chaotic mental activity (and the numbness of course), it made me more able to avoid my broken conscience and neglected social responsibilities. When your mind is always immersed in that level of bouncing-off-the-wall dialectical ping-pong, you spend less time worrying about what you're actually supposed to do (namely being an adult). I actually found this out one time when I decided to throw some alcohol into the mix, and I didn't find it exciting at all, because it killed the cognitive hyperconnectivity and creative forcefulness of the unadultered weed high. If I was simply trying to numb myself, I would probably go to alcohol and beyond (which to be honest happened a bit later, straight before I quit drugs all together. There might be a link there). When that is said, I would say that the driving force behind my behavior at the time was always trauma. In fact, I believe that thought itself as a phenonema only arises when you need to deal with some immediately apparent problem, and if they seem to arise independently, repetitively or out of nowhere, there is some emotional baggage or attachment that is yet to be resolved (be it a mild attachment to an intellectual idea, some unresolved emotional trauma, or using the former to drown out the latter like I did, which is itself a feedback loop of dysfunctional behavior; hiding from the problem and creating progressively more problems in the process).

Not me at least, because I fear I would lose myself if I did that

Yeah let's abolish all medicine. Individual freedom is only granted to you by the existence of a collective in the first place. If you're willing to let it all burn to the ground, then there will be no freedom anyway.

I did not order this red herring, sir. People are free to go around ignoring their own health as long as it doesn't hurt other people. Viruses hurt other people. This is the argument. Sure, maybe if people were more healthy, it would lead to a marginally higher overall resistance against COVID-19, thus it would technically hurt less people, but which lane are you then choosing?: increased COVID-19 fatalities or decreased COVID-19 fatalities?

The problem is that this doesn't sell.

I actually think people have the right to be unhealthy as long as it doesn't hurt OTHER PEOPLE in immediately obvious ways. However, that was just a rhetorical device to point out a fatal flaw in your argument. Maybe read it in context with the following paragraph.

Align yourself with nature and become a broccoli. Turn yourself into ashes now!

Let me point your libertarian fire hose back at you: should people not be free to be unhealthy? Now, let's say there existed a highly contagious disease that did not just make people unhealthy themselves but OTHER PEOPLE AS WELL if they didn't "address those issues". Does this not threaten the individual rights of all people? Do people not have the right to live healthy lives without being imposed a health risk from others against their will? See how this freedom shit is not a one-way street?

and it does matter to people, so you're whole naturalistic tirade is a fugazi.

Is the vaccine a natural phenomena? Please.

Oh so you're saying you're above survival? Why do you eat in the morning? Yes, please run for president with that slogan. Very appealing! Then manifest a fucking spaceship and beam our asses off this stupid rock.

On nature's terms, why should humans deserve to live and viruses deserve to die? There is no such promise. That is only the narcissism of the human condition.

Even if you respected nature, COVID-19 would still kill your dumb ass. To think otherwise would be extremely arrogant, entitled and self-centered.

Reality is not anthropocentric and evolution is a rivalrous game. That is nature. Reality doesn't care whether humans exist or viruses exist. It only cares about the integrity of the whole. Lmao. I'm so done.

Death, disease and suffering is completely natural. Nature is not on Team Human. Nature is completely neutral and unbiased. If you let the virus win, then the virus wins.

Just one problem: look at Sadhguru. Maybe it's because you're not actually selfless yet.

Only if we half-ass the vaccinations. He even specifically said it: "imperfect vaccination can enhance the transmission of virulent pathogens".

It's a joke, buddy.

You have to view global pandemics like COVID-19 like a cancer. If it isn't stopped in the early stages, it could eventually doom the entire system. I keep talking about the possibility of it spawning more lethal variants who are just as much if not more contagious, and while I have no idea of the actual probability of such an event, just the mere possibility of it should scare the shit out of you. Even so, such a scenario is only the worst case. There are many other ways that could make everything go to shit.

It's Mount Kailash – a holy mountain That's Sadhguru sitting there btw.

Real dictator: kill as many people as possible. Covid dictator: kill as few people as possible. ?

The process of overcoming the fear of standing up for yourself and overcoming the fear of dogs is the same.

He is also pro-Trump lol

Sounds like it's not much of a choice. Dogs are everywhere.