Carl-Richard

I wanted a non-dual cliché answer. Now I'm sad

What is the problem with that distinction?

Tell me what you know.

@Zigzag Idiot Bro check out the ozzfest perfomance in 2000. I posted it here earlier. It's arguably the most refined example of Red energy out there It's at the peak of Phil's heroin addiction and he is treating his voice like a piece of toilet paper

We're talking about Trump, not his MBTI type

You don't have to be condecending lol. I know the nervous system. I took some courses in human physiology and anatomy in college . Anyways, I think I've made my point clear: rape is harmful in a relative sense, but not in an absolute sense. Facts are relative, not absolute. Learn to differentiate between absolute and relative statements.

Then I don't agree that you agree with me . I'm not at all trying to say that abuse is not a serious thing. I'm saying serious things are relative. I think you should care about not doing harm, you should care about being a better person, and I believe that what I'm providing here is going to help you very much in that direction. All I'm trying to do by saying all this is to prevent harm (the harm of not seeing your own perspective as a perspective)

I recommend listening to solo players playing live instruments (or singers), who have mastered their craft to such a level that they can enter a state of flow, where they gain the ability to connect to a stream of infinite beauty and love, and express it effortlessly through form Here's only one example:

Just to be clear, I'm no rape apologist, and you might be on the same page, but I just have to be sure. The topic of rape isn't the hill I'm choosing to die on, but rather I'm trying to show you that what you consider to be factual is actually a perspective. Rape is harmful relative to a certain idea of what harm is (be it physical, emotional, interpersonal, social, psychological harm etc..). My point is that you choose whatever level of analysis you want to engage in, and that makes up your perspective. For instance, you choose to make the distinction between perpetrator and victim; you choose the definition of harm that makes sense to you; none of this is an universal given fact. Rape is harmful relative to your perspective of what harm is, of what rape is etc.. However, when you concede on the relativity of perspectives, then you can still talk about facts and how things relate within a chosen paradigm, but you realize their relative nature, and you become aware of the mechanics of your own beliefs on a meta-level: you're the puppet that is able to perceive of its own strings.

Name one.

My point was to get you to concede on the fact that since you have to define the concepts that you use to construct your facts, your "facts" depend on something that is not fact in order to be created (yes, you're creating something; it's not a given, not a self-evident truth that everybody has access to). You've defined what facts are relative to your perspective. You can have people who agree with your perspective and your definitions, but definitions aren't factual. They're fictions on which you write your story, and you can share that story with people who know the language, but only them.

You've lost me. What has this got to do with facts?

How do I know what you're showing me?

But what is America? What is a piece of land? What is black people? What is slaves? Can you define it?

When the society treats some of its citizens with the equivalent level of oppression of a Stage Red dictatorship, then you should expect these people to act accordingly. If you're pushed to your limits and threatened for your life, even as a high consciousness individual, you will regress down to the appropriate stage and address the issues from that place. High consciousness will flourish in high consciousness environments, and we're addressing the problem of the environment being unequal.

Is your definition of black people, slaves, and America just facts? Is your definition of facts a fact? To give you a hint: facts are defined relative to a perspective, and there are an infinite amount of perspectives. Are there an infinite amount of facts then? What if your idea of "facts" and "objectivity" is simply a result of the denial of the "fact" that it's just your perspective?

You should be concerned and it shouldn't be denied. Acknowledging the absolute does not negate the relative. They're just different perspectives.

Wdym?

What if you had boobies?

Shouldn't be too hard when you only get your perspective from other people anyway

Do you fear being feminine?

Yeah I know nothing about MBTI, that's for sure

I struggle to find a definitive difference between the traits Sensing/Intuition and Perceiving/Judging. I feel that both go under the Big Five trait of Openness and that there is a very severe overlap between them. https://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/ They are so freaking similar. Can somebody walk me through the differences? Thanks

Follow your bliss, man.

LOL. I took the test myself and it was garbage hahaha. SD cannot be evaluated through a standarized test.