Carl-Richard

That is powerful.

@Leo Gura If he only knew how some people look at his video with that same face

Emphasis on the quantity and diversity of mind blowage.

But I scored 80% N on the test?

It's how much you like getting your mind blown.

How do you read people?

@Artsu Just curious what your MBTI personality is? You seem very knowledgeable about it. I'm an INFP-A. I only tested myself twice, but many months apart.

What makes you think you haven't integrated green?

I remember back in 5-7th grade, there had developed this weird culture among the guys where we would get up from behind somebody's back without them suspecting it, and then try to pin them to the ground as fast and violently as possible. It was essentially a normal way that the guys would greet eachother, and it was just really exciting and typical adrenaline-filled guy-on-guy behavior (that came out wrong ). It had gotten so bad infact that one time when my girlfriend tried to jump up on my back without me suspecting it, I immediately threw her to the ground as a reflexive response, and that was so damn awkward lol. I did it so fast, she didn't even know what happened (). Everybody was in on it, and we didn't really get hurt. However, it had to come to an end. I believe it went on for a solid two years until one time it happened in front of one of the cool teachers (who had also gotten used to it), and then he said in a begrudging tone: "OK guys, I think it's time you stop doing that, don't you think?" ...and that was all it took for us to go from red to blue .

I was about to post that

It's only true relative to a set of presuppositions. We've been through this already. Absolute Truth does not come in the form of a thought. Only a thought comes in the form of a thought. A relative thought can be relatively true (which would make it relative), or relatively false (which would make it relatively invalid). You need to go experience it.

A thought is not Absolute Truth. A description is not Absolute Truth. Absolute truth cannot be emulated nor represented. Absolute Truth itself is the only thing that can be Absolute Truth. It doesn't make them irrelevant; it makes them relative. If it can be dissected, it isn't Absolute Truth.

You're underestimating the extent of relativity. Relativity doesn't just apply to the interpretation of something. The actual thing itself is a confinement, a label, a limitation, a concept, a fiction; which is relative. You're only talking about relative things here, not absolutes. The only absolute is God itself: pure, undivided consciousness. No "things" exist in an absolute sense. This is why it's important to make the distinction between the relative and the absolute domain. In the relative domain, yes, you are robbing a bank. In the absolute domain, there is only God. However, if you're able to concede on this distinction, then you could technically say that it's indeed absolutely true that you're robbing a bank in a relative sense (but then the use of the word becomes redundant).

I hope you'll laugh as much as I do some day when reading that.

When you're the only one that exists, why would you exploit or hurt yourself? If you're truly honest with yourself, it's really all just about the fear of being alone. The fear of being alone disappears when you accept that there is only one point of view. There are many different views in a relative sense, but only one view in an absolute sense.

How would you know the difference and what difference would it make for you?

I should've made it more clear: N vs P and S vs J.

No. "I robbed a bank" is only true relative to the idea of English grammar and a certain interpretation of language; whether it's literal or metaphorical, said in context, and whether you're using coded language etc.. It also assumes that you believe in personal agency, that personal agents even exist, that actions exist, that banks exist, and so on... Your statement only makes sense relative to these presuppositions. Depends if "me" and "you" are not the same people, and that isn't self-evident or obvious outside the given presuppositions that I've went through with you. That depends on the pre-existing value system that you're using to interpret the story. What is a bank? What is a robbery? What is a person? These things aren't written in stone. They're not absolutes.

@Yog I was talking about the similarities between N and P, not Se and Ni. Or am I that confused?

What if I never disagreed on any of that?

Solipsism is only a dirty word because of some confused scientists who don't understand metaphysics. Sure, if you arrive at solipsism from a place of self-aggrandizement rather than self-trancendence, then it's certainly a problem that needs to be addressed. It's not a pathology if it doesn't lead to pathological outcomes.

@Farnaby Rupert Spira addresses this point directly here:

Are you aware that you could only validate that through your own direct experience?