Carl-Richard

This is an interesting dynamic and a funny video: Green-centered rationalist-materalist reacts to Green post-rationalism/spirituality. This shows the nuances within Green: Notice how often Vaush commits the pre/trans fallacy, mistaking post-rationalist beliefs (hyper-green) for pre-rationalist beliefs (blue). It happens at 12:23, 13:08, 17:40, 23:20, 24:45, 29:50, 33:50, 34:50, 40:15, 42:47, 50:56 etc.. Essentially, Vaush has built up a wide array of cognitive schemas that link paranormal/irrational beliefs to conservatives, which is a result of years of ideological vitriol towards right-wingers. That could be an example of the lack of self-awareness and the self-deception mechanisms of Tier 1.

It is infinitely more problematic than you could ever imagine. Statistics doesn't capture it. There are countless individual perspectives that contain experiences that are absolutely horrible. The thing is though, aside from acknowledging your own relative privilege, why go around thinking about it?

You deal with it by becoming more conscious.

Thinking is poison. Use it wisely.

"Why" assumes too much.

The point that he is an agent of repression really resonates with me, particularily when I look at my own experiences in that domain. When you repress your emotions, the way you speak and move makes you come off as uptight, uneasy and confused, or sometimes just numb. You can really feel it in his voice and bodily expressions that his energy is not allowed to flow properly.

The shadow is also infinite, so the only remedy is infinite luminosity

Why?

This guy started playing guitar when he was 3 and learned everything by ear... yes. One doesn't get hired by Hans Zimmer for no reason This section 1:44 - 2:33 is fully improvised... This one is also completely improvised, recorded on the first take (!) and put on the album "Hand Cannot Erase" by Steven Wilson : And of course, Steve Vai, who was hired by Frank Zappa to work as a transcriptionist at just 18 years old:

Why would he be? He said he is done seeking

Veganism as a dietary choice is intuitively appealing, because the prospect of obtaining meat easily produces a visceral response without much investigation. However, there are a myriad of arguably much more effective ways of reducing suffering in this world, but those solutions often require taking a more cold-hearted statistical view over a warm-hearted intuitive view (yellow vs. green), and therefore it won't enter the minds of most people. If you're genuinely concerned about making a real impact instead of merely adopting an idealistic ideology, I recommend the systemic approach (of course that also includes veganism, but not as a priority).

That's a limit of the model, not a failure. You can't condense a human being down to 5 traits.

Same with Big 5.

The cognitive functions describe behavior. You don't have to impose the structure vs. content duality on everything.

Basic social interaction is ALL about conformity, hence why I mentioned Stage Purple. Remember, we're trying to give advice on how to learn basic social skills. That is what the OP is interested in here. What you're talking about applies to <1% of the social biomass out there. Outside of those niche cases, if you don't conform to social norms in any shape or form, you'll be cast out, and it doesn't matter a single bit if you're enlightened or not. If you're talking about your own experience here, I severely doubt that you haven't assimilated into your own culture to a certain extent or that you choose not to conform to most social norms. You're taking an intuitive approach that doesn't stand on its own, as it requires a relative degree of conformity (which may be less than average, but is nevertheless still a level conformity). You're actually coming from a conformist perspective and trying to go into the post-conformist realm in order to rid yourself of cultural hangups, and that's fine. What I'm talking about is how to go from the pre-conformist realm and into the conformist realm, because that is what the OP seems to struggle with.

You can't run a car on nothing but air. You need an engine and some gas: engine is structure, gas is content. Confidence is structure, culture is content. You need both. Spirituality is self-help though. That is not the point. The point is that in some social settings, depending on the culture, looking like a horse will be detrimental to your chances of succeeding socially, i.e. it's culturally dependent. Social skills depend in part on cultural markers that are either in or out of your control. Repeated practice can help with the former. It's to a certain degree relative, in the grand scheme of things, cross-culturally, of course. Nevertheless, socialization is 90% a Stage Purple endeavor with undeniable qualities that cannot be missed in order for you to not come of like a jellyfish (childhood socialization etc.), and then additionally, within a culture, there are specific requirements of cultural norms that cannot be simply downloaded from the iEnlightenment memory cloud (higher-order sociocultural dynamics). Sure, most people don't have to think much about these things and can go off into their caves all they want, but don't fool yourself into thinking that Ramana Maharshi could just walk down to the bar and pull some numbers. He would atleast have to switch the loincloth for something else.

?

Society is a very general term. Are bums accepted in society? Well, in some ways yes, some ways no. And you're correct: I'm talking about very specfic and nuanced social interactions that self-help is concerned with, because that is what you should aim for as a functional human being. If you just want to get by, sure do your thing, but if you want to excel in something, there are certain requirements that you must take up. That is also extremely relative. What if I have a speech impediment or look like a horse? What if I'm from another country originally or have had a poor upbringing that doesn't match the environment of my peers? You're severely underestimating the amount of social privilege that just makes you able to drop all concerns and just go with the flow.

Believe it or not, language acquisition is a social activity that takes decades to perfect. It's also not just about the ability to speak the language, but knowing the specific cultural fingerprint of a social group is very important in order to be able to assimilate, and that also takes decades if we're counting from day one. That goes far beyond merely the basic developmental psycholinguistics and more into complex/cortical sociocultural dynamics. "Enlightenment" doesn't automatically grant you the do's and don'ts of a particular culture: it only works as a generalized buffer of existing structures. Becoming enlightened and going to the bar doesn't make you any less of an alien than you used to be previously, just a little less anxious and a more eccentric type of alien. Did you not socialize at all?

Are we talking high school level or postgraduate?

This is the contradiction you're looking for. Infinity is unlimited by definition. Something that is unlimited cannot be created by something limited, therefore it must be created by itself. That is not a limitation on infinity. It's just the nature of infinity.

Infinity itself is not constrained. It's infinite. Only a perspective can be constrained. Infinity itself is aperspectival, because it contains and transcends all perspectives. You're asking as if it isn't already creating it differently. It IS doing that right now, infinitely in all possible ways.

You're looking for a limited mechanism that explains reality. There is no mechanism behind reality. Infinity is the mechanism. A limited mechanism cannot create an infinite structure. Absolute Infinity is self-created. It necessarily has to be that way, or else it couldn't be infinite.

There exists an infinite amount of particular perspectives, so of course it has to exist. If it excludes a particular perspective, it's not infinite.