Carl-Richard

14 men and 14 women each live on their own deserted island in the tropics and have to survive for 4 weeks. WhO hAs wHat it tAkes to sUrviVe? I've watched three episodes so far and it's pretty fun. I can't be asked to join the "haha lol women" thing before I've watched the entire thing. But there are some differences of course, as you would expect. If I was stranded on a deserted island, I would take @Natasha Tori Maru as medical grade shelter builder and @integral as contamination specialist I would be the jungle shaman or whatever; let me spend some time meditating and I'll maybe give some intuition-based navigation tips or just some wacked-out shit. When watching episode 3, I randomly came up with a possible hunting technique for sting rays that were swimming in the shallows on the beach and some of them tried to catch (if you're interested and you're ever on a deserted island without food ):

When I got to zoology and botany in biology in uni (I took a year of biology back in the day), I was plagued by the fact that we had to learn about some classes of animals and not others, and there was seemingly no good reason why. And we had to memorize like 20-30 species of birds and plants. Yep. But evolutionary biology on the other hand, that was my jam. Everything made sense, everything had a reason why you were learning it. But this is maybe more about "coherence" than "application" ("does it make logical sense?", "does one concept connect to the next?"). Perhaps more Ti than Te.

Emperor with this song is something like progressive black metal. The chord progressions are like straight out of jazz fusion and the song structure and dynamics is brilliant. Dimmu Borgir almost sounds like pop music in comparison (I still love them though).

They say that good music keeps you at the edge between familiarity and surprise. Too familiar becomes boring, and too surprising becomes hard to follow. Musical improvisation is the manifestation of this in real time, and you can usually notice when the player is engaging in well-established/familiar patterns ("licks") and when the player is creating something completely original. I'm used to improvising a lot on guitar, and I've noticed that I'm able to imagine impossibly intricate and original lines of improvisation in my head, but I'm in no way technically advanced enough to manifest that through my instrument. When I listen to the most complete virtuostic improvisational players out there, even though they can come very close many times, I always feel a tension between boredom and impenetrability. Of course, this desire I have of hearing the most hyper-creative lines of notes that I can possibly imagine is impossible to fulfill. It's completely relative to my unique conception of music, and I would probably never in a million years get to hear somebody produce even 10 seconds of those exact notes (which would be absolutely transcendentally orgasmic if it happened). Nevertheless, I know two players who come extremely close, and I'll try to weigh to which extent they're too "boring" ("musically conventional" is a better word) or too impenetrable (too melodically or harmonically complex) relative to my impossible standard of imaginative perfection. Guthrie Govan (obviously). It's tricky, because he is so versatile that he often fluctuates between too conventional (like bluesy bendy stuff) and too complex (like jazzy shredding stuff). I'll give an example for each player: Allan Holdsworth is notoriously known for being impossible to imitate by other players. For reference, Guthrie Govan can imitate virtually anyone but him. He often becomes too complex. I sometimes have to listen to his songs 30 times to understand what he is doing (like the run at 1:28 in the video below). (Btw things become more interesting around 0:40).

Mr. Air man, I have a question: what happens when you fart inside your room? And what does walking past a newly fertilized (they threw cowshit and piss on it) field do to you?

Then I think we might be watering down the concept as you've said. Is teaching your kids to not break the law abuse? Sadhguru did not put his child in school before 12 years old, specifically to avoid indoctrinating her (he even told people not to teach her anything vaguely school-related when interacting with her). But he made her travel with him all across the country. She did not have a say in that. And of course that affected her beliefs a certain way than if she had "decided" not to travel with him. At some point, treating school or church as a concrete thing or place you can choose to go to or not is a bit simpleminded and reductionistic. The very environment you are born into is technically a place you can choose whether to be in or not, and it affects your beliefs just the same. The only strong difference is that school and church has an organized and strong agenda behind it, people having an intention to teach something to somebody. But this intention exists in micro-versions as Sadhguru was aware of in daily interactions with people, and even without any intention to teach or even the active intention to prevent teaching from happening, you are passively being molded by your surroundings, happenings and events in a just as significant if not a more significant way. Bringing up a child has an element of coercion if you want them to live successfully inside a state (a place with a government) or simply a community with behavioral expectations. They have to conform to either laws or norms or both, or else they will be punished. And of course if all of this is abuse, then what is letting them "choose" to be independent of these things, letting them go live in the jungle alone (let's assume a kid, a very young kid, just keeps wandering into the jungle any time you let them out of sight)? Maybe laws and norms can protect children from neglect, as you've alluded to, a form of abuse. So can abuse maybe depend on other things than coercion, influences of beliefs, and teaching, and perhaps social responsibility, expectations, duty? Can coercion be a social expectation, a duty, and can it even be morally good?

Is putting your kids in school abuse? School surely affects their beliefs, and they usually don't have much of a choice whether to go or not.

Enlightenment is perfect, unconditional flow.

That's a lethal amount of darts 💘🥴

Them being born is then a form of abuse, taking them to school is a form of abuse, letting them watch TV, YouTube, the news, joining a youth political party. Nobody has any idea what they are doing when they are born and are just exposed to things outside their control. That's life.

Of course, the less philosophically informed you are, the more prone you are to falling for "AI is conscious because it speaks to me" and other bullshit like that. Being a "scientist" in this case only strengthens the self-deception (biology is generally not a very philosophically informed field, although this is changing at the cutting edge with e.g. Michael Levin). Mike Israetel is another example.

You'll become a mosquito or earthworm in the next life if you try to cheat.

Stardew Valley seems like a simplified version of RuneScape. I've played (OldSchool) RuneScape for more hours than some of you have been alive (jking). I haven't logged in for months, even though I started a project aiming to improve my hybridding PvP skills, specifically learning to use brews instead of solid food. The goal is to be better off at the next Deadman Mode game mode (and also just be better at hybridding in general; it's a very fun hobby).

Do you have a life purpose?

If your actions do not at some point lead you to a place where you do what you want to do, you have failed as an organism. Passion is the immediate feedback that you're doing is what you want to do. If you don't at least aim at passion, irrespective of the privilege you have to access it right now, you're ultimately working against yourself.

I'm at Dual-8-Back The levels after 4-5 tend to have lesser of a difference between them compared to levels 2-3. That is, once you're at Dual 4-Back, it shouldn't take much to jump up more levels (you might in fact be able to jump multiple at once). I think I spent the least time on level 6 of all the levels.

Maximizing meaning and purpose. It hyper-charges your brain with dopamine, it increases your IQ by several 10-points; and not willy-nilly like taking a drug — holy, sacred, crystalline dopamine which is embodied and aligned with a goal and purpose, which harmonizes with and uncovers the faultlines of true/higher reality. Then you also have brain training techniques like N-Back training and image streaming (can only vouch for the former, haven't tried the latter). N-Back is good for extending short-term memory length and capacity and generally increasing working memory capacity, image streaming is purportedly very good for training imaginative ability, semantic connectivity and verbal fluency. I worry if I try image streaming I might actually go insane. I don't think practicing random off-the-cuff associative thinking would be good for me (I think I already have more than enough but who knows), but working memory yes.

I've held half a skull with a brain in there, does that count? 🥥

Like I said, I've never done it before 😀 I'm unsure if it will at any point crack like an egg because of the thickness (ChatGPT it).

Bonesaw. I've only sliced brains but not opened skulls before.

Semen has more protein than cow milk. I won't add a joke to this 🥴 I presume we're talking about liquid cockroaches here and not milking cockroaches from their presumably non-existent non-mammalian udders? EDIT: I was wrong. Regardless, I think a liquid cow could be just as nutritious pound-for-pound as a liquid cockroach.

Me listening to brutal blackened technical slam death metal: "yes" Me discovering trace amounts of heavy metal in my fish dish: "get tha heell outta here"

Only generalizing, or generalizing a lot, can cause some issues. An antidote could be listing different alternatives and then synthesizing them. For example, with sex addiction, you can list many things: trauma, personal predisposition, personal beliefs, culture, neurological issues, cognitive styles, attention, awareness, executive control, values, life orientation, suppression, transmutation, habit. And sex addiction might not even be the right concept here. The OP seems to be struggling with some obsessive-compulsive thoughts around sex. It can often come from a desire to control or do things properly, which can come from many things, perhaps a belief, perhaps trauma, or personal experiences that cause lack of control and expressing it through control over sex can be a byproduct. Or perhaps a general cognitive style of control. And maybe you can challenge that need for control with acceptance, either by accepting the controlling behavior or relinquishing the need to control at all. What are you aiming at with the control after all? Feeling at ease with yourself? Or is the goal more important than that, is it bigger than yourself (maybe it isn't in this case)?

How to make a progressive metal song: score a horror movie scene with the precision of a Tom and Jerry score (virtually any microscopic part of the scene you can pick out, down to the eye movements of the actors, you intentionally score the music to be in sync with): https://youtu.be/2TFYM9hYxzA?is=eH9y9Q4__FPsEcIZ The way they choose the rhythms and accents, the time signatures, while still maintaining a cohesive overall song, is a work of supreme musical intellect. This is highly deliberate and consciously created music, created by conforming to not just an overall abstract idea but an existing concrete artwork in another medium. The antithesis of conforming to a tried-and-tested formula that will sell the most records. Epic example of creativity through limitation.