Carl-Richard

So does the New Age. Does that make New Age Hindu? The hell. Bingo.

Ok it's weird: he shits on religion more than you do, and he does the thing where "we're just seekers, not believers", like you and other New Agers do, but he applies that to the entire Hinduistic/subcontinental enterprise ("we've always been a country of seekers, not believers"). So he is like a Hindu/India supremacist while still New Age. "Seeker vs believer" is a New Age concept. It's directly tied to the modern atheistic critique. "We're spiritual but not religious".

Bruh this is a braindead take. He shits on religion more than you do.

Yellow flag is the most amazing idiom I've ever conceived of. But do you consume its contents? Do you "phage" it? Do you swallow?

I'm an LGBTQ+ ally. But when I eat bananas, my brain goes nanana and my body goes bobobo (i.e. feminizing and non-vitalistic effects, PS: non-interchangeable concepts). Is it the copper? The fructose? The potassium? The magnesium? The polyphenol oxidase? What's up with this penis shaped yellow flag?

Gen Z uses "autism" to mean anything that vaguely resembles nerd behavior. I'm diagnostically anti-autistic.

No. You can effectively buy an ADHD prescription. It's called private practice. The prescription of ADHD meds in Norway has increased 220% since 2015 and 85% the last four years. https://www.forskning.no/adhd-medisiner-ntb/eksplosiv-okning-i-bruk-av-adhd-medisin/2632463 There is an economic incentive on part of the practicioners that can explain parts of it. You can follow the list of criteria and be "charitable" in your interpretation so to speak and then give a "diagnosis". It's all down to the individual professional. At the end of the day, if you eat like shit you eat like shit. My friend has always been a picky eater and it seems to me he has not been very challenged in that area during his upbringing (perhaps him being an only-child could be part of the explanation). I've also always "eaten well" and been active, my mother is a general practicioner. But the difference between that and me making a concerted effort to 1. eat anti-inflammatorily, and 2. regulate glucose strategically and systematically (which is following each meal with either a 10-minute walk or a workout), the difference is astronomical. This kind of self-help approach to diet is new and cutting edge, GPs are mostly out of the loop. If it works for you it works for you, but don't be surprised if it doesn't work. Age seven is a funny thing. Virtually nobody diagnoses kindergarteners with ADHD. Seems like an environmental artifact. Make school play, make play school, let the people who sit still sit still, let people who want to run run. Let people who have eaten food move, let the people who have moved sit down. That's glucose control right there.

Only time I'll happily indulge in a banana is when in a heterosexual format.

"Peeinghuman" what the actual fuck is that channel name and logo.

Who? And how do you judge them to be enlightened? People who judge Sadhguru as not enlightened, are in my opinion either not very acquainted with the man or probably not enlightened themselves.

He is definitely New Age but his Hindu aesthetic makes it a bit less obvious. He has a standard atheistic take on traditional religions. "It's just beliefs, dogma, you have to go inwards".

No.

I might be allergic or I just overeat them sometimes or I simply don't appreciate their gayness.

Learn to identify a shittake comment and take the general gist. I'm pointing out a very often overlooked issue while being a jokester about it. It's taken from personal experience. I can drop the full-scale graduate curriculum if you haven't already learned it. If I don't regulate my glucose or eat sufficiently anti-inflammatory, my attentiveness and IQ goes to absolute shit. No brain training, meditation, anything, except pharmaceuticals of course, can help me. I watched my friend who eats like absolute garbage get a med prescription because he convinced himself he has ADHD and then he developed OCD-symptoms, felt like "I sort of feel like I have more ADHD on the drug than off it" and then threw the prescription away.

If your tits are shaped like bananas, should you be concerned?

You just have a problem with autism. You come into the nerd squad preaching basketball and beerbongs. It doesn't inherently make you less awake to be a nerd vs a jock. It's primarily a difference in preference and temperament. Unsolicited preaching on the other hand, perhaps a strong case for an inverse (🤓) awakening relationship.

Notice how nobody asked.

Stop eating shit and go for a walk. Veggies, glucose control. ADHD is children not listening to their mom.

Who? Osho? Charles Manson? L. Ron Hubbard?

Biology.

Np I also find it particularly interesting that it notes that ages 25-30 seems to be where meta-systematic can start to develop, and that's when I started to have "original" (or "organic") insights into my own field (psychology) that seemed to connect different parts of the field together. Particularly how all mental illnesses involving negative emotional cognition seem to involve a lack of perceived (or actual) control (thread).

Same. Meta-awareness becomes particularly prominent at age 7 or so. That's around the first time I started pondering my own mortality. But the core of meta-awareness comes online at age 3 or so. You could perhaps map it onto cognitive complexity theory (Model of Hierarchical Complexity): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_of_hierarchical_complexity I asked ChatGPT 6.1 Sol Max some questions about it: https://chatgpt.com/share/6af117ce-50a0-83ed-8b57-498fbd68b013

Remove the padding and you have my sentence. But now you're making a big deal out of it. Like, can I not call out what I consider to be "low development" (I never use that term unless I'm forced to, it disgusts me) and people will consider me just a good ol' inspiring person? Can only "spiritual people" do that? Seems hypocritical.

I'm literally uncertain about the word. Now you're being uncharitable ;( Honestly, I never use the word, I always found it a weird word, and it seems to have at least two separate meanings that are equivocal in this discussion. So feel free to engage with me 'charitably' and not simply mind-read me, if that is what is expected of people. In what sense was I being uncharitable? Was I just being too harsh in my portrayal, or was I not being open? Both? Something else? Do I ought to be charitable? Can I not simply share an opinion without performing a forensic interview of the person I'm referring to? Do i seem closed to discussing my opinion? Is perhaps the person in question the one who is closed to discussing it as per "I don't see the point in responding, agree to disagree"? And were they to discuss it, perhaps I would look less presumptive and you wouldn't be as likely to make this characterization? I guess why the word never made sense to me is because the idea of "being charitable" (like you're running a charity), like you're supposed to give something else than just your opinion, like something else than what you perceive is accurate and is the case, like being fake, makes no sense. "If I were to be charitable, I would of course say this thing which I actually think is not what I think". On the contrary, the greatest charity is giving exactly what you think is most accurately the case. Asking for anything else, you're not asking for what I think.

Can you define uncharitable?