Carl-Richard

No talk

Copy the white.

@something_else Try debating whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable. Did that once. I repeat: once.

Quack? 🦆

Need when you sleep to. Need you when sleep to. Need you when to sleep. Need to you when sleep. Leaving me with a few options here. Why is my brain like this when I have to sleep, thinking like a sheep, not counting them, counting on being sleek, getting girls real steep, won't peep, go deep, I've become the comic relief, not even smoking leaf, not talking to her from the Great Barrier Reef but the great Sweet in Swed-en, no jacket on, just a Coat, goatboat. I will never rap again. or will I rap again, probably not, only listen to snotnosed metal music and jazzfusion, fusing my wires in a Twist, like the Swedish candy (no sorry that's Noruegan, I'm not vegan- STOP). Somebody stop me 🤖 (Somehow I'm triggered by saying "I'm not vegan", I don't have OCD, that's just a role I'm playing - didn't intend that to rhyme but oh well).

You want to see how "not talky" I can talk? ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⣶⣶⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣾⠛⠁⢰⣧⡈⢻⣦⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣇⣼⡀⠻⠟⠁⠀⢻⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⢀⡞⣹⠙⣧⡀⠀⠀⡀⢸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⣀⡴⠋⠀⣀⣴⣿⡷⠴⠞⠁⢸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢾⣁⣀⡤⠾⠛⠁⣸⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠈⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣿⠁⠀⠀⠀⢀⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⡿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣶⠶⠿⠟⠿⠿⣶⣦⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⣼⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⠛⠿⠶⣶⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⣸⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠁⢀⣀⣠⣤⣤⣤⣤⣤⣀⠀⠉⠙⠳⢦⣄⡀⣀⣤⣀⣀⡄⠀ ⠀⢀⣿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠻⢶⣀⠀⠀⠈⠉⢁⠈⠏⣿⣁⠀ ⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠻⣦⣀⣀⡴⠁⠀⠀⢙⣿⡾ ⠀⠘⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠀⠀⣀⣠⡾⠟⠃ ⠀⠀⠹⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣀⣀⡔⢊⣵⠞⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⣦⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡠⠚⠉⠀⣠⣴⠟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⠳⠶⣤⣤⣄⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢤⣤⣴⠊⣁⣤⠶⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠙⠛⡷⢶⡶⠶⠤⠔⢺⠃⡟⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⠀⢰⡇⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣹⣤⣭⠿⠟⣃⣾⠋⠀⠀⢠⡟⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠁⠈⠉⠙⠛⢋⣿⣙⣶⣾⡿⢷⡿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⠛⠛⠻⠧⠶⠾⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠘⠛⠚⠛⠻⠟⠛⠓⠟⠻⠓⠐⠚⠒⠛⠁⠀⠀⠸⠓⠇⠞⠛⠚⠙⠲⠀⠐⠞⠀⠀⠀⠀

This is too intellectual for me.

His whole "it was an act" after his hospitalization was obviously a cope, trying to gain control in a situation where he probably felt he lost control. So this could be a sequel to that, trying to re-iterate that narrative. Or he went cray cray again and he jumped in the lake in a lapse of judgement. Both are not the most unlikely scenarios. But to be fair, he has not acted as unhinged as he did act those couple of years ago in his last couple of videos. He seemed too put together, even in his last video. That he suddenly went cray cray after a night with no sleep would be odd, a psychosis tends to build steadily, unless of course there were drugs involved.

Last sentence: "You motherf*ckers have an unhealthy relationship with death" *cuts camera* How much does it cost to make a fake news article in a local newspaper in Thailand?

Most awake everr. (Is she inviting me to sleep? 🤔😳🤨🤔🤨 Inviting? Sleep? To not be awake? Hmmmm. Tempted by the devil? Hmmm.) Sorry that's not my "role"

Whats sleep

It's like debating whether Trump is the best president that has ever lived. You can't have such a discussion follow a rational trajectory because it inevitably involves delusion-swallowing sycophants.

OCD is the cycle of identifying a problem and focusing in on it (obsession), and acting on a solution (compulsion). Taken to the extreme, everything becomes a problem and everything needs a solution (or you just can't seem to stop focusing on a problem or solution) and you may feel things are out of control. But it's fundamentally a function of our cognition. The less feeling of control, the more you want to call it an illness. To tie this into the discussion of belief, the worst belief you can have as a person who struggles with OCD is "I'm not in control of my actions". That's the nail in the coffin for any hope of organic recovery as far as I'm concerned. And that's one belief which is very abstract and not very grounded or fact-based and which you should challenge actively whenever it arises, because it lies at the core of all mental illness, all sense of vitality or growth, all sense of biological survival and thriving, that you can take action and do what you want.

Say what it is or don't say it.

I think the distinction you're getting at is that beliefs shape your cognition and what you find salient, relevant, worth spending your time on and that this leads to trade-offs. That's exactly true. That's why I'm careful to say "I think" and not "I know", so that you know I could be off and that I recognize that myself. The alternative is to deny that you could be off when you could be, which is a real sin. I've learned thanks to my cult experience that we don't actually choose what we believe. We believe whatever our path through life, be it due to our attention, attachments, reactions, rationalizations, has laid out for us as reasonable to be entertained as belief. Beliefs enter through the backdoor even when you think you're being rigorous about how you're assessing a situation. And that's on top of me believing that beliefs shape how you're assessing the situation again. So beliefs are slippery; but that does not remove the epistemic virtue of speaking with clarity about what you think (your hypotheses, etc.) and what you truly know. Because language also shapes beliefs, your own and others'.

I'll never get over how hilariously fucking sad this dynamic is where the person who says with the just purest grandiose conviction "I am the most awake person in existence" gets all the charity in the entire world ("you have to be openminded that he could be right") while the person who says "I think that is most probably false, but I could be wrong" gets met with the most absurd torrent of cynical pedantry and ruthless psychoanalyzing doubting whether I'm even saying what I think I'm saying ("I think you're bullshitting yourself that you think you could be wrong"). Bro this is like 1984^2 inverted twice into a strangeloop.

Do you recognize the distinction between a hypothesis and a 100% certain proof? Do you recognize the distinction between corroborating evidence and analytical/logical necessity? These are valueable fields in epistemology. Shame Leo skims over it because "academics are stuck in groupthink". Except when he finds one pseudo-academic which he uses to define what a cult is and ignores all the rest.

I think most people I learn things from are broken and corrupted in many ways, yet I put that aside. Leo's brokenness is just very loud and obvious and it's cringe when people try to deny it.

Wrong. I "think" it is bullshit, I don't "know" whether it is. It's not hard. Leo makes it hard because he conflates the two and sends mixed signals all the time. He has broken your brains on this. It's the most basic distinction in epistemology: theory/hypothesis vs proof/truth/actuality. "My hypothesis is I think [...]" vs "I know because this proves it."

...what??? Him being a stubborn corrupt baby says otherwise that he has admitted to being wrong in the past? Why do I even waste my time on this? I've said I can be wrong. "And that means I'm right" is something Leo would say, and he would also say statistical absurdities like "I'm the most awake person in the world" and then use bullshitting language such as the former to cover up that fact. He wants his "I can be wrong" cake and eat it too. We're here calling out that fact, we're not here saying we can't be wrong. This "you have to realize you can be wrong" line of argumentation is ignoring exactly what we're calling out, you're just blindly dishing it out as a defense response without seeing what is happening, it's just demented zombiefied numbed-out engagement.

You just say bullshit that is not true. That is what I mean by being a reducing/fake-closure enthusiast. Why will there be no learning if I can't call out what I think is bullshit WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY being open that I could be wrong? Tell me how you're not just saying bullshit to one-up or make me have an emotional reaction. This might be why you're giving a free pass to Leo because you're just the same: when cornered, say bullshit that you can't back up and then ignore any response.

Alien Awakening to me is simple. It's when you take Terrence McKenna style "realizations"/hallucinations/ideations and explain them from the perspective of a narcissist who thinks they're the best in the world. That said, "I could be wrong", just like I could be wrong that Leo is probably not the most awake person in the world. But this is what it seems to me. Just like you can give "benefit of the doubt" based on observations of his past behavior, you can also do the opposite.

My fishing level is 99 from all the red herrings I'm catching in this thread. I'm a nerd 🤓

The fact that he oozes judgement and superiority with every comment does not have to boil down to a disagreement. It just so often happens that we can point to such disagreements as evidence that the aforementioned traits are the case (particularly when we're talking about what anyone with half a brain would consider a delusion). When he says "huehue, scientists are so stupid" every gosh darn diddly blogpost he makes (which I don't read), I most probably don't disagree with the core message (probably more over time though), but the way it is said is disgusting and blown out of proportions. And that has to do with simply how he is, not whether I think his worldview is flawed or he said something wrong. But yes, I do agree the main way he wants to distinguish himself from other spiritual teachers is to my understanding born out of Maya, and calling it Absolute truth makes no sense (unless you want to redefine the word in some peculiar way), and that I therefore disagree with his teachings, and that being high on your own farts 24/7 does notoriously impact your ability to see truthfully. But that is like 10% of the issue here.

The red line is Leo is a hurt and/or simply misbehaving child and we're stuck pampering him.