lmfao

@IJB063 Yeah that's why I'm weening off them right now. Emotional blunting is my main negative effect.

@Carl-Richard Cries in doomer

@Leo Gura in due time, inshallah

I think this is a fun idea. You get to see inside someone else's brain. It is my wish that no dialogue or answering/discussion takes place. Just purely focus, with eyes wide open, on what you're inquiring. Be radically honest/transparent with yourself, unweave everything. Discussion is a slippery slope and will completely kill threads of contemplation if allowed. I'll write a few now: I am bothered that I do not have happiness and high states of consciousness. I then trick myself into thinking I must relinquish this bother, and should just seek truth. But I try and force myself to want truth all for the purpose of achieving happiness and high states of consciousness. I verbally assert that all speech is false. What does that make that assertion? How can I possibly question the integrity of thought whilst I am thinking right now? How can I deny the existence of I?

Beyond just the thought alone that "I am in pain", what is there? When I say that I hurt, what do I mean?

@SamueLSD meditation is cool and all, but if you're serious I recommend inquiry and contemplation of the likes that Jiddu Krishnamurti or Peter Ralston engage in. Any actual changes I have experienced thus far (which are extremely little in the grand scheme however) have never came from a mystical experience, they came from alert and wide eyed observation of the movement of my intention/thought and questioning. If you're trying to understand this mindset more, look the likes of Jed Mckenna as well. For me this style works very well, just try.

Sometimes I've finished meditating or working out and my mind is cleared of some noise, and what immediately can be seen left in my experience is a lot of pure anxiety and clinging. Quite painful. Can anyone relate? Feels like I'm empty and I create the drama of ordinary consciousness and life to hide the emptiness.

I've read some of The Religion of Tomorrow. I think the book is far too long winded. He repeats himself, going down massive tangents all the time. It's definitely in depth and technical if that's what you're after. But it's a lot of rambling.

God doesn't exist. I'm serious. This is a distraction. Inquiry is good but you'll be lost unless you seriously reconsider the assumption that God exists. If this question is your current line of confusion, and what you REALLY want is enlightenment, you're probs better off with a Peter Ralston or Jiddu Krishnamurti or Jed McKenna approach.

I contemplate what it means to be super mindful, super enlightened, in everything that one does. I contemplate spontaneity, the kind best expressed in zen koans. This work, its been a process of unlearning for me. I have seen a few times, first hand, that the current me is a conditioned machine. I am mechanical, I am not alert and sensitive to reality. I wonder what is the line between this automaticity and the existence of memory. e.g. muscle memory of how I do I certain skill like moving my body, speaking, memory in certain ways of thinking. Makes me wonder if learning/skill/memory is antithetical to high levels of consciousness. I have a theoretical idea for how this is resolved. But until I can discard of that rubbish I will be stuck. Doing this work, YOU are trying to force/get yourself to act spontaneously. Trying to break free of premeditation or dithering. It's a paradox.

@The observer I've heard ideas here and there about karma as a synonym for memory. One of my favourite ways to articulate non-duality to people is to talk about how we are essentially conditioned robots. But explanations people have about karma, or my own explanations of this all, they're just lifeless theories to me currently.

@ivankiss By not taking the existence of unconsciousness for granted and being skeptical of it you'll understand it better than most, is the funny thing.

A formulation for free will in the domain of the relative can be found in "compatabilism", Daniel Dennett for example. Seen under a good light, I see this framing of things as a pragmatic/grounded approach to it. If what I value and am interested in is exploration of life, then theoretical knowledge that yes I am free or no I am not free does nothing for me. Like either way, my life and existence is unchanged by my conversation with you about what might or might not exist. Of course I see the objection. Denying free will can be a tool for acceptance and love of others. If it works in that way for you, then all power to you. If you so wish, it's certainly a good line of inquiry/debate when talking to let's say, a conservative sort of person strongly bought into moral absolutism. Thinking everyone who's poor or a criminal is fundamentally culpable in this narrow minded view of good vs bad. Giving people empathy for the upbringing and genes of others.

How does anyone eat this shit up, I dont understand...

-Family -chronic fatigue -depression

@willen1995 Read Radical Honesty by Brad Blanton! I've only just started some of it but I can already tell it's gold. It's something that is relevant to all domains of your life. There are but a few very tricky things I can see myself learning to be completely open about.

@bazera I've thought about the possibility of there being a second peak if people are released from quarantine. Supposing the government take no further action and lift lockdown ,even if slowly, maybe it could peak a second time. But it doesn't have to stay on the trajectory of a second peak I'm assuming, with action during bought time. Like everyone else said, it buys time for researching cures, healthcare infrastructure and capacity, getting massive testing done so people can resume lives to normal, etc. Some people ( dunno if they're right or not or if it will happen) speculate that once quarantine is over, it might peak again. I'm pessimistic of the entropy and degrees of freedom you give virus transmission upon releasing lockdown. I just hope enough action is done during lockdown in all these countries to prevent a second peak. Maybe it will peak rhythmically over the period of years, idk. Maybe the virus will be an ever-present force you're always fighting the force/trajectory of. Either way, it seems like a very long term game will be played. TLDR coronavirus is Trump's master plan to cancel the 2020 elections and usurp democracy ; )

Jesus christ dude, stop being such a fucking baby just because you perceive someone has slightly slighted you. Your model isn't doing jack shit when you misread the intent of someone like Chakra Lion. The levels of irony in everything you write there is stupidly high beyond belief.

The model I referenced is less hierarchical than spiral dynamics, and has less or the same leeway to be butt hurt about. For someone who's engaged in such a system as spiral dynamics strongly and is making many labels and judgements, I think it's a little odd you got so offended by what I wrote. Throughout this thread you've been sensitive and touchy to responses and criticism. It seems as though at some deep level in general you feel as though you and your ideas aren't being appreciated. That's fine, everyones feels the same way and can empathise. I don't want you to feel that way, and I know you're only going to get more pissed from me typing that but that's okay.

@Virtually Good find! After reading that dialogue, I'm reminded of what I've read Jed McKenna say. That he thinks there's a difference between mysticism and enlightenment. From Jed's point of view, mystical experiences are simply to be having a good dream. It's still within the realm of duality. You're still in plato's cave. When one's goal is to wake up from the dream all together. I get a feeling that Peter Ralston might fall into a similar camp of framing. Jed frames enlightenment in a relatively binary manner, give or take a bit of time from when the "first step" is taken. However. Once enlightened, you are enlightened. Your work is done. And that sort of binary manner is the same manner in which him or Peter dismiss "subjective states" as irrelevant to enlightenment as those states fade but this thing called enlightenment is supposedly permanent. My problem with Jed's point of view (Not Peter, I just noticed a similar energy/vibe between the two of them) is best expressed by the koan "if you meet the buddha on the road kill him". Jed even talks about that koan. Funny that.

@w4read Yeah I can relate to this. I mean in the analyst category, you can often take interest in the impressionist and can see that point of view more, but your default cognition process will be on the more lexical side. I have similar OCD/Perfectionist-like streaks running through me in trying to write something "perfect". If I'm making notes in uni on a topic and the lecturer misses out something or says something slightly incorrect, it bothers me a lot and I make like 2-3 footnote side comments for my future self to read so that they don't get confused. @GodDesireOnlyLove For which system do you wanna know my type, mbti or this thing? MBTI wise I'm INTP. I mean for this thing, I'm quite unsure. I don't evaluate myself to be very hyper intelligent or creative compared to what I could be or others can be, so I'm perhaps not extremely lateral. Relative to this model I could be. I'm likely analyst or quick-witted possibly. I think I've always been around that region, even if I've started to enjoy more impressionistic domains of experience. When I was younger a few years ago (im 19 now), I was a bit more lexical, more entranced by semantics and verbal nit-picking. I still engage in that sort of thing, but I like to make it as colourful and dynamic as I hopefully can.

@cypres Yeah, that's a good question. I know that sometimes I think in images and have gut feelings sometimes that I can't really put into words. I think it might be a bit more common for impressionistic thinking to think in images, but that needn't be the case. I think many highly lateral thinkers in general think in images. Impressionistic folks are more inclined to artistic stuff on average I think. Unsymbolised thinking is generally associated with the impressionistic realm. But it needn't always be that way, I would think. e.g. Someone who's lexical might be into Zen forms of consciousness work, and to quote R.H Blythe

I made a post which talks about this topic of why people talk past one another on this forum and communicate differently , in reference to my above message

Absolute ascension. Spiral Dynamics breaks down and/or isn't the appropriate metric to ascertain certain mystics or enlightened folks. His level of consciousness is off the charts. Talk about the ascension of all images, and the importance of attention. What he cared about and spoke about cannot be reduced to spiral dynamics, those sorts of things would be minutia within the matrix, when one wants to leave the matrix. Funny that one of the men I idolise the most is the one most against the whole notion of authority and idolisation. How beautiful.