lmfao

A film maker called Louis Theroux makes a documentary in Las Vagas where he follows around compulsive/regular gamblers. This guy doesn't like to insert in his own opinion too much in these documentaries, he prefers to just observe people and lightly poke them with questions. You can get an idea of what the industry of gambling is like. The people he follows are addicts, and most of them are in complete and utter denial about it. There's this elderly woman in particular who has lost $4000000 in 7 years. If you're gonna waste your time with television, this documentary is pretty good. I found it interesting, and it's given me a feel for the gambling industry. Casinos just want to make money, in a nutshell. They will employ long term and short term strategies for this. The odds are stacked against you. People have all sorts of emotional systems triggered, and they become hardcore addicts. The psychological manipulation is not covert at all. It is by "abusing" the human psyche that these gambling companies make money. Dopaminergic circuits are being targeted in the most blatantly obvious ways. And even though I don't gamble, I can relate to the people involved in gambling very well. Anyone who's an addict can relate to other addicts. And so it is I realise that my addictive behaviour mirrors that of a compulsive gambler. I will search and scroll on the Internet repeatedly, searching for something to give the next "hit". It's as though I'm at a slot machine. With every new video I watch or every new web page I click, I'm not gaurenteed to find something good. But it's the hope that something good will come that hooks me on to the behaviour

@Hallo_Leo An alive cockroach scares you more than a dead one, right? This is probably unhygienic, but it could get you to face your fears. Kill a cockroach and just touch the carcass (e.g poke it with your hands) . When I was a kid I was absolutely scared of spiders, and wouldn't dream of touching them. But if you can get used to touching something, I think your fear of it can start to dissapate. And since the cockroach will be dead, you won't have to worry about it moving or doing surprise movements. After that, try touching alive cockroaches. Try to be very rational, and get it through to your subconscious mind than there is nothing to be afraid of. This is easier said than done. After all, cockroaches can't really harm you at all. As with all things in life, mindfulness helps.

Well I'm just gonna post some nice tunes, idk/̶i̶d̶c̶ if they're epic or what. Hellsing Opening Theme: Requiem Aranea : Mirai Nikki Opening 1: Mozart - Lacrimosa: As a bonus, this song is good for building up hype. It's cooler to listen to if you've seen the show where it comes from:

@ULFBERHT "The Book of Not Knowing" by Peter Ralston is great. I've only read a few chapters, and I regret that I haven't read more of it in my spare time.

@SpaceCowboy ?

Has anyone here ever done it?

@metwinn If you want to address this question from a rationalist point of view you could intellectually arrive at the conclusion that free will does not exist. From this point of view, all of reality is composed of energy and matter moving and shuffling around in space in accordance with set laws of physics. Our brains are made out of atoms the same way a tennis ball is made out of atoms. We are no more responsible for our actions than a tennis ball is responsible for falling through air due to gravity. Our actions and thoughts, as well as the motion of the inanimate tennis ball, is all determined by set laws of physics. You could imagine our brains as extremely complex mixtures of chemicals dancing around in an elegant but predetermined way. When you examine modern science, and you want to be reductionist: Biology is complex chemistry. Chemistry is complex physics. And physics "just is" .

@metwinn I read quote somewhere. I can't find the source of it, but I'll paraphrase "The non existence of free will is a wonderful discovery but an awful teaching"

@Cuzzo I come from a Pakistani family and was raised Muslim, but I'm not a Muslim myself. My post might go off at a tangent at times but I'm just trying to paint a picture for what the religion is as best I can in a short-is time. My knowledge of Islamic history isn't superb but I've been exposed to a lot of it as a child in religious school. Islam as it is practiced today by the majority of followers is based upon a fundamentalist interpretation of the quran. The Quran is believed by the vast majority of Muslims to be the uncorrupted words of God. And it is because of that belief that Muslims will be fundamentalist in how they interpret the Quran. To disagree with the Quran is therefore to disagree with God. That is the view many Muslims hold. After the Quran, the second most important source for Islamic teachings are "Hadiths". Hadiths consist of traditions and sayings of the prophet Mohammad which have been recorded by his followers. Hadiths are very important, as they can shape to a significant degree the Interpratation you take of the Quran. It is from hadith that some nasty things can come into play. For example: Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah." Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally." Different schools of Islam follow different hadiths. Hadiths are not the words of God in Islamic theology. Muslims recognise they have no guarantee that they haven't been corrupted. It is because of this that Hadiths are often rated and reviewed on how reliable they are by looking at the source of the hadith. I think that there is a realitively consistent strict vetting process for which hadith are considered "authentic" and which ones are not. On top the sayings of Mohammad, Islamic figures who lived around and shortly after the time of Mohammad have their sayings recorded. Sunni Muslims will follow the sayings of whom they deem worthy and Shia Muslims follow the sayings of whom they deem worthy. I can't be bothered to go into it now, but Islam split into being Sunni and Shia after Mohammad's death and there was an internal dispute among Mohammad's followers. I've went on off on a massive tangent. Now time to focus on the main questions you were asking. Why is Islam associated with violence, and why is there such a clash in social values between East and West. Even if all Muslims agree to take interpret the Quran literally, there will still be room for disagreement amongst Muslims for how to interpret the Quran. There will be verses in the Quran which talk about violence against disbelievers. However, most Muslims believe that these verses are not what they seem on face value because of context. For example: Surah 9 Verse 5: "And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful" Now, most Muslims will say that this verse is only applicable as instructions to the followers of Mohammad in the situation they were in however many hundred years ago. The verses are instructions to Mohammad and his followers when they were in war with a particular tribe they lived around, and you might then go on to talk about why such actions might be justified as you analyse the exact historical situation. But on the other hand, terrorist groups and extremists will interpret/use this verse as an instruction from God for Muslims in all eras to apply in all situations they find themselves in life. Now even if we are put the murder of disbelievers aside to one moment, you still get Sharia Law from Quran and Hadiths which a very significant portion of Muslims in the world support ( but they will not use violence to impose these laws). Shariah Law isn't this monolithic set of rules, there are many variations to it. However, the set of "nasty" laws you get in the set of different versions Shariah Law are believed by most Shariah Law advocates with little variation. Muslims on the more fundamentalist end of the spectrum have a huge obsession with gurading their religion from heresy and moral corruption. They see their religion as the only true path, and have an extremely low tolerance for changes to the religion. These very fundamentalist Muslims are on guard from Bid'ah, which is Arabic for "innovation" in religious matters. They don't want "innovation" for their religious laws. It is important to note that the essence of the word "innovation" will differ from that of "Bid 'ah". Each of the two words will different connotations in the two languages. If you ever read the Quran from a literal point of view, there are a few messages which are repeated over and over again. The Quran emphasis that the believers will go to heaven, and more importantly, the disbelievers will go to hell. I've read 80% of the Quran, and it gets very boring to read. It's just God saying in 101 different ways that disbelievers are vermin. The overall tone of the book is one of intolerance in my opinion. I believe that from a fundamentalist lens of the Quran, the argument that extremists make for their interpretation is very strong unfortunately. Now, as for a non dual take on the Quran I'll copy and paste what I wrote on a previous topic I made The Quran likes to talk about how those who commit themselves to God are ultimately on the right path and will be rewarded, and those who reject God will only find misery in hellfire. If we take "God" to be the "absolute" (or whatever word you want to insert here) , the nothingness from which everything comes from in your perception, then a take away from reading the Quran might be the idea that those who make a commitment to connect to the absolute (whether it be through yoga, meditation, devotion and etc) will reach heaven, a peaceful state of mind. However, those who are not mindful of and are ignorant of God will ultimately end up going through unbearable suffering (hellfire) as a result of them not connecting to the absolute. People will be trapped in suffering as a result of them not connecting to the absolute. I don't have many thoughts as to what the morality preached could mean. Perhaps the Quran is also trying to say that being charitable and doing other "good deeds" is a way to connect to the absolute, whilst doing "bad deeds" like adultery distances you from the absolute. However, the worst sin you can do in Islam (from a non-dual intepratation) is to not acknowledge that the absolute is there, and to not try to connect to it. A fundamentalist would call this sin "shirk". Shirk is the rejection of the fact that God exists, and that there is only one God. You could interpret this as meaning that the chief sin you can commit is to not recognize that all is one and that there are no boundaries between things, an ultimately non-dual teaching. Provided we are going with a "non-dual" intepration of the Quran, then we ultimately find the Quran is just repeating the same message, over and over again, since it keeps on talking about heaven and hellfire.The Quran likes to emphasise heaven and hellfire to tremendous degrees, more so than the Bible on a whole in my opinion (depends on which part of the Bible as well as though). Whether or not my intepration is separate from the authors' intent or not is unknown to me. Whatever the case, it was entertaining to read. My take away from the Quran is this: those who make the effort to connect to the absolute will find peace, and those who don't try to connect to the absolute will find misery. This is why it's important to set practices in place to connect to the absolute (Muslims like to pray for instance). So what do you make of religious scriptures? I feel as though that the Bible and Quran can only be seen in this light if you already have non-dual ideas about reality. The word "God" has different meanings to people, and it's ultimately a verbal semantic game when it comes to what you make of it. Given the fact that from a non-dual intepratation the Quran repeats the same message over and over game, it perhaps stands to reason that the Quran was written to be interpreted in the way that fundamentalists do so. But an argument about that would ultimately require an examination of history

@sarapr @sarapr@sarapr [mobile actualized.Org doesn't let me delete the extra "sarapr" s] It depends on how green manifests. Each stage can express itself in a wide variety of ways. But if we're discussing how an abstract "pure green" would manifest itself there may be less variation than I initially implied.

I waste lots of time on the Internet. It's pretty much the only addiction I have ( that doesn't mean I'm in a good situation) . Although within that you get YouTube addiction, porn addiction, anime addiction, Netflix addiction and etc. It's something which I've been "struggling with" for a long time because I use the Internet as my main pastime. Things have gotten worse for me recently since I just finished school. I have two YouTube accounts, and here's the stats from just one of them. I took this screenshot a few moments ago. And if I really want to overcome addiction, what do I need to do. Is it to go cold turkey? Because I've had a meditation habit for almost half a year now but nothing has fundamentally changed in this regard. I remember Leo's video on overcoming addiction. As far as I can tell, that video advocates for you to be mindful of the void you try to hide through addiction.

@Leo Gura ?

I recently finished a large bout of exams, and for 1 month I was neurotic and stressed. I ended up in a never ending procrastination-cramming loop, and these exams were something I should have studied more for since I was paying less attention in school for the past year and my entry into my desired university is dependent on me getting almost perfect grades at A-Level. During this period I was meditating daily, but I was still neurotic. I've found myself in a situation where I'm just sitting at home doing nothing since I'm in Summer Holidays. After meditating today for 65 mins, I feel more mindful but I also feel extremely empty. Whenever I try to be mindful now I become abruptly consciousness of an all encompassing deep emptiness/sadness within me. It feels insurmountable. The joy of things has been sucked out. And even though "I know" that I am not my thoughts, and that I am getting lost in thought, I feel like there's a massive void inside me which I'm not mature enough to handle. I've barely got the motivation to even exercise today. During these holidays, I wanted to just exercise, meditate and read stuff (whether it was maths or non-duality) for fun.

@Leo Gura Yep anytime you used the word God it completely triggered me. I wasn't triggered by you using the word "spirituality" because I was already convinced by Sam Harris that spirituality can be good. I also had a lot of problems with your criticisms of science. I mean I have reservations about your two videos on quantum mechanics, but that's only because I don't want to just take somebodies word on a topic that I personally don't understand. I'm neutral towards those videos.

@Joseph Maynor @Joseph MaynoryeahMaynoryMaynorMaynoryeahMaynoryMaynor Mobile actualized.org is trippy as fuck. I wanted to just type "yeah boi" as a reply yet I've got my phone doing that random shit in the previous paragraph.

@zoey101 @d0ornokey good advice ?. I obviously need to go about "tackling" the issue by considering maslows hierarchy and all aspects of my life. I'm probably just gonna watch this video today

@WelcometoReality Indeed I do want to awaken. Tell me how dude. I'm ready to become woke as fuck.

@John Iverson this video isn't a debate between Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson though. It's just Sam Harris being interviewed.

@Thetruthseeker I know the feeling man. I spent 90 minutes this morning watching dog rescue videos and wild animal videos on YouTube. How am I supposed to overcome the cuteness. #1 obstacle to enlightenment tbh.

@Leo Gura book > film.

@Joseph Maynor @Joseph Maynorthis sounds like fun. Pros: 1) Green, at least to a greater degree than orange, sees through the illusion that material wealth brings satisfaction and happiness. 2) Green sees the "value" in human relationships for life satisfaction. 3) Green people are conscious of the impact their actions have on other people around them and the environment, and hence create a better society. 4) Green is typically more emotionally honest and expressive with themselves and with others. Thus means that they can more easily troubleshoot their personal emotional issues than orange. 5) And to follow on from the last point, they tend to be more empathetic and caring for the wellbeing of other people. 6) They are open to spirituality. Can start to see the limits in hyper rationality. Cons: 1) They think that all problems can be fixed through persistent use of empathy. 2) Their empathy can be misguided, and they end up casting many people into two groups: predator and prey. They treat the predators with hostility and animosity whilst carrying with themselves a huge sense of moral superiority. In their crusade for justice they become arbiters of injustice (e.g. SJW's who demonise people for being white). 3) And just to elaborate from the last point, excessive green let their emotions get the better of them and cloud their judgement. 4) They can moralise a lot and hence restrict their wholistic perception of reality. I'm struggling to come up with more items to this list.

@who chit Even if I'm in a nondual state and am connected deeply to the present moment, I don't see "intelligence" in my experience. I understand what you mean when you ask someone to pay attention to their experience whilst not giving any energy to the abstractions they concoct about their experience. There is unfathomable depth to conscious experience indeed, but the word "intelligence" isn't something which points towards experience for me. There can be interconnectedness between things, but I still don't resonate with the word "intelligence" because I see that word as a relatively useless abstraction about reality. I think the "problem" here is just that my image of intelligence is different to the image of intelligence you're trying to convey. We both have perhaps experienced the same thing, it's just that we describe it differently.

@molosku @Major Tom thanks

@Charlotte Leo described infinite intelligence as a facet of consciousness. I cant say that I understand or have experienced what Leo means when he talks about infinite intelligence.

@John Iverson Nice. Are you asking people to debate or are you saying that the video is a debate?