How deluded Leo is ?

[mandyjw]

11 minutes ago, David Hammond said:

@mandyjw There is no destination. It's about living life as a free person. Anything beyond that is a fairy tale.

I agree. 

[legendary]

1 hour ago, mandyjw said:

How is complete and total ego death and enlightenment not the same as physical death. Don't you need some semblance of ego or sense of separateness to survive as a form?

I think it is. I met an enlightened master, who, for a few years, could not function as a human because he could not relate to anything/anyone else as separate from the Self that he was.

But he said he grew past that, to a level where he is a vehicle for God's will. He relates to objects and people as separate from the individuated self, but at the same time, is conscious of the fact that it is the Self. That's why Sahaja Samadhi is the highest level of samadhi, I guess.

[mandyjw]

@legendary

13 minutes ago, legendary said:

I think it is. I met an enlightened master, who, for a few years, could not function as a human because he could not relate to anything/anyone else as separate from the Self that he was.

But he said he grw past that, to a level where he is a vehicle for God's will. He relates to objects and people as separate from the individuated self, but at the same time, is conscious of the fact that it is the Self. That's why Sahaja Samadhi is the highest level of samadhi, I guess.

Its it wrong of me to be concerned that the object of this community seems to be to hack our way there as quickly as we can and not enjoy the journey? 

[Nahm]

1 hour ago, mandyjw said:

How is complete and total ego death and enlightenment not the same as physical death. Don't you need some semblance of ego or sense of separateness to survive as a form? 

What if ego death, enlightenment, physical death, semblance of ego, sense of separateness, and ‘surviving as form’, aren’t actual real “things”? 

What if all of that is of a dream, which you are dreaming?

“This place is a dream, only a sleeper considers it real. Then death comes like dawn, and you wake up laughing at what you thought was your grief!” - Rumi

(What if you are actually Rumi, pointing this out to you, but it is missed because you’re assuming ‘you’ are separate and alive, and “he” is “dead”?)

If “physical” is a thought about a dream, and you realized there is no separation and no physical / realized the falsity in the thought “physical” - if that idea of physical was “seen through” - then would there ever by a “physical death”? Can the Truth of a delusion be realized as other than untrue?

Consider, “Do I have any experience of death”? 

Or have I seen “physical things” doing “physical things”?

Can you honestly say you have experienced separate physical things? Or have you experienced thoughts, sensations, perceptions of “physical things”? And is there a “you” - separate from - a “separate knower of”, thoughts, sensations, perception? 

 

‘Don't you need some semblance of ego”

What is “ego”? What really is “semblance”? 

What was a “semblance” of ego at age one? What is it while ‘you’ sleep? Did you “survive age one” via ego? Would you have “survived” age one, without the Love of “other people”? Which seems more real, really?

Where is a “semblance of ego”, while Mandy is asleep, deep in a dream? Where is it then?

Why is it, that truly, only you are enlightened? If that’s true, is there such a “thing”, as enlightenment, or is it all a dream?

[mandyjw]

1 minute ago, Nahm said:

 

(What if you are actually Rumi, pointing this out to you, but it is missed because you’re assuming ‘you’ are separate and alive, and he is “dead”?)

 

This is why I believe so much in my experience as form. Out of my experience and commitment to the absolute, I denied my form. Out of the formless the dead took on a form, subtle as it was because I was already dead myself it was able to communicate to me. It reminded me of certain forms that had lived, done great work on earth and died and that I as my form self existed as an extension of it so that I could continue that work. I'm here as form to create and manipulate form, all out of love and connection because that is my purpose here on earth. 

[Scholar]

19 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

@tecladocasio  I would recommend becoming aware of the kruger-dunning effect and the pre-trans fallacy. These explain the misinterpretations, assumptions and lack of awareness that arise in the minds of people that are in middle stages of consciousness. They are major blocks toward evolving to higher conscious levels. 

Not quite on topic, but the Dunning-Kruger effect is not real:

 

[legendary]

19 minutes ago, mandyjw said:

the object of this community seems to be to hack our way there as quickly as we can and not enjoy the journey? 

Well, that's because we all want to avoid all forms of pain and suffering. If we were conscious of the fact that we are in heaven and that everything is Good, we would be able to enjoy the journey. But then, there would be no need to embark on the journey. Paradoxical

[Nahm]

@legendary Simply no longer avoid. Maybe stop speaking for everyone too. ??

[electroBeam]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

That's a very deep topic.

I address some of it here:

 

Yes you do very briefly.

1. How are you sure cross reference is a valid way of predicting the truth of something? Cross reference relies on the assumption that consistency leads to truth. Do you believe that and if so why?

2. How much do you trust gut feelings? Not in that video, but in a comment you once wrote to me in regards to that video, you said that you read from all different sources, then throw it away and let your subconscious mind eat all of it up and generate a feel for what's right and what's wrong. Does this mean your technique largely involves trusting your gut feeling? Is there a difference between an inner muse and a gut feeling? Can you trust either one? Why do you trust your gut feeling? When can you? Are there techniques for training your gut feeling so that its more effective at existential stuff like spirituality(in other words beyond the ways mentioned in thinking fast and slow)?

3. How do you effectively map raw experience to intellectual concepts/information/knowledge? If you have an existential insight about something, what ways can you know whether someone else is talking about the same thing as you? How do you effectively map this experience to words(without distorting it, or alternatively distorting it in a way that helps you compare it to other sources)?

4. What is active listening in essence? What is critical thinking in essence? How do you measure your performance in either one? How do you improve them?

5. Does spirituality help you in this topic?

6. What is believing vs thinking for yourself in essence?

7. What is fundamentally the difference between thinking in principle, and thinking in analogies? What are the ramifications of this for making use of spiritual sources, and also sources in general for scientific work?

8. if you don't want to answer any of the above questions, at least answer this one, the most important one of all: What is high quality critical thinking vs low quality critical thinking? How can you improve your skills? What metrics or performance indicators can you use to improve it? Are there any metaphysical and existential practices to improve this area?

[Forestluv]

24 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Not quite on topic, but the Dunning-Kruger effect is not real:

 

I was referring to the effect qualitatively, not quantitatively. 

[Scholar]

7 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

I was referring to the effect qualitatively, not quantitatively. 

But the effect itself is based on it's prevalence among the population, that is really the whole point of calling it the effect Dunning-Kruger effect. Otherwise it's just normal incompetence and overestimation of ones knowledge or skill, I don't think there is a need to keep misinforming people about something that is just bad science.

 

[legendary]

36 minutes ago, Nahm said:

Simply no longer avoid.

I fail at that. 

Would you give Leo the same advice? After all, he did get bored during his meditation retreat.

[Moreira]

Leo is very intelligent, but what I dont get it is if he reaches those superior stages of consciousness in his psychedellic meditation experiences, how is that he isnt aware that his current diet has flaws that is making his body and brain weak? mayby not all in this life is FEELING. Maybe some things in this life need to be reasoned?

[Nahm]

@legendary You have an understanding that the sensation you’re avoiding, is something to fear, so you fear the sensation. It never was something to fear. You literally made that up. That sensation is Big Love, always purifying you from this stubbornness, this deflection, etc. It is Truth, and it can not go on self diminishing adventures. You are free to go to negative town alone. Just don’t pay so coy as to why it feels bad. 

 

“Come, come, whoever you are,

wanderer, worshiper, lover of leaving, 

it doesn't matter.

Ours is not a caravan of despair.

Come, even if you have broken your vow a hundred times.

Come, come again, come. “

- Rumi

You can come home too. That’s how I see it. You are free to see things however you want. Even if it isn’t working for you. You are that free. Man, someone must really love you, to allow that. 

 

The sensations were never something to avoid. So there is, in truth, no possibility of “failing at that”. There is no failure. You can love the shit out of yourself. Life is better, shitless. 

[legendary]

18 minutes ago, Nahm said:

The sensations were never something to avoid. So there is, in truth, no possibility of “failing at that”. There is no failure. You can love the shit out of yourself. Life is better, shitless. 

Thanks @Nahm?

[mandyjw]

2 hours ago, Nahm said:

Don't you need some semblance of ego”

What is “ego”? What really is “semblance”? 

What was a “semblance” of ego at age one? What is it while ‘you’ sleep? Did you “survive age one” via ego? Would you have “survived” age one, without the Love of “other people”? Which seems more real, really?

Where is a “semblance of ego”, while Mandy is asleep, deep in a dream? Where is it then?

Why is it, that truly, only you are enlightened? If that’s true, is there such a “thing”, as enlightenment, or is it all a dream?

It's all a dream. But I can make it a good dream or a bad one, it's up to the illusory me. 

Babies care intensely about their survival, it's the only thing that care about. Is that ego? Love and survival are the only drives we are born with. We take our first breath and then we cry, we cry asking for love, asking for nourishment. 

I die every night when I sleep then I'm born again into the world of form.  

[Forestluv]

3 hours ago, Scholar said:

But the effect itself is based on it's prevalence among the population, that is really the whole point of calling it the effect Dunning-Kruger effect. Otherwise it's just normal incompetence and overestimation of ones knowledge or skill, I don't think there is a need to keep misinforming people about something that is just bad science.

 

I see your point and see value in it. I’d rather not get into a discussion and analysis of raw data sets, statistical quantifications and the conclusions drawn. Based on my experience as a scientist, I’d estimate that would take several hours of work into the weeds of T-tests, Anova, chi square, P-values, levels of confidence etc. 

Also, discussions about assigning values of “good” and “bad” science and misinformation are very nuanced. Much of science is along continuums, it is not “bad” or “good”. There can be mixtures of “bad” and “good” and different degrees of “bad” and “good”. And there is of course multiple statistical tools that yield different models and interpretations. I can take the same data set and give you a significant result or insignificant result depending on the tool I use.  I would not draw your own conclusions regarding the statistical interpretations based on that video.

 I think these are very interesting conversations and I’ve spent many hours engaged in it. Yet it’s not what I was pointing to and it is a distraction. 

I’m willing to call the “Dunning-Kruger” effect a model without a consensus regarding statistical significance at this point. This would also be true of 99% of the models discussed in the forum.

There is a distinction between a model and statistical significance to suppirt a model. Just because a model lacks statistical significance foes not mean thete is statistical significance to regute that model. 

Consider Wilbur’s “Pre/Trans” model. I think it’s a useful model - yet there has been no experimentation on it and there is zero statistical support. Why should we hold Dunning-Krugers model to a higher standard than Wilbur’s model?

For the purpose of this discussion and the intention of helping the OP, I am fine referring to it as “being unaware of one’s own deficiencies and over-estimating their competencies” as you suggested.

[sgn]

21 hours ago, ajasatya said:

right, until someone hits you, screams at your face or tries to hang you with their own hands (happened to me ).

Someone tried to hang you?

[thesmileyone]

1 hour ago, mandyjw said:

I die every night when I sleep then I'm born again into the world of form.  

Do you?

Do you know you have 7 bodies? Physical is just one of them.

[tsuki]

2 hours ago, mandyjw said:

It's all a dream. But I can make it a good dream or a bad one, it's up to the illusory me. 

Babies care intensely about their survival, it's the only thing that care about. Is that ego? Love and survival are the only drives we are born with. We take our first breath and then we cry, we cry asking for love, asking for nourishment. 

2 hours ago, mandyjw said:

I die every night when I sleep then I'm born again into the world of form.  

The world of name is not apart from the world of form. Not-two.