Another Critique on Actualized.org

[Lento]

@electroBeam

Self-Actualization is not just about the NOW. Just keep that in mind.

[Nak Khid]

1 hour ago, Conscious life said:

@Leo Gura

For those of you who think Leo is under guru his above them

He is exploring real scientific Sprituality, most mystic and scientists don't do. 

It's rare in the world to find a teacher like Leo. 

 

The term  "scientific spirituality" is not Leoistic

[VeganAwake]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You should disclose such fantasies as your fantasies.

 

[Nak Khid]

LEOISMS

 

On 12/6/2019 at 10:28 PM, electroBeam said:

 

Some words that are used:

1. ego backlash

2. projection

3. devilry

4. Going full circle: actualized.org followers use this term to describe things which have nothing to do with going full circle, or have nothing to do with Leo's original intention he wrote in his infinite insights blog. Reinforcing a dogma and distorting reality. 

5. Love: lots of times used out of context to describe beliefs and dogmas

6. vibrations

7. Creative Intelligence

etc etc etc. 

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, Meister_Eckhart said:

Sometimes I see (Leo) people saying something in the phrase of: “you aren’t actually born”. 

Is this an accurate Leoism?   If so we can add this one to the list

 

 

 

[Commodent]

23 hours ago, Dan502 said:

Fortunately, the videos are peppered with caveats and warnings not to become convinced but to try things for ourselves.

By including such warnings, Leo is communicating responsibly.

A couple of warnings here and there of not believing the things that he says is not going to change anything. His attitude of the remaining 2 hrs of the video is still what is going to get ingrained in your subconscious. So if he was actually serious about his warnings he would embody that through the whole video, as a couple of warnings here and there is not going change anything. But of course, that would be a huge threat to his business model so I see why he wouldn't do that.

And yes, it's glaringly obvious that his videos are pretty much just hours upon hours of him trying to convince you, and that his entire conversational style reflects this. His catchphrase "but Leo!" is a very telling example.

[Bill W]

12 minutes ago, Commodent said:

A couple of warnings here and there of not believing the things that he says is not going to change anything. His attitude of the remaining 2 hrs of the video is still what is going to get ingrained in your subconscious. So if he was actually serious about his warnings he would embody that through the whole video, as a couple of warnings here and there is not going change anything. But of course, that would be a huge threat to his business model so I see why he wouldn't do that.

You write about "not going to change anything", what is the change you refer to? What is the context to the change talk?

[Commodent]

13 minutes ago, Bill W said:

You write about "not going to change anything", what is the change you refer to? What is the context to the change talk?

Change in your subconscious. I thought I made that pretty clear.

[Bill W]

4 minutes ago, Commodent said:

Change in your subconscious. I thought I made that pretty clear.

Okay, I read your post again

36 minutes ago, Commodent said:

So if he was actually serious about his warnings he would embody that through the whole video, as a couple of warnings here and there is not going change anything.

Do you think Leo should embody warnings throughout the whole video presentation? You allude to this, but is that what YOU would like? Are you suggesting that a video full of warnings would hit someone's subconscious to a degree that danger would somehow be avoided? Do you think there is danger within his content? 

[Lento]

@Bill W

The way Leo presents his content is not objective. He clearly loves what he does. He's so passionate with his message. He is transmitting his motivation to us through his videos, and the more authentic he is, the more impact he will have.

I would say it can be dangerous, it really depends on both Leo and the audience.

Then again, what's not potentially dangerous? Even a cup of water can be dangerous if you think about it.

Edited December 8, 2019 by Lento

[Bill W]

17 minutes ago, Lento said:

@Bill W

The way Leo presents his content is not objective. He clearly loves what he does. He's so passionate with his message. He is transmitting his motivation to us through his videos, and the more authentic he is, the more impact he will have.

I would say it can be dangerous, it really depends on both Leo and the audience.

Then again, what's not potentially dangerous? Even the future can be deemed dangerous if you think about it.

I get that. You've already summed it up though to a degree. He cannot be objective if he is passionate and motivated by what he teaches. Unless we view objectiveness on a scale. He could be somewhat objective but not totally. If someone is sharing what they think is Truth and what works, being totally objective is probably not a priority for them. I guess you would need to remove all personal bias to be totally objective. Impossible (virtually) in my opinion.

Not disagreeing with you. Some good points your raise.

You are right, most things can be dangerous to various degrees. Going to church can be dangerous, reading content on here could be dangerous. A lot of it would depend on the underlying vulnerabilities of the "consumer".

I'm not suggesting you are arguing different here, but I for one, do not attribute any responsibility to Leo for safeguarding people's vulnerabilities. Now, if he went out of his way to exploit and put people at risk, that's different. But I've never seen a shred of evidence for that.

There are other seemingly responsible moderators (in my opinion they are all good, compassionate people) that can also help guide people if they come off track and/or are disturbed by any of Leo's content, plus there is the whole mental health subforum. These factors don't reduce the risk to ZERO, but what will? 

[Commodent]

1 hour ago, Bill W said:

Are you suggesting that a video full of warnings would hit someone's subconscious to a degree that danger would somehow be avoided? Do you think there is danger within his content? 

No, it's about the presentation, the attitude. It's about practicing what you preach. Because he could very well present his message in such a way that it encourages the viewer to find their own inner truth (for example), without sacrificing anything on the content. Yeah, this goes much deeper than just giving some warnings. If he really had done this, no warnings would be necessary. Because he would be fully embodying that message.

[Thought Art]

2 hours ago, Commodent said:

No, it's about the presentation, the attitude. It's about practicing what you preach. Because he could very well present his message in such a way that it encourages the viewer to find their own inner truth (for example), without sacrificing anything on the content. Yeah, this goes much deeper than just giving some warnings. If he really had done this, no warnings would be necessary. Because he would be fully embodying that message.

 

I think Leo does present his message in a way that encourages you to find your own truth. I've watched nearly all of Leos video at this point and I think to really understand him is to realize that he means no dogmas or paradigms of any kind and to read from diverse sources.

Here is how Leo wants you to use the videos: Be reading diverse books based on what YOU want to learn about and develop during the week. Be experimenting with habits, nutrition, spiritual techniques, therapies.  His videos are like a candy, or a snack on top of the work that YOU should be doing to find what YOUR truth is. Or, ultimate truth. 

I find again and again that what Leo is teaching is present in all types of self help books. Leo reads tonnes of books, and its now obvious to me he at least teaches from these books. So, his world view is pretty extensive. But like the saying goes. "If you meet Buddha in the middle of the Road, Kill Him".

 

However, Leo should make this more clear... However, he isn't like your daddy or something ahahah

Edited December 8, 2019 by Thought Art
Not a complete thought

[VeganAwake]

15 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

You should disclose such fantasies as your fantasies.

Leo,

Did you like The Dumb and Dumber clip I posted did it make you laugh this woke vegan prefers a little feedback every now and then..

Would it really be that hard to go to Burning Man with a vegan I will pay for our expensive lunches lol..

[Bill W]

Have you tried the jokes part of the forum? You will get your needs met there maybe? 

[Commodent]

@Thought Art If you really had to watch tons of videos to extract that message then that kinda proves my point ...

Most people in here seem to have a pretty toxic conception of what criticism really is. Sincere, honest criticism helps people grow, and I honestly wouldn't be doing this if it didn't. Leo is an influential person, and by aiding him become more aware I might also indirectly help all of those who are watching him. So this is not a personal thing to me. Personally I would love to have some attuned people pointing out my blind spots. But still it's somehow perceived as "dirty".

Edited December 8, 2019 by Commodent

[Fede83]

Instead of analyzed..makin criticism and blame just accept it as urself ❤️ Leo is full of love ❤️ We are blessed to be here and now ❤️

[Bill W]

4 minutes ago, Commodent said:

@Thought Art If you really had to watch tons of videos to extract that message then that kinda proves my point ...

Most people in here seem to have a pretty toxic conception of what criticism really is. Sincere, honest criticism helps people grow, and I honestly wouldn't be doing this if it didn't. Leo is an influential person, and by aiding him become more aware I might also indirectly help all of those who are watching him. So this is not a personal thing to me. Personally I would love to have some attuned people pointing out my blind spots. But still it's somehow conceived as "dirty".

Yes okay. You are speaking for yourself. Totally respect that. I realise that you are not respresenting anyone or speaking on behalf of people and just conveying your own personal opinion. You know what they say about opinions... we all have one 

[Commodent]

9 minutes ago, Bill W said:

I realise that you are not respresenting anyone

No one? You haven't noticed that many people have shared similar concerns? As in, lack of embodiment? This is probably the one I hear the most, by far.

[Conscious life]

7 hours ago, Nak Khid said:

The term  "scientific spirituality" is not Leoistic

@Nak Khidso what is he?

 

[Bill W]

10 minutes ago, Commodent said:

No one? You haven't noticed that many people have shared similar concerns? As in, lack of embodiment? This is probably the one I hear the most, by far.

I'm not sure if we are all clear on what embodiment is? Can you clarify? I'm not trolling you. It's interesting.

My understanding is that it means to make something more concrete, observable and measurable? 

Surely Leo would be unable to do this even if he wanted to? 

This whole nondual concept cannot be proven one way or another. You either believe it or not.

I assumed that with Leo's teachings you take it on faith that he is right or you dismiss it as you see fit. Up to you. He always says if you don't resonate then look elsewhere. He actually let's people like me run around on the forum from a pure self help side. I'm grateful for that.

His teachings cannot be proved one way or another surely? 

Well there is the whole 'direct experience' term, but that is flawed as well because all direct experience has to be interpreted by the mind first anyway. Direct experience is grossly affected by self bias.

Lots of his ideas and beliefs cannot be measured. There is no test to see if he is right. 

I also don't think we can expect him to flood his videos with warnings. Warning of what? That we might not like it? That we will have  nightmares that we don't exist?