Practical Tips on Dealing with the Academic Paradigm as a College Student?

[TrynaBeTurquoise]

As a college student with only a couple semesters left after this one before graduation, my classes are getting more demanding and the scientific/rationalist/academic paradigm is being forced fed more and more, especially in a mandatory research class I have to take. 

In this critical inquiry class (referring to Kinesiology) Ontology and Epistemology are brought up but misrepresented greatly. 

My assignments are requiring me to play into that paradigm in order to get a good grade, which limits my authenticity of expressing my true thoughts on the matter. 

How can I balance having to jump through these hoops while staying authentic to my true self? Place less importance on grades and just get the most practical technical knowledge for the future as I can? Or jump through the hoops to get the best grades possible while waiting out graduation, knowing in the background this is only a temporary thing I have to deal with? 

[Leo Gura]

@TrynaBeTurquoise Society will always ask you to jump through its hoops and conform to its standards if you're playing within its game. By entering university you implicitly agreed to play its game.

Since you only have a few semesters left, just suck it up until you're out and free.

And unless you're going to grad school, your grades don't mean shit. Literally no one in the real world will care. No one will even care that you got a degree. It means nothing in the real world.

[remember]

57 minutes ago, TrynaBeTurquoise said:

As a college student with only a couple semesters left after this one before graduation, my classes are getting more demanding and the scientific/rationalist/academic paradigm is being forced fed more and more, especially in a mandatory research class I have to take. 

In this critical inquiry class (referring to Kinesiology) Ontology and Epistemology are brought up but misrepresented greatly. 

My assignments are requiring me to play into that paradigm in order to get a good grade, which limits my authenticity of expressing my true thoughts on the matter. 

How can I balance having to jump through these hoops while staying authentic to my true self? Place less importance on grades and just get the most practical technical knowledge for the future as I can? Or jump through the hoops to get the best grades possible while waiting out graduation, knowing in the background this is only a temporary thing I have to deal with? 

you could have a medical theory journal where you write down your anthithesis and how it would be correctly and even try to write your doctors degree (if you need that) on that if you find the right doctor father. of course it’s more difficult to remember both - but it also will help you being a better doctor later. make this something that brings you joy to understand it more detailed. what ultimatively counts is not the grades but how good of a doctor you will be. a patient will not ask you about your grades but about how good of a healer you are.

Edited February 12, 2020 by remember

[Forestluv]

@TrynaBeTurquoise When at an entry level, there is often more pressure to conform. That you are bothered by pressure to conform to traditional paradigms is a trait you have. I teach at a liberal arts college and I’d say only about 10% of undergrad students are considerably bothered by being limited within a paradigm. 

I would gut out the last couple semesters. I would also plan ahead accordingly. Intentionally choose environments that will allow you space for expansion - now and years into the future. This was my #1 priority when choosing my current job. I wanted space to be able to explore, expand, integrate and create. I don’t like feeling contracted, limited and restricted by outside forces. 

As you reach higher levels in a profession, you can get more space. You can be the one creating new methods and understandings. I also felt too constricted within the traditional scientific paradigm. I’m now able to expand beyond and create novel material. I created a neuroscience course that integrates neurology, meditation, yoga, psychedelics, collective consciousness, chakras, paranormal, science and mysticism. The only reason I haven’t been labeled a quack or gotten fired is because I have a deep sense of knowing from decades of study and direct experience. Most of my colleagues think I’m eccentric - yet in an innovative way - like I’m years ahead of the field is n many ways. 

You may have a different niche than me, yet I would be very intentional about choosing and creating environment that  allow you space to explore and expand. 

[Nahm]

@Serotoninluv There’s hope for the world yet. ??

@TrynaBeTurquoise Guilty of silver lining here but...it seems that the material is actually serving you well, in increasing your awareness of it’s short coming, and your consciousness. Another thought...couldn’t your assignments meet the criteria for the grade, and have the meta added? (Not sure how tight their paradigm is honestly). Make those hoops yours. 

[electroBeam]

If you are allowed, do uni part time, online, and spend the other time doing a creative job, being an entrepreneur and getting money from scratch. There's no job more free than being an entrepreneur.

But at the same time, even being an entrepreneur is constricted. You have to play by your customer or investor's game.

[TrynaBeTurquoise]

@Leo Gura@Serotoninluv @remember @Nahm @electroBeam

Appreciate the advice, all helpful 

@Serotoninluv That seems like the most worthwhile college course of all time. I would actually spend the expected hours to study for one class by the college on that one and then some.

I have been doing personal training for a couple years and am in school for kinesiology, I have developed a pretty good holistic understanding of the body and nutrition especially with improving peoples movement quality and coaching others. The only reason I would go to grad school is to be a physical therapist, but I was told by a holistic chiropractor first hand he would not advise wasting all that time and money to be a physical therapist because people who don't have doctorate degrees can know more about the body and help people just as much if not more than them. So I am looking to somehow transcend personal training, and stay in the health/fitness/wellness world while not being even forced deeper in the paradigm in grad school.  

Edited February 13, 2020 by TrynaBeTurquoise

[Leo Gura]

8 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

I created a neuroscience course that integrates neurology, meditation, yoga, psychedelics, collective consciousness, chakras, paranormal, science and mysticism.

Awesome!

Quote

The only reason I haven’t been labeled a quack or gotten fired is because I have a deep sense of knowing from decades of study and direct experience.

Try telling them that you're God

[coca]

@Leo Gura so if your early into university you should drop out?

[Forestluv]

@TrynaBeTurquoise It sounds like you may need to find your own niche and it might not be "mainstream". . . . I've known a few PTs that are worth their weight in gold, yet like you say - they are highly specialized and not very integrative/holistic. Yet each component within an integrated system is still important for the system. . . An athlete specialized as a sprinter will not be a good decathlete. Yet a decathlete without sprinting skills won't be good either. 

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Try telling them that you're God

It's hard for me to even imagine doing that. It would be very radical in my environment. I think an entire course entitled "I Am God. You are God" would be needed. 

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, coca said:

@Leo Gura so if your early into university you should drop out?

No, maybe you like playing their game.

2 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

I think an entire course entitled "I Am God. You are God" would be needed. 

Good luck with that

[Derek White]

2 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

It's hard for me to even imagine doing that. It would be very radical in my environment.

Would it be radical to say I believe in God?

Can’t you hide it under the guise of “oh I’m a Hindu or something” Many eastern religions/traditions directly say God is everywhere and is everyone. 

[Forestluv]

23 minutes ago, Derek White said:

Would it be radical to say I believe in God?

Can’t you hide it under the guise of “oh I’m a Hindu or something” Many eastern religions/traditions directly say God is everywhere and is everyone. 

That would be fine, yet it is a very different contextualization.

At a blue level “I believe in god” is a religious external god. I might get some sneers from my orange and green students/colleagues - yet they wouldn’t find it threatening or want to stigmatize me. 

At green level, I could say “I believe in god” in which god is nature or energy. This might seem “woo woo” to my orange colleagues - yet they wouldn’t be bothered by it (as long as I didnt teach woo woo pseudoscience from their pov)

Yet this recontextualization alters the whole point of awakening. Imagine my human students/colleagues all thought they were dogs. They serve food at the cafeteria, they put themselves on leashes and pee on fire hydrants. Showing them they are actually humans would be a major awakening, yet they would resist by going into attack mode. Telling them “ok, you all are dogs. I believe in humans”. . . It defeats the whole point to help them realize they are humans. It would actually be counter-productive in re-enforcing their attachment/identification as a dog. 

[PenguinPablo]

@Leo Gura C's get degrees crew checking in. 

[Forestluv]

3 hours ago, d0ornokey said:

How did your students respond to it?

Generally positive. I need to present it in a way that is rational and grounded. I see science, metaphysics and mysticism all inter-related. It's not like I go into "woo woo" mode about meditation and then say "ok, let's shift back to real science now". . . . Rather than speaking three different languages, it's like I'm speaking one integrated language. . . The only area I can't do very well is chakras. I just don't have enough direct experience and embodiment. It's like I'm presenting someone else's ideas and understanding. I just briefly mention it and move on.  .  . Yet I could easily do a whole semester on the science/mysticism of psychedelics. 

[lostmedstudent]

@Serotoninluv so awesome!!!

lucky students!  

[Whatwhat]

3 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

Yet I could easily do a whole semester on the science/mysticism of psychedelics. 

I want to be a uni student now

[Sebiwert]

I am trying to make an argument for the study of science here.

Science strives for objective measurements and understanding through consensus to create models. These models help other people to manipulate the world (social endeavor). The models are only useful if they are accurate for the people who use them.

A completely objective measurement is not really possible. If only one person observes his reality, the measurement is distorted by his biases. Even if the models he creates are useful for him, they are likely to be misleading for other people. So scientists write papers based on measurable data, and these papers are reviewed by experts to remove these distortions. If this process is done well, the result is what is commonly called "objective" but still limited to a human, scientific point of view.

This system is not perfect, but it is still valuable to learn, because it teaches you to recognize your own biases. People who avoid the scientific system could be in danger of going deeper and deeper into their own world. 

Especially if you want to change large systems of the world according to your vision, consensus is needed.

[Lento]

@Serotoninluv Wow! Awesome! ♥️

@Sebiwert This is exactly what we're trying to do here with spirituality. There's no denial of science whatsoever. The scientific, experimental method is the basis of this work.

[Forestluv]

@Sebiwert I'm involved with science and appreciate your comments about how science can help reveal individual biases.

I think you make a good point about how a "higher" conscious level can reveal individual biases. For example, an individual scientist may have personal biases as he conducts his research. Perhaps he is an oncologist with his own hypothesis of how pancreatic tumors form. His career, reputation and funding is related to this hypothesis. He can try to be non-biased - for example, by doing blind studies. Yet there will still be subconscious biases. As you mentioned, he would submit a manuscript of his work to a review panel of scientific experts. This can mitigate the original scientist's subconscious biases.

Yet, we can take this up another level. A collective group of scientists review the biases of an individual scientist. Why not have a "super-collective" group that reviews the biases of the collective scientist group? We could create a "super-collective" panel made up of high level yogis, philosophers, metaphysicists etc. This "super-collective" group could help mitigate the collective biases within the prevailing scientific paradigm. This could help the progression of science. However, just as an individual ego wants to control the narrative, the collective scientist ego wants to control the narrative. For example, the collective scientist ego wants to control the narrative of what is "real" and "not real". The collective scientist ego says that certain therapies is "woo woo" and should not be covered by health care insurance. This collective scientist ego will resist being reviewed outside of their collective self-constructed paradigm. For example, notice the reaction of traditional scientists when they are criticized from above. When a transcendent scientist/mystic like Deepak Chopra criticizes the contracted scientific paradigm, there is enormous backlash within the traditional scientist collective. Someone like Deepak would be labeled a "quack practicing pseudo-science". An example is how Richard Dawkins perceives Deepak Chopra.

I think a good example of science revealing individual biases would be with homosexuality. 30 years ago, the prevailing view was that homosexuality was "abnormal" and "unnatural". Through various studies, scientists showed that homosexuality occurs in every insect and animal species examined. In this context, homosexuality is completely normal and natural. This allowed many people to realize their subconscious biases. Some people might realize "Hmmm, science has revealed homosexuality is natural. Perhaps I was biased due to my religious upbringing. Or perhaps I was biased because homosexuality makes me feel uncomfortable. Perhaps it only seems unnatural to me". . . . And we can continue on to a "higher" level. . . For example, I've seen many scientists claiming that gender can be measured physically, yet they fail to consider nonphysical aspects. I observed a scientist telling a transgender woman that her gender is actually male due to the measurement of her rudimentary penis and her brain structure and activity. The transgender woman tried to explain her nonphysical experience as a woman, yet the scientist kept returning to her physical make-up, telling her "no, you are actually a male". She finally became exasperated and said "You are saying I don't exist". And the scientist said "No, you exist. Your bones, muscles, brain etc. all exist". . . In this context, it is actually the scientist that needs to have his biases revealed. 

A good model for this is SD theory. The traditional scientific paradigm is Orange-centered. New Green-level science is currently emerging, yet is resisted by Orange-level science (e.g. the nonphysical basis of gender). Yellow-level science is just beginning to be expressed, yet still rare. I don't think yellow-level science will have considerable mainstream appeal and impact until another 20 years or so.