Getting My Covid Vaccine

[Forestluv]

16 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

@Forestluv How do you know a simple conversation won't work? You don't, unless you can predict the future.

Because I already tried it and it didn't work. Keep in mind if someone wants to expand and develop new skills, they will need to move into their stretch zone and make mistakes. 

16 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

@Forestluv

If you wish for me to read what you have to say, you can give me what you deem to be a reason good enough and at the same time complex enough so that someone like Elon might have omitted in his own reasoning, that's what I came for. Otherwise, I'm not interested and that's my right. Sorry for not reading all you wrote (you probably intended for me to read it lol), might interest others tho. 

As I mentioned, 98% of what I'm writing is going over your head and you are not my target audience. You've already clearly indicated you don't see any value in what I'm writing and have no interest in it. My target audience are other forum members that do have interest. 

For those following along. . . notice the usage of "give me a reason good enough". This shows a lack of desire and interest, which isn't a bad thing. Someone might be freestyle rapping and another might not see any value or interest in it. Importantly, be mindful of the source of "the reason good enough". No one can convince you of a reason good enough that will motivate someone to stretch into higher levels of expertise. Extrinsic rewards are insufficient. There must be genuine intrinsic reward as fuel to reach higher levels. One must have a passion for it. If I see a freestyle rapper and think "He's got nothing. Mariah Carey is such a better singer. Convince me that I should learn freestyle rap from someone who sucks at freestyle rap". That mindset will not allow someone to advance. There is no way to convince that person. 

In contrast, I recently discovered Harry Mack and I'm sooo impressed. He has such a wide variety of skills with improvisation, human connection, wordplay, cadence, flow and body language. Not only is it entertaining, yet I'm learning so much about fluidity of words, new mental skills and spontaneous communication. I also want to start integrating some elements into teaching skills. I'm now watching HMack videos in which he explains the process and mental dynamics. I'm totally open, curious and engaged to learn because I have intrinsic desire and rewards. A mentality of "give me a good reason why I should learn freestyle rap and not listen to Beyonce" is not a growth mindset. 

@Consept You are good at cracking open dams and allowing trickles of water to flow. That is a skill I'm not very good at. I just don't have that patience. 

[Consept]

4 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

Yes!!! You got it mate!

Great!! So i think for you it would be better to accept that no one on here or anywhere else will come up with a reason that will convince you, then you can conclude your investigation. Maybe just check every now and then if new reasons pop up, but in general you dont need to spend too much time on it 

[Mannyb]

@Forestluv From my perspective you just tried to "school" me from the beginning, and failed to do so (although you probably think I can't get it, funny).

You think that what you say is going over my head as though what you say is so "advanced" but that's just an assumption on your part (and if that were true maybe you're just a lousy professor lol). 

You keep trying to analyze my words, without addressing me directly as though I'm some kind of lab rat of your, that's precisely why I don't trust your type (pseudo intellectual academics).

And why do you keep talking about what you're doing on your free time lol There's other threads for that I guess xP

You think you don't have the patience to have a normal conversation with me but what you really are is pure patience itself, only the ego can ever be impatient.

Edited May 5, 2021 by Mannyb

[Mannyb]

6 minutes ago, Consept said:

Great!! So i think for you it would be better to accept that no one on here or anywhere else will come up with a reason that will convince you, then you can conclude your investigation. Maybe just check every now and then if new reasons pop up, but in general you dont need to spend too much time on it 

Why wouldn't they? I'm open to new ideas... Yet I do get your point, I already don't spend much time in here (echo chamber vibes sometimes, which is natural for a forum of like minded people). 

[Consept]

19 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

Why wouldn't they? I'm open to new ideas...

Well maybe, i hope you find the answer you were looking for 

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, Mannyb said:

@Forestluv 

You think that what you say is going over my head as though what you say is so "advanced" but that's just an assumption on your part (if that were true maybe you're just a lousy professor lol). 

You are correct that I don't have a heart-centered approach here. I'm aware of that. I'm intentionally creating conceptual constructs. 

Relativity, spectrums and integration is more advanced that binary views because relativity, spectrums and integration includes binary constructs. Any system that includes basic elements AND more elements is more advanced than the more basic system. For example, a map of Europe is more advanced than a map of France because the map of Europe contains the map of France and more. 

In terms of SD, stage yellow is more advanced than stage blue because stage yellow includes stage blue and more. 

If a mind can't see this is indicative of "over the head". If it wasn't going over the head, you would be getting it and not restrict yourself to binary constructs. You would be integrating in relativity, spectrums and multi-perspectival elements Yet from a growth perspective, this is good news. It opens up new dimensions of growth potential. When I listen to Harry Mack, I realize much of what he says is over my head, yet that is good news! Because it is a resource that allows expansion. 

1 hour ago, Mannyb said:

@Forestluv 

You think you don't have the patience to have a normal conversation with me 

Again, you are misinterpreting what I'm saying. That is not why I lack patience in certain areas. It's going over the head. 

I lose patience when someone is using simple, contracted, personalized, competitive constructs with Dunning-Kruger mixed in. 

If someone says "Can we engage at the basics and work our way up? Can we start with binary constructs and then you gradually add in more elements of spectrums, relativity, multi-perspectives and integration?" - I would be like "sure, let's go for it. Check it out. We can start of by creating a simple binary construct that the pharmaceutical industry is unethical and manipulates the public for financial gain". Then we could advance by building upon that simple binary construct. . . We could start to add in new elements of spectrums and mosaics. I tried to reach out to you multiple times by stating unethical manipulative behavior of the pharmaceutical industry and build upon it. Yet you've shown no interest in doing so.

A "normal" conversation for you is very different than a "normal" conversation for me. Yet this is an aspect of relativity you are not grasping. Over and over I keep saying that there is value in what you are saying. Over and over, I've stressed positive things in what you are saying and say let's build upon that. Yet you don't catch that and keep defaulting to "me vs you".

How many times do I need to agree with elements of your view until you realize that I agree with elements of your view? Do I need to state 100 times that the pharmaceutical industry has elements of unethical and manipulative behavior? Do I need to list 100 forms of unethical behavior of the pharmaceutical industry for you to realize that I don't have the opposite view as you? After trying this 5-6 times and you don't see it, I lose patience. I don't see us getting beyond a simplistic construct of "my view vs your view" and "convince me that your view is right and my view is wrong". There is no "my view vs your view", The view I'm presenting includes elements of "your view"!

1 hour ago, Mannyb said:

@Forestluv 

you really are is pure patience itself, only the ego can ever be impatient.

From the perspective of an ego, yes. Yet it's not that simple. As a basic example, I dog can lose patience, yet has no ego.

Loss of patience can arise without an ego, just like hunger, pain, curiosity etc. can arise without an ego. Adding in ego is an extra element added in. It's totally fine to add in that element, yet there are many dimensions to explore without that element.

[Mannyb]

40 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

Relativity, spectrums and integration is more advanced that binary views because relativity, spectrums and integration includes binary constructs. Any system that includes basic elements AND more elements is more advanced than the more basic system. For example, a map of Europe is more advanced than a map of France because the map of Europe contains the map of France and more. 

In terms of SD, stage yellow is more advanced than stage blue because stage yellow includes stage blue and more. 

If a mind can't see this is indicative of "over the head". If it wasn't going over the head, you would be getting it and not restrict yourself to binary constructs. You would be integrating in relativity, spectrums and multi-perspectival elements Yet from a growth perspective, this is good news. It opens up new dimensions of growth potential. When I listen to Harry Mack, I realize much of what he says is over my head, yet that is good news! Because it is a resource that allows expansion. 

Again, you are misinterpreting what I'm saying. That is not why I lack patience in certain areas. It's going over the head. 

I lose patience when someone is using simple, contracted, personalized, competitive constructs with Dunning-Kruger mixed in. 

If someone says "Can we engage at the basics and work our way up? Can we start with binary constructs and then you gradually add in more elements of spectrums, relativity, multi-perspectives and integration?" - I would be like "sure, let's go for it. Check it out. We can start of by creating a simple binary construct that the pharmaceutical industry is unethical and manipulates the public for financial gain". Then we could advance by building upon that simple binary construct. . . We could start to add in new elements of spectrums and mosaics. I tried to reach out to you multiple times by stating unethical manipulative behavior of the pharmaceutical industry and build upon it. Yet you've shown no interest in doing so.

A "normal" conversation for you is very different than a "normal" conversation for me. Yet this is an aspect of relativity you are not grasping. Over and over I keep saying that there is value in what you are saying. Over and over, I've stressed positive things in what you are saying and say let's build upon that. Yet you don't catch that and keep defaulting to "me vs you".

How many times do I need to agree with elements of view until you realize that I agree with elements of your view? And you stop creating "my view vs your view"? Do I need to state 100 times that the pharmaceutical industry has elements of unethical and manipulative behavior? Do I need to list 100 forms of unethical behavior of the pharmaceutical industry for you to realize that I don't have the opposite view as you? After trying this 5-6 times and you don't see it, I lose patience. 

From the perspective of an ego, yes. Yet it's not that simple. As a basic example, I dog can lose patience, yet has no ego.

Loss of patience can arise without an ego, just like hunger, pain, curiosity etc. can arise without an ego. Adding in ego is an extra element added in. It's totally fine to add in that element, yet there are many dimensions to explore without that element.

I was talking about your ego’s perspective obviously ? I know it could also be anything in a pre egoic state as well and it’s “nice” of you again to assume that I don’t know that, yet I never said I didn’t. 
All of your arguments here are predicated upon assumptions.

There is no normal for you or normal for me, there’s just normal or abnormal aka special, unique, whatever..

A normal conversation is simply I ask you reply for example, that’s normal. If I say give me a reason you either give me one or not, simple.
An abnormal conversation is I say give me a reason and you start deconstructing every single term I use and start making assumption after assumption.

Seems you’re stuck in your precious stage yellow, maybe you could ascend to turquoise and realize what I’m saying might be going over your head. I could also play games you see, yet I’m not here to play games.

So I’m gonna make it simple for ya; either give me a reason to get the vaccine I haven’t heard of or let’s just agree to disagree and stop it there.

[RendHeaven]

25 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

Seems you’re stuck in your precious stage yellow, maybe you could ascend to turquoise and realize what I’m saying might be going over your head. I could also play games you see, yet I’m not here to play games.

You're not turquoise lol.

[Forestluv]

34 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

I was talking about your ego’s perspective obviously ? I know it could also be anything in a pre egoic state as well and it’s “nice” of you again to assume that I don’t know that, yet I never said I didn’t. 

The "your ego's perspective" is an add-in. You are creating that. Notice the framing of "your ego's perspective", rather than "the creation I'm creating that I call 'your ego's perspective'". (And yes, I am aware I am doing the same thing within this construct). 

You seem to be interested in assumptions, here there is an assumption that there is an external thing of "your ego's perspective". 

34 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

All of your arguments here are predicated upon assumptions.

Notice the construct of "argument". Imagine we are hiking together in the forest and I say "look how that hummingbird flies!!! It flies like an alien!". Wouldn't it be odd to say "Your argument that the hummingbird flies like an alien is predicated upon assumptions". That framing is very debate oriented and very restrictive. It is not exploratory.

Yet in terms of argumentative structures, EVERY argumentative structure is predicated upon assumptions. In fact, any thing is predicated on the assumption that it is not another thing. 

34 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

There is no normal for you or normal for me, there’s just normal or abnormal aka special, unique, whatever..

This is what I'm referring to as a simplistic construct. Within the construct of an objective, external reality - this is correct. Yet within a relative construct, this is only partially true. The phrase "there is no normal for you or normal for me" indicates a conscious state contracted within objective, external reality that cannot see relativity. It literally say there is no relativity and reveals lack of this awareness.

34 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

A normal conversation is simply I ask you reply for example, that’s normal. If I say give me a reason you either give me one or not, simple.
An abnormal conversation is I say give me a reason and you start deconstructing every single term I use and start making assumption after assumption.

Within the relative construct of "normal" you are creating, that is true. Yet it is not true in other relative constructs of "normal". For example, we could say that deconstructing terms is "normal" - this is true within that relative construct of "normal".

Notice how you are saying that your perception is normal and my perception is abnormal. I am saying that your perception is both normal and abnormal. As well, my perception is both normal and abnormal. This is relativity. What is normal and abnormal is relative to the perception of what is normal and abnormal. 

34 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

Seems you’re stuck in your precious stage yellow, maybe you could ascend to turquoise and realize what I’m saying might be going over your head. I could also play games you see, yet I’m not here to play games.

For that to be true, you would need to be playing like you don't understand things like spectrums, mosaics and relativity. That would be like someone fluent in Spanish pretending they are a begginner in Spanish. That would be playing a game. 

I'm straight-up adding elements of relativity to what I write. It doesn't get any more direct. If you can't see the relativity elements I'm spitting out, you don't understand relativity. It would be like me saying "Como estas?" and you replying "Say something to me in Spanish". If you could speak Spanish, you would be playing games that you don't speak Spanish.

34 minutes ago, Mannyb said:

So I’m gonna make it simple for ya; either give me a reason to get the vaccine I haven’t heard of or let’s just agree to disagree and stop it there.

As I've said, I can't give you a personalized reason for you to get the vaccine. A personalized reason comes from within.

Imagine me asking "tell me a reason why it should learn freestyle rap". If I'm not internally interested in freestyle rap, there is no reason you can give me. Anything you say, I would dismiss as having no value for me. You could say "Freestyle rap would improve your vocabulary" and I could respond "I don't need to improve my vocabulary".

I'm able to give both positive and negative elements of the vaccine. Yet I cannot give a reason for you, because that is relative to you. You create your personal values. 

[Mannyb]

8 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

You're not turquoise lol.

You should read Don Miguel Ruiz The 4 agreements, might learn a thing or two about assumptions

[RendHeaven]

@Mannyb Ok 

And you can get the vaccine while I do that~

[Mannyb]

@Forestluv Just to let you know there’s no point in talking to you, you’ll always reframe everything to your advantage, you must be fun at parties... ? 

You very well know that I’m asking for what you call the positive and negative elements of the vaccine, yet like a child you choose to play games... how stage yellow of you...

Nice job trying to suck me into your mind games but I’m out. Peace ✌? 

 

Edited May 6, 2021 by Mannyb

[Mannyb]

8 minutes ago, RendHeaven said:

@Mannyb Ok 

And you can get the vaccine while I do that~

Why do you want me to do that exactly?
I recommend you read that book as it can help you stop making assumptions.

What are you trying to get at with me getting the vaccine? It only makes it seem as though you felt attacked by my recommendation...

Edited May 6, 2021 by Mannyb

[BadHippie]

@Mannyb

The only good reason I can see, for young healthy people, to get the vaccine is to get back their "freedom" (not absolute freedom). Things like going to restaurants (without testing), legally meeting multiple people, shopping, cinema, zoos and so on. Good that I am not that easy to blackmail.

Here in Germany starting next week we will have an vaccine-apartheid... (I thought we were over the notion that a two-tier society is any good).

The thing that is scary that most people are so full of fear (because of a virus with 99,9% recovery rate), that they are willing to accept that our basic-rights are just a privilege now. They don´t even notice the hypocrisy of saying that basic rights are now rights for vaccinated people. 

That´s why so many people here in Germany are getting the vaccine. The Mainstream-Media is doing a pretty good vaccination-campaign, downplaying all the dangers of these new vaccines (no long-term studies). People are so traumatized and anxious that they don´t see any other option but taking the shot. And it will probably help them simply because it will decrease they fear, as they will feel safer.

And all this is based on a test that can´t even tell you that you are infectious or sick... Crazy times, but people can rationalize everything, as we can see pretty clearly on the forum.

I will probably get called biased again and not looking at things holistically, but I am used to that now. Yes I am an anti-vaxxer, I don´t think my body needs any outside help to stay healthy. I´ve never been really sick since I started to live more consciously, why would I suddenly need a vaccine if I can stay healthy like this.

Yes you can say "do it for society", but this is just virtue-signaling for most people. If people would truly care about other people we wouldn´t have lockdowns and mandatory mask wearing. No one would try to force anyone to do anything, they would instead invite you to learn new things. 

If the vaccine truly keeps you from getting COVID-19, why can´t people simply decide to take it? The ones who don´t want it aren´t endangering others. Why do vaccinated people still need to wear masks and keep distance? Obviously because they don´t keep you from getting COVID-19... There are just so many paradox statements on the official side (also corruption). Yeah I know every information has a bias, that´s why I didn´t choose to not take the vaccine on the basis of any outside information. It´s simply the fact that I don´t feel like taking it because I will probably get sick when taking it (fever, headaches and such things). Problems I don´t have when I don´t take the vaccine. 

Yes I may get sick some day again, but I believe my body can heal any damage without the help of medication  

Also according to official numbers (Germany) the COVID-19 mortality for 80+ people in some counties increased 4-20 fold (60 days after compared to 60 days before starting vaccinating). Yeah just a correlation, but a pretty interesting one. Also all-cause mortality in Israel increased a lot since they started vaccinating. Interesting correlations all over the place. 

 

Edited May 6, 2021 by BadHippie

[Consept]

@BadHippie Not gonna pull apart your points but im just curious, what would you consider an actual good reason look like? As in would there ever be a good reason to take a vaccine for a contagious virus, and if so what could that reason be? 

[BadHippie]

@Consept

A good reason for me would be a truly dangerous virus (which COVID-19 isn´t, at least for my age and health) and safer-vaccines (which aren´t safe enough for me). Also I would need more trust in the pharmaceutical-industry and some truly "independent" safety-studies for these new vaccines, which we don´t have. We have the EMA here in Europe, but the chairwoman worked for the pharmaceutical industry. There are two many "experts" telling to many different things. It´s just way to fucked up currently for me to trust in any of these narratives. So I will listen to what my gut tells me  

But of course I´m biased. I know more people indirectly who died from the vaccine, then from COVID-19. I know exactly 2 people in my whole circle of friends who has a positive test result (1 PCR-Test, 1 PoC-Test), one had weak symptoms, the other one did not have any.

And this while not wearing a mask (I have a doctor´s note, because I get headaches and accelerated heart rate and feel sick when breathing through the mask), still meeting a lot of people (hugging, kissing, having sex with different people) and basically going on with my life the same way as before. 

Edited May 6, 2021 by BadHippie

[Mannyb]

@BadHippie  Namaste bruder ?? Glad to see someone speak their mind loud and clear, I second all you’ve said!

Edited May 6, 2021 by Mannyb

[Meditationdude]

On 4/19/2021 at 1:55 AM, Leo Gura said:

Don't delay, schedule yours today.

@Leo Gura ?

 

I was always curious your take on the vaccine and if your were getting it. I wrestled with the idea for many weeks before I pulled the trigger. I get my second dose (Pfizer) tonight.  
 

The biggest thing holding me back was this thought: The vaccine doesn’t necessarily prevent you from getting COVID, but there’s a 99% chance you won’t get serious symptoms and end up in the hospital. Me being extremely healthy, physically fit and having a very strong immune system (haven’t been sick or fever in over a decade, no allergies (live in allergy capital of the US), never had flu (never had flu shot either) I figured I would be fine even if I caught it. So why put some new vaccine in me when I’ll good? 
 

Did anything besides your health hold you back this long? 

[Consept]

3 hours ago, BadHippie said:

@Consept

A good reason for me would be a truly dangerous virus (which COVID-19 isn´t, at least for my age and health) and safer-vaccines (which aren´t safe enough for me). Also I would need more trust in the pharmaceutical-industry and some truly "independent" safety-studies for these new vaccines, which we don´t have. We have the EMA here in Europe, but the chairwoman worked for the pharmaceutical industry. There are two many "experts" telling to many different things. It´s just way to fucked up currently for me to trust in any of these narratives. So I will listen to what my gut tells me  

But of course I´m biased. I know more people indirectly who died from the vaccine, then from COVID-19. I know exactly 2 people in my whole circle of friends who has a positive test result (1 PCR-Test, 1 PoC-Test), one had weak symptoms, the other one did not have any.

And this while not wearing a mask (I have a doctor´s note, because I get headaches and accelerated heart rate and feel sick when breathing through the mask), still meeting a lot of people (hugging, kissing, having sex with different people) and basically going on with my life the same way as before. 

OK thanks for your reply and i get where you coming from. So essentially you seem to be saying you dont believe this to be a truly dangerous virus, can i ask what would constitute a dangerous virus for you? So the current total death number is 3.24 million people as well as quite a lot with long covid and various other symptoms which clog up the healthcare systems, i know youll argue that not all of them were covid deaths but for the sake of not going down another tangent lets just say those numbers are legit. So considering this is the number with sever precautions in place, in your opinion how many deaths or illnesses would there need to be for it to be considered a truly dangerous virus?  

The other part is that you dont trust the pharma industry which i also agree with to some extent. The issue is that you seem to be saying that you want a vaccine or medicine created completely independent of any links to the pharma industry. You also say you want all the experts to say the same thing and for there to be completely independent safety studies. There are safety studies currently but are you saying that they cant have any link to the scientific community or to the pharma industry? If these concerns were addressed, would you then trust the vaccine?

[BadHippie]

Quote

OK thanks for your reply and i get where you coming from. So essentially you seem to be saying you dont believe this to be a truly dangerous virus, can i ask what would constitute a dangerous virus for you? So the current total death number is 3.24 million people as well as quite a lot with long covid and various other symptoms which clog up the healthcare systems, i know youll argue that not all of them were covid deaths but for the sake of not going down another tangent lets just say those numbers are legit. So considering this is the number with sever precautions in place, in your opinion how many deaths or illnesses would there need to be for it to be considered a truly dangerous virus?  

Well these numbers aren´t high for me. More people die from cancer, starvation and other things. Even alcohol kills more people every year. Personally I would rather have them prohibit alcohol again, but that would probably backfire as so many people are addicted to it. I am more addicted to my "freedom"

Also as you said, these numbers are just deaths with a positive PCR-test. There sadly aren´t any valid numbers. Even if I check the CDC (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#Comorbidities) I can see only 6% of people died because of COVID-19, the other 94% had 4.0 additional conditions on average. Doesn´t look that dangerous to me. Especially since I studied how the PCR-Test works... (You can check what the inventor said about it, pretty interesting). In America you guys used 37-40 cycles on average... Which I honestly can´t believe. And now the vaccinated people will get testes with only up to 28 cycles which will make it look like vaccinated people have less COVID, simply because they reduced the CT-number. 

What you call long-covid I call slow regeneration (healing). My grandfather needed over 14 months to recover from a flu, when he still lived. Can happen with almost anything, not just with COVID. This just shows how bad our collective understand of Health is. We simply label anything as COVID now, maybe that´s also a reason why so many people don´t heal, because they forget to check what actually makes them sick?

Also I wouldn´t consider any virus dangerous in general, what the public thinks about viruses isn´t my perspective on what a virus is. There are many different models on viruses not just the one that gets propagated in society. I don´t think people get sick because of viruses. But that´s not a popular opinion, people don´t like to look inside when it comes to what makes them sick, they like to have someone or something to blame.