Leo, you are so much wrong in this video with a red dress :(

[p1xelm0nk]

2 hours ago, Axiomatic said:

Understanding the destruction women can cause (which is more subtle and manipulative compared to the male's physical destruction) is one of the few things Islam got right.

Idk if they should cover them all up, but it's easy to see and understand if you truly know female nature. 

wow do we really have people on this forum preaching taliban values now? this forum is such a cesspool.

[Carl-Richard]

4 hours ago, Axiomatic said:

Understanding the destruction women can cause (which is more subtle and manipulative compared to the male's physical destruction) is one of the few things Islam got right.

Idk if they should cover them all up, but it's easy to see and understand if you truly know female nature. 

Lol no get out. Women were covered up to keep male impulsivity in check (which is a classic band-aid solution that doesn't address the root issue). Islam just took it to its logical conclusion. The Abrahamic religions served as a hasty reaction (rather than a thoughtful response) to the excesses of Red. Purple has no problems with naked ladies.

Edited August 27, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

7 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

No society has ever stepped beyond Green. Green is the last stage for a society, then it collapses.

No society has ever been close to Green before the 20th century, and this is the historical context that mr. 1377 is lacking. He is not talking about Green. If anything, he is talking about the regression from Blue down to Red. The medieval period was a long tug of war between Blue and Red, and its synthesis was Orange.

 

8 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Hypothetically, even if tier two could somehow become mainstream, society would still collapse nevertheless, and that's the point. It's impossible to have a society made solely of thinkers. You need all other kinds of people to make a functional society.

When did Green suddenly equal "thinkers"? If anything, Green is the first stage that really cares about the worker class.

 

8 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Unfortunately, some people have the time to study SD, but they skim through other models and dismiss them casually because they're old or whatnot.

It's not that a model being old necessarily makes it wrong. It's just that when it comes to societal system theories, and especially those that are based on the observation of history, of course the older theories are severely inferior, because of a glaring, macroscopic hole in their data set. Heck, professors tend to feel uneasy just when they're citing decade year old studies.

[The0Self]

Do you think a rock would see a difference in goodness between nazis and those killed by nazis? Course not, they aren’t selfish. Good/better only means good for me and what I identify with. If I’m a terrorist, “good for me” might be beheading someone — otherwise why would they do it... the infidel is considered a threat to the goodness of reality in their minds, so they obviously have good intentions. Pretty straightforward. Of course for us that would be very bad. Same deal. Everything is ultimately perfection (that’s all there is), and equal, but of course NOT relatively equal — we’re more developed and clearly display more apparent goodness (depending on who you ask) than terrorists... No one is arguing against that.

Edited August 27, 2021 by The0Self

[Gesundheit2]

3 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

When did Green suddenly equal "thinkers"? If anything, Green is the first stage that really cares about the worker class.

Tier two, not Green. You can't be a tier two farmer, you just don't have time for meta reflection. But you can be a tier two CEO that runs various farms. Tier two is reserved for the people who specialize in thinking. You're dreaming if you think you can get there otherwise.

Quote

It's not that a model being old necessarily makes it wrong. It's just that when it comes to societal system theories, and especially those that are based on the observation of history, of course the older theories are severely inferior, because of a glaring, macroscopic hole in their data set. Heck, professors tend to feel uneasy just when they're citing decade year old studies.

Instead, why don't you give me newer alternatives to SD (please no more integral stuff)? Why is everyone here always stuck with SD?

3 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

No society has ever been close to Green before the 20th century, and this is the historical context that mr. 1377 is lacking. He is not talking about Green. If anything, he is talking about the regression from Blue down to Red. The medieval period was a long tug of war between Blue and Red, and its synthesis was Orange.

You're explaining Muqaddimah through SD lens. It doesn't work like that. Every theory stands on its own and explains itself. I only explained it in SD terms to make it more understandable. But you should be wise enough not to interpret it through that lens or to take it literally. SD separates the individualistic stages (Beige, Red, Orange) and the collective stages (Purple, Blue, Green), which is the key difference between SD and Muqaddimah. Muqaddimah considers each triplet one stage. And he is correct for that, because essentially each triplet manifest in a unique way, either individualistic oriented, or collectivist, and that's precisely the point. You need both components to make a functional society. You can't have all individualistic oriented or all collectivists. Regardless of the center of gravity, it's always either this or that. A functional society consists of an equally impactful amount of each, which creates a proper balance that makes right conditions for prosperity and growth. Once that balance is skewed in any which direction, say bye bye to society.

Also, Green existed in every large enough society that have been stable for an enough period of time. Values like: equality, peace, harmony, connection, compassion, love, etc. have always existed. And they're all Green values. SD is not reinventing the wheel here. All tier one values exist in every society, and to a large extent. Most of the times, Purple, Blue, and Green come together as one entity. You can't really separate magical thinking from religious thinking from idealistic thinking. All grounded in emotions. And same thing for their counterpart stages, only all grounded in logic instead. It's only tier two values that are rare and only exist in the top <1% of the population, who tend to be intellectuals most of the times.

Edited August 27, 2021 by Gesundheit2

[Enlighten]

10 hours ago, Axiomatic said:

Understanding the destruction women can cause (which is more subtle and manipulative compared to the male's physical destruction) is one of the few things Islam got right.

Women covered themselves up in almost all parts of the world until a few centuries ago. Islam isn't special. 

And what destruction women can cause? lol 

How old are you making such statements? 15?

Go Wank off.

Edited August 27, 2021 by Enlighten

[Carl-Richard]

10 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Tier two, not Green. You can't be a tier two farmer, you just don't have time for meta reflection. But you can be a tier two CEO that runs various farms. Tier two is reserved for the people who specialize in thinking. You're dreaming if you think you can get there otherwise.

If we grant this assumption of menial labour as a cap on development, generalized AI fixes that problem. I think it's a weak assumption though, because it doesn't take future society into account (also Chris Langan is cognitively Tier 2 and worked menial jobs all his life, though of course he doesn't represent the rest of the population).

I think you're underestimating the effect that society has on shaping the individual. Once society becomes peak Green and moves into Tier 2, you'll see a wide distribution of those values in the population across social classes.

It's true that Tier 2 is only present in the minds of hyper-intuitive intellectuals of today, but remember that there is a societal component that always catches up and dictates the values of common man. Plato and Aristotle were unmatched in their time but is now being taught in today's children's classrooms.

Likewise, it's true that only the cutting edge of intellectuals could grapple with the fundamentals of Green 100 years ago, but there is nothing stopping a Norwegian farmer from enjoying the fruits of that today, and it's the same with Tier 2 in the future.

Edited August 27, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

8 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

Instead, why don't you give me newer alternatives to SD (please no more integral stuff)? Why is everyone here always stuck with SD?

The genius of Ken Wilber's integrative approach is unmatched, because he isn't just dealing with one model. He (while being inspired by Robert Kegan) recognized the shared similarities of the so-called "altitudes of development" across a dozen different models: Piaget – cognitive domain, Cook-Greuter – ego domain, Kohlberg - moral domain, Beck/Cohen - vMEME domain, Kegan, Loevinger, Maslow, Erikson, McElland/Murray etc. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kegan#The_Evolving_Self

Heck, recently I even found a state model in a systems psychology lecture at my university that lines up with the altitudes: 

Edited August 27, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[Gesundheit2]

@Carl-Richard I really wish I could agree with you and believe that that's how things actually work in reality. I just don't see these developmental models applicable. They're not in alignment with my perception. I am open-minded and sincerely trying to accept them as factual, why would I not want the world to be working that way? Right?

Edited August 27, 2021 by Gesundheit2

[Danioover9000]

@Axiomatic

18 hours ago, Axiomatic said:

Understanding the destruction women can cause (which is more subtle and manipulative compared to the male's physical destruction) is one of the few things Islam got right.

Idk if they should cover them all up, but it's easy to see and understand if you truly know female nature. 

   Understandable, as that part of the world has harsher geography and climate, with not much else to do but brutally survive.

   But that's on that part if the world. When it's a different part, it's not that destructive.

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Gesundheit2 said:

@Carl-Richard I really wish I could agree with you and believe that that's how things actually work in reality. I just don't see these developmental models applicable. They're not in alignment with my perception. I am open-minded and sincerely trying to accept them as factual, why would I not want the world to be working that way? Right?

Yes, there can be a kind of naive optimism to seeing the world through this type of teleological lens of "everything is progress", but there is nothing that tells us whether we will get to Tier 2 before it's too late or whether Tier 2 will be successful at all in the long run. But the idea that these ideas cannot manifest themselves in society is a bit too pessimistic in my view.

This idea that Tier 2 requires expert knowledge and genius level cognition to arrive at is only true if we're talking about those who pioneered and discovered these new altitudes. Once they're fleshed out, packaged and distributed through the collective consciousness, that isn't necessarily the case.

I mean just look at how fast all these young people on a forum they discovered a couple of years ago can become so welcoming of such ideas (meanwhile they might not embody it fully yet). Imagine if not just their local internet community was pro Tier 2 but that their school teachers, healthcare workers and politicians were pointing to these values. It's hard to imagine that they wouldn't embody Tier 2 to some extent.

Edited August 27, 2021 by Carl-Richard

[DocWatts]

23 minutes ago, cypres said:

@Hulia You should not try to have empathy with the taliban before your identification with their victims have come to an empowered state. 

This ^ %100.

Nor is this incomparable with taking the time and effort to understand what causes someone to adopt the role of a victimizer.

Just that our first ethical obligation is to extend empathy and compassion with people who have been disempowered and victimized, and only secondarily towards thier victimizers and abusers.

[Hulia]

@cypres He just says that a westener shoudn´t be agitated when a terrorist beheads a human being. Then he decribes the perspective of a rich well set westener and the perspective of poor terrorist and his bad childhood. Nothing wrong about it so far... But! What he completely forgets is the perspective of a victim. Not important?

Tell me what you want, Leo lives in a bubble, in a laboratorium of consciiousness. 

Somewhere in this thread he says that, if he were a victim, of course he wouldn´t think about difficult life of terrorist, but fight for his life or scream for help or whatever. 

I ask him, what is the difference? If not his but another person´s life is threatened he would rather think about terrorist? Doesn´t this other person deserve to be saved? What is more important - difficult childhood of a terrorist somewhere in the past or the life of this person in the present? 

He is speaking in this video from a perspective of a safe and well set westener.

[Danioover9000]

@Hulia

3 hours ago, Hulia said:

@cypres He just says that a westener shoudn´t be agitated when a terrorist beheads a human being. Then he decribes the perspective of a rich well set westener and the perspective of poor terrorist and his bad childhood. Nothing wrong about it so far... But! What he completely forgets is the perspective of a victim. Not important?

Tell me what you want, Leo lives in a bubble, in a laboratorium of consciiousness. 

Somewhere in this thread he says that, if he were a victim, of course he wouldn´t think about difficult life of terrorist, but fight for his life or scream for help or whatever. 

I ask him, what is the difference? If not his but another person´s life is threatened he would rather think about terrorist? Doesn´t this other person deserve to be saved? What is more important - difficult childhood of a terrorist somewhere in the past or the life of this person in the present? 

He is speaking in this video from a perspective of a safe and well set westener.

   He already did a few old videos on what victim mindset is and how to overcome it. I think he might've not wanted to rehash the victim's perspective again in the everyone has good intentions video, but overall this should be obvious at this point for most who have followed and did the inner work he did. The main problem is that most people are still strongly self identified that they make it personal and think Leo is talking to you directly. Not the case. Leo is making a meta point about intentions, and trying to get this point to click in your triggered mind, lost in the content of the example. Again, it's not content of the example, it's the structure. You could have a very diferent victimhood, like being rpped off, or having a lover cheat on you, or walking into a pole. Different areas, but a deeper root issue.

   

[Hulia]

16 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

He already did a few old videos on what victim mindset is and how to overcome it.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

AAAAAAA!

Do you really don´t see any difference between thinking negative thoughts and being beheaded??????????

Is the nuance so slight?????

I just stop here. No sense. Too much spirituality, too much 1st world snobbery.

 

[The0Self]

@Hulia

Your responses are perfectly rational on the level at which you’re speaking. But hear me out...

Also to anyone else who might not understand or agree with the sentiment that everyone acts with good intentions, I don’t know if this will help, but it’s the clearest way I can express it:

Unconditional love creates (appears as) character-structures (we could conceive of each individual as a unique maze) which unconditional love can explore through. The structure can have all sorts of challenges and impediments and imperfections — this is responsible for and indeed necessary for the diversity and uniqueness of beings. However, at every step, each and every intention is literally the expression of unconditional love, which is perfect. It is only the maze which appears as imperfection, so any judgement of choices in that maze is actually just a judgement of the maze itself — since, at all times, every single choice is always just love... love choosing the most loving choice (it just can seem like a terrible choice if the maze dictates it to). So not only are all intentions good, they’re hopelessly unable to be anything other than perfect.

The intention to “make intentions better” is of course perfect as well — however, in that case you’d really just be making alterations to the maze! Not the intentions! The intention literally is fixed at perfect.

Edited August 31, 2021 by The0Self

[Leo Gura]

@The0Self Well said.

[Leo Gura]

On 8/26/2021 at 11:58 PM, Gesundheit2 said:

You can't be a tier two farmer

Much farming these days is done by automated tractor robots.

In the future all farming will be automated. Why would anyone want to work in the fields for 12 hours per day? This is like slavery.

If kids can learn 12 years of mathematics, they can certainly be taught Spiral Dynamics and everything that Actualized.org teaches. It's not like this is rocket science. This stuff should be basic learning material for kids. It should all be known by the end of high school.

There cannot be an advanced society without such education. So it will happen.

You're just forgetting that we live in the Dark Ages.

[Gesundheit2]

On 31/08/2021 at 11:07 AM, Leo Gura said:

Much farming these days is done by automated tractor robots.

In the future all farming will be automated. Why would anyone want to work in the fields for 12 hours per day? This is like slavery.

If kids can learn 12 years of mathematics, they can certainly be taught Spiral Dynamics and everything that Actualized.org teaches. It's not like this is rocket science. This stuff should be basic learning material for kids. It should all be known by the end of high school.

There cannot be an advanced society without such education. So it will happen.

You're just forgetting that we live in the Dark Ages.

Forget about farming. What about other occupations? It isn't about physical effort per se. It's about the time required to get certain tasks done. Certain jobs are still very far from automation, e.g. programming. If I work 10 hours a day, when will I have the time to reflect and raise my consciousness?

Also, you probably have a natural inclination towards intellectual type jobs. So, it's easy for you to suggest education as the ultimate solution. For me, it's the opposite. I would rather work in a physically demanding position than in a position that requires serious thought or innovation. Unlike intellectual people, I don't particularly find it joyful to understand everything. If I ever have an insight, it's because it was forced on me by God. As well, learning and thinking in a systemic/academic way is even more difficult for me.

Quote

Why would anyone want to work in the fields for 12 hours per day? This is like slavery.

Because it's easier and more enjoyable than formal studying, at least for me.

And I don't think of it as slavery. I think it's something that needs to be done because of division of labor. But people abuse and put each other down because they're evil. In this case, people with higher intellect commit the abuse, and others just perpetuate it with their silence and low consciousness.

Edited September 1, 2021 by Gesundheit2

[p1xelm0nk]

On 8/30/2021 at 6:58 AM, Hulia said:

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

AAAAAAA!

Do you really don´t see any difference between thinking negative thoughts and being beheaded??????????

Is the nuance so slight?????

I just stop here. No sense. Too much spirituality, too much 1st world snobbery.

 

Yeah just stop. This is obviously much too advanced for your level of development.