Curt’s resistance to Truth: TOE podcast

[Terell Kirby]

Did anyone else feel Curt J. getting triggered by some of the existential insights shared by Leo?

I took the podcast as a great example of how guarded the intellectual/academic ego mind is..even for those who are open minded. Kudos to Leo for patiently countering many of straw-mans thrown at him. This is what we are up against for those wanting to share Truth to the masses.

[Frenk]

I think we should be more understanding. The things Leo talks about are hard to stomach even for an open-minded individual.

So Curt being triggered is a good thing imo that he's actually listening rather than acting fake

[Terell Kirby]

@Frenk I agree. Curt was able to maintain an open ear whilst being triggered, and I am sure that was difficult. Not to say we shouldn’t sympathize, but it’s amazing how irritable the truth can be to human psyches.

[TheAlchemist]

I didn't notice him being triggered. He was just speaking from the POV of someone seeking to understand. Just saying yes to everything even when it doesn't make sense or resonate for you in your mind will not result in any kind of progress. Blind faith is not useful. It needs to resonate with the mind for the mind to then have enough interest to look into it more through 1st person experiential means. 

[peanutspathtotruth]

I was actually very impressed by how open minded he was. Leo's ideas and his conviction are highly confrontative, especially if one does not have an experiential framework to compare it with. Curt had no chance to check for himself during the interview and still was able to juggle with ideas, present criticism, doubts, further questions etc. 

A really humble guy, who, if he commits to do the work required, would probably get deep insights rather quickly. All this was still necessarily conceptual, which has been called out by both multiple times, so regarding his position in this respect, he was rather transparent as to what his mind had problems with, which is laudable. 

[Terell Kirby]

6 minutes ago, peanutspathtotruth said:

Leo's ideas and his conviction are highly confrontative, especially if one does not have an experiential framework to compare it with.

Hmm...I would say one's thoughts on Leo's delivery is subjective. You may think he's confrontative, others (like me) may find it authentic.

56 minutes ago, TheAlchemist said:

Just saying yes to everything even when it doesn't make sense or resonate for you in your mind will not result in any kind of progress. Blind faith is not useful.

Agreed, but it's really easy to confuse what you call blind faith with true open-mindedness. The ego can trick us in this way, especially if it's deep in materialism.

[TheAlchemist]

5 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

Agreed, but it's really easy to confuse what you call blind faith with true open-mindedness. The ego can trick us in this way, especially if it's deep in materialism.

That's true, it's a tricky balance. I think being honest with oneself is crucial. Do I actually understand this, or am I just believing it? As Leo talks about with open-mindedness, there's a certain feeling tone to it. Just believing in something when it has not been experienced directly has an uneasiness to it, whereas when it has been truly understood it feels expansive and natural to go along with it. And on the other hand, not being open to a possibility also makes one feel somewhat uneasy and triggered. 

It's a tricky thing to balance, not blindly believing in something, but still being truly open to it. 

[Tim R]

I don't think he was "triggered" at all. On the contrary, he was impressively open minded.

[Terell Kirby]

@Tim R Yes, he was definitely open minded. Not refuting that, but there were moments of triggering or at least some form of skepticism when it came to hard points on God-realization.

For example, Curt was really persistent in denying the infinite nature of consciousness during the first half of the podcast. He'd even cut Leo off mid-explanation saying "I get it"..in an irritated tone. I do think he opened up a bit as the discussion went on, but it didn't start that way.

Curt wasn't completely shut off from Truth, I'm just pointing to how uncomfortable it can be..even for the most open minded among us.

[Dryas]

But from his pov, he doesn't know if its true or not. His resistance (assuming there was any) is understandable and even a good thing imo.

[Terell Kirby]

@Dryas It's definitely understandable, I don't know if I would call it good in all cases, especially if it's rooted in closed mindedness. This, of course, is not the case with Curt.

There's value in being skeptical about our skepticism. 

Leo is an intense person, and hits you with insights in a very raw way. Most folks would crumble and not be able to withstand it; I do give Curt credit for hanging in there, even if he offered up some push back here and there.

Edited September 7, 2021 by Terell Kirby

[Tim R]

13 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

He'd even cut Leo off mid-explanation saying "I get it"

Yeah? but because Leo was giving 20 examples for something which Curt already understood? no need to list two dozen movies.. Btw, if anything, it was Leo who kinda interrupted Curt a bit to often. 

I don't think he "denied" infinity either, he was just being skeptical, which imo is perfectly fine and totally understandable, given how incredibly radical some of the things Leo said must've sounded to his ears.

Edited September 7, 2021 by Tim R

[Terell Kirby]

1 minute ago, Tim R said:

Yeah? but because Leo was giving 20 examples for something which Curt already understood? no need to list two dozen movies 

Haha, yea that moment in the podcast was what I was exactly referring to lol.

[peanutspathtotruth]

1 hour ago, Terell Kirby said:

Hmm...I would say one's thoughts on Leo's delivery is subjective. You may think he's confrontative, others (like me) may find it authentic.

Firstly, I said and meant that his ideas are confrontative - clearly so - just as most of his way of explaining, which not at all needs to carry a negative connotation. It doesn't to me at least. Secondly, who said authentic can not be confrontative at the same time? Concretely the opposite, in this example of Leo, this just highlights his authenticity. 

[Terell Kirby]

4 minutes ago, peanutspathtotruth said:

Firstly, I said and meant that his ideas are confrontative.

That's also relative to one's interpretation. I'm not criticizing you here, you are entitled to feel this way about his ideas.

[peanutspathtotruth]

8 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

That's also relative to one's interpretation.

Of course, everything is ? I'm saying in most people's view it obviously is the case that these ideas are challenging and directly confronting their metaphysics, which is observable in their way of reacting towards them. Considering this, Curt's reactions seem rather un-defended, honest and curious. 

[Chris365]

59 minutes ago, Tim R said:

 Btw, if anything, it was Leo who kinda interrupted Curt a bit to often. 

 

I felt there was a delay between the 2 , whether network issues or the way the 2 audio tracks are synced... it went up to 2seconds at times... so Leo starts to speak thinking Curt was finished

[peanutspathtotruth]

3 minutes ago, Chris365 said:

I felt there was a delay between the 2 , whether network issues or the way the 2 audio tracks are synced... it went up to 2seconds at times... so Leo starts to speak thinking Curt was finished

That's what I thought to be the case as well, I also found him to be interrupting Curt at points when he felt it would digress too much from what was being relevant, also taking into account how jumpy they were with topics (due to Curt's interview style, which I like a lot, and Leo's way of necessarily stringing important big topics together) 

Edited September 7, 2021 by peanutspathtotruth

[Terell Kirby]

5 minutes ago, peanutspathtotruth said:

I'm saying in most people's view it obviously is the case that these ideas are challenging and directly confronting their metaphysics, which is observable in their way of reacting towards them.

I see...and I agree!

I totally give Curt credit for keeping his mind open whilst being challenged on his metaphysics. Let's just say Leo knows how to ask all the right questions . I wouldn't call it pushing buttons, but he does a great job anticipating materialist counterpoints, specifically related to proof and evidence of Truth.

[Leo Gura]

I didn't feel he was triggered. His mind was just trying to be rigorous and so he played a lot of devil's advocate. Which is proper.

If anything I would say he didn't challenge me enough because he was trying to be polite.

But his inability to understand that nothing can exist outside infinity was pretty stubborn. Not much I can do about that. He sort of assumes that infinity is merely a mathematical notion and he can't stop imagining beyond infinity while not realizing all that is within Infinity. He also assumes Infinity can be reached with logic, which it can't. No amount of logic can get you there.