Leo's Blog: Infinite Insights — Page 3
Aggressive ignorance:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DdJ7QzgxEPK
"It is so pleasing to God"
"It is literally an offense to God"
Ahahahahaha!
What can be said to such people?
This is who you must share a country with.
This is so true.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/Dd-CdaKhLhs
But it goes deeper than entertainment or even problem-solving. At the highest levels, thinking becomes its own form of spirituality. You can use thinking to access and appreciate advanced parts of God which nobody else even knows exist. Thinking isn't just thinking, thinking can be communion. Thinking is the Mind's appreciation of Itself, if you do it right. Of course most people's thinking is just bullshit. It has to be done correctly.
You can think so deeply that you can experience God in new ways. Buddhists will definitely not teach you that.
And of course, you can parlay that level of thinking to create amazing new things.
This is true, according to my direct experience.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DeeCam5R-Gz
Understanding Will is a very advanced aspect of Awakening. I have not heard it explained properly by almost anyone.
People do not understand that God's Will is the world itself. God's Will manifests as physical objects. Physical objects are Will.
A pitchfork in your butt is God's Will. But who wants to hear that?
I explain Will in my video: Does Free Will Exist?
As I've said, whenever you hear a Christian call anything "demonic", "Satanic", or "luciferian", you can be sure he's bullshitting.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DefK_mXSzLs
I guess Joe Rogan and Peter Ralston are going to Hell.
The entire challenge of epistemology is that the mind has no way of knowing right from wrong because it bases that distinction on its own internal criteria which it never knew was right in the first place. Right and wrong here aren’t moral but epistemic. Fundamentally, the mind gets lost in its own circularity. Whatever criteria you have for distinguishing right from wrong, or true from false, has never itself been proven right or true. The criteria your mind is using to know right from wrong are themselves wrong and the mind isn’t able to see it because at some point the mind needs to assume that some criteria is true and get on with its sense-making work. But the truth of that criteria is never established, it is assumed. The mind cannot work without taking some things for granted, which ends up being the source of the mind's corruption and self-deception. It is similar to confirmation bias, but much much deeper. I am saying that the idea that, "Science is objective", is a profound confirmation bias. But this problem is not limited to science.
When a scientist looks at the world, he looks at it through scientific criteria which he takes for granted as true, not realizing that his criteria was never proven but assumed, and since it was assumed, it could be wrong. But he blithely uses the criteria to do sense-making without ever digging deeper into his own mind to reconsider the rightness of the criteria. Every worldview works this way and suffers from this circularity problem. A paradigm is blind to its own criteria, as the eye does not see itself. Science or Christianity or Islam or Marxism or Zionism is used to see, therefore it does not see itself. The key question is: How do you know that your criteria for knowing right from wrong, true from false, is not itself wrong and false? Because the Mind is alone, it has no external frame of reference to anchor itself with. For example, in science, the scientist just assumes that everything must be scientific in order to be taken seriously. But what if that’s wrong? How would the scientist know? This is the question-begging Catch-22. The point is he doesn’t know but he thinks he knows. He doesn’t even see the circularity problem.
For any paradigm, when you ask the paradigm, “Are you right? Are you true?”, the paradigm looks at itself and uses itself to judge itself as right and true. You ask any paradigm, "Are you true?", the paradigm looks at itself and cockily responds, "Yes, I am true." But it says this even if it isn't true. That's the problem. The paradigm is using its own criteria to judge its own criteria. That’s the circularity, that’s the question-begging, that’s the fatal blind-spot, that’s the epistemic blunder. The criteria was never grounded in anything, because no ground exists. If a paradigm is wrong or false, then when it looks at itself to check itself for wrongness, it will appear to itself not as wrong but as right, precisely because it is wrong! Do you see that? That’s the entire trick. This is the crux of self-bias. Every worldview fails to see its own circularity, which the fatal flaw in every worldview. The point of epistemology is not to find the one true worldview, or to defend your favorite worldview, but to see that all worldviews suffer from blindness to their own circularity, and to escape this dynamic by getting the mind to catch itself being circular. The essence of a paradigm is really a set of assumed and unquestioned criteria. The point of epistemology is for the mind to become so flexible and so self-aware that it is able to objectively view and evaluate its own criteria, recognize them as limited, and transcend them.
This is the heart of philosophy; solving this problem. If you solve this problem you will unlock a new level of Mind, another order of Intelligence.
The balls it takes to be this flagrantly corrupt:
His church made $80 million per year in the 1990s.
Question: Is it real spirituality for me to ask you to donate $1000 to me in exchange for favor with God?
Another question: What do you imagine it's like inside of his mind?
Think about it, none of Jesus’ direct followers were educated or even literate. The literacy rate in Roman Palestine was less than 3%. Writing was much lower, and literary-quality writing was infinitesimal. And the Gospels were written in Greek, not Aramaic or Hebrew. Only children of rich urban elites went to school. There were no schools for adults or peasants. Synagogue schools did not exist in Jesus' time. Jesus was from rural Palestine. Most of his followers were homeless peasants. Pause and appreciate how backwards they were relative to even a homeless man today.
Imagine if a guru today had an audience of adult followers with zero education, who did not even finish the 5th grade, could not read, could not write, never read a book in their life, no internet and no social media, and homeless. Never mind something like philosophy or epistemology. What would such people know? Would you trust their stories about Jesus? It’s laughable to think that such people could report on a guru accurately. You cannot trust such people to give you accurate directions to the nearest outhouse, never mind interpret mysticism correctly. Jesus’ direct disciples and apostles had the education level of cavemen, living in an era where everyone believed in magic, ghosts, demons, sea monsters, heroes, curses, spells, prophecies, witchcraft, voodoo, and many kinds of gods, spirits, and myths. These people did not distinguish myth from reality the way we take for granted today. These people had zero science, zero education, zero epistemology, zero real history, zero books, zero internet, zero pop-psychology, zero self-help, zero philosophy, zero rationality, zero awareness of cognitive biases, zero awareness of cult psychology, barely any morality, zero awareness of the evils of religion, zero international cross-cultural awareness, zero testing of their beliefs, and zero constructive criticism or feedback or fact-checking. Jesus was probably the only teacher they ever had. They did not have multiple points of view on anything. They did not have multiple gurus to cross-reference against.
Also, don’t forget that Jesus’ apostles believed that he would return from the dead in their lifetime! Imagine if I died and you guys believed I would return back from the dead in 20 years. What kind of cult would that be? Early Christians made all sorts of false predictions about the coming apocalypse and return of Christ. They’ve been doing that for 2000 years and they still keep doing it today because they haven’t learned any epistemic lessons. Blindly trusting that a handful of illiterate peasants got mysticism right 2000 years ago, is insane. It doesn't get any more epistemically irresponsible than that.
People underestimate how much education matters. Today, we all just take for granted 12 years of modern education, as if everyone has always had it. Imagine how big of a fool you'd be if you never went to school at all! That's a terrifying level of ignorance. And now imagine you gather 20 such people together and task them with explaining God. Imagine trying to explain Actualized.org to an illiterate peasant from 2000 years ago. You might as well be speaking Swahili.
The key thing to realize is that none of Jesus' direct followers wrote the Gospels because Jesus did not have literate followers. Jesus' followers were not scribes or authors. Being a scribe or author in that era was extremely rare and elitist. Maybe one of them could scribble his name in Hebrew, not compose a world-class work of literature in Greek. I have been writing for 20 years, but I would struggle to write a Gospel. The Bible was written by elites who never knew Jesus directly.
It's just interesting to think about.