Leo Gura

Notice that science never tells you who's in control. So it's not like this question has ever been answered by mankind. What if no one is in control? After all, who controls the rain?

Good, but do you realize that the brain is a thought? That's a tricky one to swallow. Try it.

Just remember, Ra is a projection of your own mind

Well... people's notion of life-transforming is of course highly subjective. Those who are well-suited to it will get a lot more juice out of it. Exponentially more. Like 100x more. So that can explain that. Personally I'm not well-suited to it. My mind is hyper creative non-stop. Meditation is best for people with weak minds

A problem is only a problem if the mind says its a problem. This gives the mind a near-magical ability to create and erase problems in the blink of an eye.

1% is a more realistic mortality rate, IMO.

The reason you feel that way is because for meditation to be life-transforming it must be done with extreme rigor. If you half-ass meditation, it is 100x weaker than if you do it rigorously. Most people in the West are not taught to do serious meditation. They are taught meditation for newbies. It took me a lot of trial and error just to learn this. And I'm by no means a great mediator. But I understand what makes it powerful or life-transforming. Also, not all people are equally suited for it. To really appreciate meditation it must be done as a hardcore monk, virtually full-time. But almost no one is willing to pay that cost. With consciousness work you get what you are willing to put into it.

The mind is beautiful thing. Like a spider's web.

Well, I never said growing is easy

LOL, so Green it makes you want to vomit

In ordinary life, yes. But the point of these political and philosophical discussions to question certain held "facts". For example, it's an legit question to wonder whether such a thing as "a man" and "a women" really exists, or if it's just a socially constructed "fact" which we use because it's convenient. All human knowledge works this way. First we over-simplify reality, then we discover that our over-simplifications aren't nuanced enough to deal with complex edge-cases like trans people. And so we have to re-evaluate our simplistic ideas. But lots of people are resistant to doing so because they have taken on those oversimplifications as "facts", and they get outraged when they find you denying their "facts". Point me to a fact in the world which says, "That is man, and that is woman." You will not find such a fact within biology.

But there's the rub: facts aren't facts. They have no clue how deep relativity runs.

The real test for progressives is if someone like Bernie wins the presidency and then starts doing evil things. Will progressives have enough integrity and impartiality to call him out on it? Many won't because they will justify it in their minds as, "Well, he's still better than any neoliberal." That's exactly what Republicans do with Trump.

Yes, but that is also easy for them to do now because they are not in a position of power yet. It serves the progressive survival agenda to rip apart neoliberals because the neoliberals are in power. But once progressives get into positions of power they will start to use double-standards to excuse away their selfish behaviors. The real test of your integrity is when you have serious power. It's easy to act noble and righteous when you are powerless.

Of course. This is what I refer to as self-bias, where one's own position is held as privileged and sacrosanct. The lower down the Spiral, the more self-bias there is. The mind uses double-standards, confirmation bias, projection, denial, and justification to enforce its self-bias.

Of course! Once the mind paints some situation as evil and another as good, virtually any action can be justified in the avoidance of that evil situation because it's seen to be in the service of good -- which can't be wrong (by the mind's logic). For example, if the mind believes that it is on God's side, almost any action is justified in the service of God. And you better believe all those FoxNews people believe they are doing God's work. Since they see the communists are taking more and more radical actions and gaining ground, they feel more justified to take off the kid gloves and use every trick in the book to win.

I disagree with Kyle on this. Trump is fundamentally more dangerous than Bush, even though Bush might have caused more lives lost strictly-speaking with Iraq. You have to distinguish between potential damage and actualized damage. You don't know how bad Trump could get if he gets 4 more years. A nuclear war is on the table. And when we take a look at the slow Covid response, hundreds of thousands of deaths could be on Trump's hands. A war with Iran is still on the table, which could be worse than Iraq. Obviously Bush was a dangerously ignorant leader. But Trump is more ignorant and more dangerous. Obviously I have not interest in whitewashing Bush's presidency. It was a disaster on many levels, both internationally and domestically. I was extremely critical of Bush during that era. Selfless action is possible of course. I was talking about how most ego-minds work. I'm not talking about saints and sages here. This is a discussion about Tucker and his ilk. Right They are in a bubble of their own BS. In order for them to bullshit their viewers they must first bullshit themselves, otherwise they could not do their job. Don't underestimate the mind's ability to fool itself into believing whatever serves its survival. Self-deception covers its own tracks. They are not aware of their own hypocrisy because then they couldn't live with themselves. From their POV they are defending solid, good, American conservative values against crazy and evil communists who seek to destroy America. They see themselves as heroes and guardians of mankind. This justifies all of their flip-flopping and manipulations.

I'll take a look.

My point is that such a question is not as easy to answer as people assume. The mind deliberately conflates its worldview and its survival agenda to the point where it's hard to distinguish what is authentic and what is an act. I would bet that he believes that Democrats are far more corrupt and dangerous than Trump, which renders the question of Trump's misdeeds and corruption moot in his mind, similar to how we might overlook Biden's problems because we see Trump as the greater evil. He cares about elites abusing their power to the extent that it serves his worldview and career. What???

The forum code cannot be changed. What is ineffective about it?

In a deep sense, no. Everyone believes their actions are in the highest good. Because ego defines "good" as "good for my survival".

So what's missing from that analysis is that Tucker is still operating under a worldview and an ideology. His mind -- like all minds -- tailors his worldview to fit his survival needs, and vice versa. Believe it or not, even with everything said in the above video, he's still acting in good faith, in a deeper sense. His worldview is one in which his actions are fully justified, reasonable, true, and good. Of course his ideology conveniently aligns with what is good for his career.

History is full of people attempting to suppress the sex drive. The track record doesn't look good. I prefer to indulge in it with moderation and love. It also helps if you have a life purpose that takes up your attention. Idle hands do the devil's work Most of my life I've been too busy for sex because I was so focused on my LP. If you lead a lame, boring, passionless life, then yeah -- masturbation is like all you got going for you. Usually, the less creative I am, the more my mind wanders towards sex. When I'm most creative, sex disappears into the background.

Is here against peaceful protest? I don't think so. He's more complaining about extremist elements from what I remember. I think most of us can agree that peaceful protest is okay and even good, but violence or looting should not be allowed. It's a deep topic. You'd have to start defining what you mean by critical theory and give concrete examples of it. Some of it will be reasonable, some of it will be excessive. The fundamental thing that's not understood by Bret and JP is relativism. There are no objective facts per se. Reality is relative and constructed by the mind. If there is no such thing as absolute time, as Einstein showed, there surely is no such thing as absolute male or female. It's pretty embarrassing how a hard scientist like Bret can accept General Relativity but then insist that males and females are objective biological facts.

The mistake there is taking universities too seriously. Be an independent thinker. Nothing is stopping you from taking whatever combination of classes you want. Be careful not to get caught up in petty social squabbles. Focus on creating your life as you want it.