RendHeaven

@Natasha Tori Maru I see what you're saying. You can smell "truthseeker" neurosis from a mile away. In my case, I thought of myself as a champion of truth my whole life, until recently I had an apocalyptic infinity awakening that basically wiped away everything I had ever known or loved. And somehow I was still given the option to go deeper, endlessly, forever. The cost for Truth is EVERYTHING. No exceptions. You only get everything by giving up everything. Naturally, it must be this way. You get what you give, because you are the progenitor and the receiver. It's just you giving to yourself. So whatever you're not willing to give will not be received. You are are cut off from infinity precisely by the degree to which you are not willing to give up finitude. And I couldn't do it. When I came face to face with the TRUTH, I ran away in terror... and here I am. I made the trade of Everythingness for human life. Arguably foolish - I basically traded a trillion dollars for a pubic hair. But it's my favorite pubic hair. I couldn't let it go. Though I say that truth is my highest value, when my neck is under the guillotine, I choose life. Forgive me, a weak fool, for being so in love with the finite

@Emerald You're so wise for this People have no idea what they're asking for And your words will fly right over our heads

Yeah I understand, this alone justifies the use of a natural nontoxic flouride-free toothpaste. Spices and sauces will leave lingering smells (in your gut, which creeps up through your mouth even if your teeth are clean). The real power of toothpaste is not merely that it cleans or protects your teeth from the erosion of damaging foods but that it bombs your oral cavity with "freshness" which overpowers all negative smells. There's a reason normies brush their teeth after waking up or before a date, but forget to brush after a meal. It's because they're not even brushing for hygiene, they're brushing to mask odor. Not that this is wise, but that it does actually make sense to use toothpaste if you're consuming foods that make you stink. For example, if you cook with garlic or onion spice - toothpaste is mandatory

you have a very rich imagination

Jaw actually dropped God we're so human Blessing and a curse My phone broke down a few months ago and I simply never bothered to replace it. As a completely phoneless person, I miss nothing.

To be clear, "fructose" is a category of sugar and is obviously found in fruit, but is more importantly found in all the processed foods (corn syrup) and added sugars that everyone is eating. At a high level, my stance is not that fruit is bad for teeth, but that processed sugar is bad for your teeth. At the end of the day, all sugar is a threat, but fruit has protective compounds that "counterbalance" the sugar content, whereas something like cereal with corn syrup will just fuck you over time. If anything, I do recommend a moderate daily intake of (organic!!) fruit for most people (amazing vitamins and antioxidants, which are overwhelmingly positive inputs). I am weird in the sense that I'm basically on 0grams of dietary sugar (personal preference. not a universal recommendation). Sometimes I drink organic pomegranate juice in glass for the antioxidants, but it's not a daily thing. This does stain teeth so I sip through a metal straw to avoid as much teeth contact as possible, and promptly brush and floss my teeth (with water) afterwards. tl;dr: fruit is generally fine. fructose is more concerning in processed normie foods (which everybody is eating, which is why everybody needs toothpaste). within fruit, there are further distinctions about staining foods vs non staining foods. you can use your gut to discern. like obviously blueberries will stain your teeth more than a banana. You should be brushing (with or without paste) after every time you eat fruit, but if you're guzzling blueberries every single meal then just water might not be enough to keep your teeth completely white

No, your paradigm assumes that optimal teeth requires addition of inputs, when in truth its a subtraction of inputs. Oral hygiene is 95%+ food discernment and the mechanical movement of brushing and flossing (with just water is fine) the paste only exists to overcompensate for the fact that most people guzzle teeth-destroying foods, which creates problems that require fixing. But that is synonymous to putting duct tape over a crack in the dam. You're creating your own problem, and then going out of your way to fix it, when you can just stop creating the problem and there's nothing for you to fix. There's nothing "lambo" about having the best duct tape covering up existing damages. The winning formula is to simply not have damaged teeth in the first place, by avoiding inputs that erode and stain. This same dynamic occurs in pharma solutions as well as other minor hygiene products like shampoo and deodorant

@Leo Gura That makes sense. What I like about Emerald's story is that she's very vocal about how she glanced at the possibility of omniscient solipsistic infinity during an aya ceremony, but then collapsed back into her dream character out of overwhelm. The takeaway lesson for her was to cherish the finite. That's very honest, and true to the soul of a woman. You could accuse her of throwing in the towel too early, but from her POV she made the most appropriate choice for herself. There might be something universal about her journey that can predict the trajectory that most feminine souls will follow. It's simply not a woman's job to transcend and annihilate. In her eyes, she has better things to do here on earth. The object of her loyalty (earthly affairs) might look like peanuts next to the vantage point of God - but somebody has to attend to the minutiae with great care. You can imagine that God created women in order so that the things you don't care about are given sufficient attention and love. This way, every finite object in the universe has its respective adorer and steward.

ah fuck..

They're all like this with their crystals and star signs lmao. They just conduct social violence (indirect reputation battles) against their foes rather than kinetic violence like terrorist bombings

In their own twisted way, this is the flowering intelligence of a woman. She loves the drama of intense ups and downs with such sincerity that she'd actually rather ride that wave than to kill the spectacle with "solutions" like a boring, linear, dry male.

titanium dioxide is horrible. definitely one of the (many) ingredients I actively avoid. I'm at the point where i don't even use toothpaste lol. 0 fructose diet + no spices or sauces + no coffee or staining drinks + mechanical brushing and flossing + home made diluted peppermint spray keeps my mouth elite as fuck

oh. duh, that's easy. it's just literally not there. ta da

I was going to write an answer to this and then realized I literally can't lol

Can you give an example

@Natasha Tori Maru And yet, I can see very clearly how feelings ARE true. If I put orange glasses over your eyes, you would see all things as having the tinted shade of orange. So in some way, the whole world really does become orange (to you and you alone. nobody else will affirm this for you, unless they're willing to meet you in your world by also putting on orange glasses). But the logistics-oriented man would find this ridiculous, because he would say "the world didn't ACTUALLY turn orange; everything you're experiencing is explained by your glasses! the moment you take the glasses off, the world is no longer orange. Thus the world was never actually orange, you just thought it was orange while you had your glasses on!" But also that's quite insincere. Because if he actually bothered to wear your orange glasses, he would see, very personally, just how orange the world can look. And whether that orangeness is an illusion, or fleeting - it still gives a strong in-the-moment impression which is true insofar as it exists at that time. There's much more I can say about this, let me know if I'm making sense or if this jogs anything in your mind.

@MuadDib Glad we agree. Unfortunately I do find that most women would not take well to the suggestion that she's gained weight, even if you buffer it with flattery and genuine statements of love. I suspect this has more to do with modern people's body image getting royally fucked by social media, advertisement, consumerism, etc. A woman without toxic inputs should be able to take realistic, balanced feedback without her mood spiraling.

@Leo Gura Chest over glutes huh?

@Deziree Great points overall. I appreciate the effort you put into this post. I agree that ultimately, empathy does not have to conflict with brutality or truth. A conscious mind can hold brutal clarity (i.e. truth) while acting out of compassion and balancing all perspectives and shifting the needle towards harmony. This is what Leo means by the maxim "Live Intelligently"

Yeah, I get you. It's not that the best survivalist is the apex truth seeker per se - you're right that these men are totally deluded. The seed of a man's "truth-orientation" is a very crass, primordial need to accurately scan the terrain that you're planning to conquer or defend. At a very extended level, this makes God more accessible to men on average because knowing God requires you to eventually kill all fantasies and die. Which, nobody wants to do. So obviously, almost no men are God-Realized. We're just saying that, all else equal, if you pluck a random man VS a random woman, the man will have an easier time solving God.

@Natasha Tori Maru Yay, I was hoping you would join I did consider very thoroughly that the feminine POV has "it's own truth." I've brought up many times in this thread now that most women will prefer to hear what sounds good to them rather than a consistent interpretation of sense data (accurate mapping of reality). This is the anchor claim behind why femininity tends to be less truth oriented. But the counterargument to that is something like - "sure, a woman might reinterpret sense data in whichever way feels whimsically good to her in the moment, but why can't this be its own meta-truth? why do you insist that there's only one correct interpretation? Maybe she doesn't value utilitarian pragmatism. When she makes statements or asks questions, she's feeling into an energetic truth beyond the logistical content of her speech" That would be a solid way to challenge everything I've written so far. But the problem with saying that women are tapping into some sort of "meta-truth" that goes beyond the logistical contents of speech is that this gives license for women to call anything at all "truth" on a whim. This reduces Truth down to "anything goes as long as I feel like it" and this cannot be tenable because Truth is non-arbitrary. The finite world is configured a certain way and not another way. A woman can paint over the state of the world with her relative, spontaneous "meta-truth," but unless her worldview is stress-tested and accuracy-checked by contact with reality, she will always be a walking contradiction between what she says, believes, and feels VS what the world is reflecting back at her. @MuadDib But that's precisely delusional, if she's actually fat as fuck and the guy has to reassure her that she's not fat in order for her to feel loved. Truth = Love. There is no Love if it's built on lies. If the woman really cared about love, she would feel warm butterflies and a sense of peace and comfort when her man says, "Actually, you do look a little more plump today. I don't mind. You're beautiful to me." But no, this would make her sour and passive aggressive lmao. Because she doesn't actually care about love. She cares about FEELING love on HER terms. (again, speaking in averages. obviously, conscious women do not have this issue)

but you're comparing men vs men now. regardless of how they stack up against each other, on average they will both prefer to interpret sense data in a self-consistent manner whereas the average woman will choose to interpret sense data in whichever way sparks joy

No, the dichotomy is genuinely truth vs feeling. Case in point, my earlier silly example about the girl asking if she looks fat or not. She intentionally doesn't want to hear the truth Whereas a guy asking the same question is positing a logistical query. Is my belly popping yes or no? The reason the feminine-coded POV here is anti-truth is because reality-mapping becomes strictly secondary to the positive feelings she is seeking.