• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Sbilko

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,235 profile views
  1. Please see that "justice" is just another name for "vengeance". Thus, as long as the human being is vengeful, they will be unjust too. Because everyone is a hero in their own story, they are just and such; but in their enemies' opinion, it is the opposite: they are the unjust archenemy.
  2. Do you get it through meditation? Like, focusing on your breath? That's interesting, because the closest I have been to such a feeling was when I was doing self-inquiry and a significant realization suddenly came. I wonder if meditation could work for me; like, I can question things for a long time; but if I try to restrain my attention on a single thing, I get distracted after 5 min.
  3. @XYZ About overpopulation, please see this: And about immigration, please see this: And if you'd like to learn more about this latter one, this would be a nice addition:
  4. @Revolutionary Think I completely agree with your ideas. Just like in your case, this is my greatest worry these days. My worry is that we live in a world that is so technologically advanced that it can blow up the entire world; nevertheless, it is not culturally and sociologically developed enough so as to prevent that. It is the person pulling the trigger that kills, not the gun itself. With this I mean that being technologically advanced is a good thing; but it is not when you are not enough sociologically advanced too. Now, why is our society so technologically advanced and so little sociologically advanced? There are a few reasons: The first reason is that the government has it easier when there are no people who are smart, self-aware and go call out the system's faults. Whenever a dictatorship comes to power, the first thing they do is deport or execute all the teachers and smart people (at least that's what they did in Cambodia, the Soviet Union I think and such). Why? Because those who are smart enough would not support such a regime. For a dictatorship to educate well its people would be like a person shooting themselves in the leg. The second reason is that all technological advancement has as it's core objective war supremacy. Why else do you think that it is during wars that the greatest scientific achievements are made? Nuclear energy, rockets, modern warfare tactics, etc. were all developed in the WW2. The space race and all that space exploration started during the Cold War. We aren't willing to move unless we are threatened with death. And if a technological advancement is not developed during a war or in preparation for a war, then it's developed to outcompete your opponents. And that's because economics and war go hand-in-hand: the better your economy is, the more weapons you can build and the more likely you are to beat your opponents. --- I am very frustrated with the educational system, it uses us like tools. There was a time when my dream was creating a computer program that would enable you to learn everything you're interested in, in a simple and pleasant way, for free. Nevertheless, I later discovered that the problem is not that these programs and tools don't exist, but because the system doesn't implement them. Doctor Skinner's Learning Machine existed since many, many decades. Nevertheless, it was never implemented in the educational system. There is this amazing app called Euclidea, it's a game that teaches you geometry in a very interesting and pleasant way. It starts simple and then goes on to teach you complex Euclidean constructions, step by step. There is this app named Phet, it teaches many things, from Biology to Physics, and from Mathematics to Chemistry. And it does it just like a game, in an interactive and pleasant way. There is Space Odyssey: The Game, it teaches astronomy, astrophysics, physics, chemistry, biology, etc. in a fun and interesting way. You have to found a civilization and maintain it. It was scheduled to come out this month, but will instead come out next year. A too effective educational system would make people too smart, too inquisitive and curious; and therefore, dangerous (for the government, because it would not be able to manipulate them so easily). Only the government has the right to be curious, to spy you and such. --- Nevertheless, why is all this happening? Why are governments doing this? I'll tell you why: because those governments who didn't focus all their efforts into advancing technologically as fast as they could, were conquered by their neighbours and had those systems implemented on its citizens anyway. The educational system just wants to train us into loyal and submissive workers (or in the case of the 20th century: soldiers). Yes, submissive because you can't have 30 students in a class being silent while listening to you, their authority figure, without learning to be submissive. The people in power don't care whether we like it or not; which is why they don't teach us creativity, nor do they teach us things in a pleasant way. The only pleasant thing about studying is that once you go to College, you finally get to study mostly only what you have chosen to; and the only reason for that to be this way is that if we do what we like, we'll do it better and be more productive. It all turns around profit, and it's so ingrained into our society that we say things such as "time is money" and "don't waste my time". The thing is that society makes us do mechanical tasks which could be done by machines without a problem. Working in a factory, or as a supermarket cassier, or as a teacher, could all be perfectly automatized. And the problem with this is that people don't understand it, they think that they have to work so as to keep their belly full; despite the fact that they could simplify the process a lot if they grew their own crops. People are doing the jobs of machines and have been doing them ever since the Industrial Revolution; and it will hit them all like a brick falling from the sky when machines start taking their jobs. "Of course," you will say, "more jobs will be created". And while that is true, it is also true that machines will start replacing you even in the jobs requiring creativity (as a matter of fact, there already are machines writing articles and books). And the problem with this is that the people in power will no longer see any need of you, because everything you are capable of doing could be done much faster, better and cheaper by a machine. You were 'educated' (I would rather say trained) to be a loyal and submissive worker only because you were profitable; but now you are not profitable anymore. What will happen, then? One would think that they would starve us to death and outcompete us because we can't find a job (and that is indeed what would happen if the world population kept itself stable or grew). However, I think that they would be smarter than that: they will drug us with smartphones, the internet, pornography, virtual reality, reality glasses, etc. just like they are doing at this very moment. And they will spy you to make sure that that is happening and going smoothly. This would drastically decline the population growth; just like it is doing now, but on a bigger scale. --- What can we do to prevent all these terrible things from happening? Only one thing comes to my mind as a good solution: to protest and pressure the government into changing the educational system. The educational system should be just like a game; the human being, just like every other mammal, has evolved to learn through playing. In primitive societies, children ran around with their spears and learned to hunt by playing. Playing is the way to learn things effectively; memorizing them would only make you forget most things after a while. Furthermore, if children learned things by playing, they would no longer need to have the same things repeated to them year after year. Our educational system teaches us for too many years; it keeps us sitting in a classroom for too many years of our lives. That would no longer be a problem if children learned by playing, because: they would not have needed the same thing to be repeated to them over and over; and they would be more skilled in it because they've been playing/doing it for some time. Bonus video: --- "For example a factory that just replaced its workers with automated robots means abundance for the one who bought the robots and scarcity for the person who is being replaced by them." I would like to add that the scarcity comes from the too much competition and complete lack of cooperation. With this I mean that the scarcity comes because of the boss not sharing his profits with people; he's selfish, not generous. Nevertheless, that could be reversed if the system taxed the rich and redistributed the wealth equally among everyone. See:
  5. @Baotrader I agree with your opinion. I also think that one should use enlightenment in order to get through the difficulties of life, instead of as a justification for not having a hard life. One should use the knowledge of enlightenment to get through the hard times, such as the long days at work or when life does terrible things to you.
  6. @Rilles They say, practice makes perfect. Developing extraordinary mindfulness isn't something which happens in a day, or a year. “If you can't fly then run, if you can't run then walk, if you can't walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving forward.” - Martin Luther King Jr. Who keeps going eventually reaches the destination. But there is no destination in this case. ?
  7. @SoonHei "is this just a belief that the one who watches everything CANNOT BE SEEN ? is it not possible that there could be something meta to our beingness which could watch each of our Ones that Watch Everything ?? please someone clarify?" - Whenever you are observing an object, there is the observed (the object) and the observer. - However, whatever the observer is, it cannot be located at any point in space. Because in that case one would be able to observe it, and in that case it would no longer be the observer, but rather the observed (the object). - Therefore, the observer has to be outside of space, so that it wouldn't be exposed to being ever observed. - Since the observer is outside of space, then space and all objects in it have to be inside the observer. Did you find this of any use? That logic process came to my mind to explain to myself how can time and space be inside consciousness. The insight came to me thanks to one of Leo's exercises: "Exercise #8: Noticing You Are Not A Point-Camera Sit comfortably and quietly, still your mind, and become aware of direct experience. Notice that you feel like you are a camera looking out onto the world. But notice that reality cannot have any point-cameras. Notice that reality cannot have perceivers. What would a perceiver be? Anything you might want to call a "perceiver" would have to be an object percieving another object. But this is illogical. An object is really just a series of sensations. And one sensation can perceive another sensation. Become deeply conscious of this. Notice that there in fact is no "perceive" object in your direct experience. Try as you might, you cannot locate any perceivers. All you have a perceptions. So then, what is perceiving all these perceptions? Notice further, that whatever "it" is, it cannot be a sensation. Notice further, that whatever "it" is, it cannot be located at any point in space, because all of space has to occur "within it". Notice that you are NOT like a camera. You are NOT looking out onto the world from a point behind your eyes. Instead your are omni-present. Become deeply conscious of this, until your conviction of you being located as point in space breaks down."
  8. @Roman Edouard The soul, spirits, God, matter, energy, the universe, etc. are all one and the same, where only the terminology changes. This is because of the following logical process: - When we look inside us, there is nothing solid and lasting which we can call "us." - Therefore there is no "I". We are all matter and the universe is just a bunch of matter. - According to E=mc^2, all matter is energy. Therefore everyone and everything is just energy. From now on it's a question of terminology, you can call that everything as: soul, energy, spirits, God, etc.
  9. Everything that is loving, kind, and compassionate is more beautiful than if it weren't. And everything that is rude, angry and cold is less beautiful than it originally was. This is what love is in my opinion, except of chemical reactions in your head.
  10. I can't meditate for longer than 5 or 10 minutes without getting distracted by thoughts or the environment (and not returning to meditation). Maybe if someone threatened to cut my arm if I don't meditate for hours, then I'd greatly improve my meditation time. ...that is, until I see the truth and stop caring about losing my arm.
  11. @phoenix666 The only reason which I find to love, be compassionate and kind is because everything that is kind, compassionate and loving is more beautiful than if it weren't. And everything that is rude, angry and cold is less beautiful than it originally was. This is my reason. But what is your reason to think that everything is love, that it's all about love and such? What makes you think that? Can you explain it (preferibly in a logical way with logical steps)?
  12. It would be amazing if everyone got such nice trips and realizations when smoking weed. Like, yeah they philosophize, but that is pointless and directionless thought. Life is meant to be lived, there is no wrong way in living it.
  13. @lmfao I completely agree with what you said. When I tried to explain it to people who were suffering, some were like "no thanks, I'm Christian." Only one friend can understand (and is trying to understand) what I say about the absolute truth. And indeed, she's open-minded, agnostic, understanding, interested in philosophy and psychology. And as you said, these people are rare. When I explain it, I explain it in a way so that it makes sense. I believe only what I see, and I have the same scientific mindset, so I try to explain it with logical steps that go like this: - When we look inside us, there is nothing solid and lasting which we can call "us." - Therefore there is no "I". We are all matter and the universe is just a bunch of matter. - According to E=mc^2, all matter is energy. Therefore everyone and everything is just energy. From now on it's a question of terminology, you can call that everything as: energy, spirits, God, etc.
  14. @Marinus That's cool! So you can trigger goose bumbs whenever you like? I have no idea why that is, but I have a better question: How do you do that?
  15. @XYZ Your reasoning is correct: selfishness pushed to the extreme turns into selflessness, because as one wants to get everything for oneself, thinks only of oneself, and guarantees only oneself's own safety, they realize that they can get for themselves much more (including more safety) if they were selfless and thus gained the favour of the people surrounding them. Let's show this with an example: Nazi Germany wanted to rule all of Europe and (almost) achieved it, but didn't last long because they were selfish and wanted themselves to be the only rulers (for 1000 years). Even if they had lasted, they would have turned into something unstable, like Yugoslavia. People don't want to be taxed but not represented into the power holders of the political entity. Now let's compare them with the EU: the founding countries (including Germany) agreed to form an union, each sharing a fraction of the total power. The motives were no longer the same kind of selfish, the sort of "I want to rule all of Europe." Instead, they turned into another sort of selfish: "I want my rightful fraction of power over the EU." You may even consider them selfless: they no longer want to be the sole rulers of Europe; instead, they agree to share that power with the other countries of the EU, and they even would call up their army if some other country attacked any EU country. Their motives are still selfish, though, and they always will be: they do it all thinking about their own safety. Can you see how the border between selfish and selfless starts to become less clear? We have evolved to have selfishness so as to improve our odds to survive: the more material goods we have, the better are our chances to survive. However, the more we are selfless and thus improve our relationship with the people around us, the better are our odds to survive too. This selfish selflessness can be seen even more clearly in this other example: natives of Papua New Guinea used to exchange gifts with members of other tribes near to them. Those other members, in turn, return them the favour. However, both parties have only one objective in mind behind their apparent selflessness, and it is a selfish motive: if I give gifts to members of that other tribe and they do the same, then it is less likely for a fight to break out between us and probably kill me. There is no selfishness or selflessness, all is one; there is just a tool to seem like the good boy in the eyes of other people, which is deep down us justifying our own actions to ourselves. The only information needed to correctly understand and use that tool is: killing, stealing, lying and sexual misconduct are seen as something evil by everyone (unless it's used to "punish" a "criminal"); all ancient societies and religions condemned these acts, in order to bring the order and stability which they need in order to function properly.