EternalForest

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    781

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by EternalForest

  2. Posted

    It sounds like you need more humility, as well as a healthy outlet for your feelings of powerlessness. In this case I'd recommend:

    a) Humbling yourself in real life as much as possible. Experience what its like to donate, volunteer, and do selfless acts of kindness for others. Let this become second nature.

    b) In your private life, preferably through art, get all the feelings of power that you desire. This could be through roleplaying, writing, video games, imagination, etc. Be the king of the world that you crave to be in a way where no one gets hurt.

    c) This is the most important part. Build a foundation for yourself, and do things to earn genuine respect from others. Become a master in your field. Work towards something extraordinary. In this way, you won't even have to demand respect from others. They'll simply give it to you out of their own will because they look up to you so much. This is good, healthy respect that's good for you.

    By doing all 3 of these regularly, you'll have enough humility, natural admiration and healthy outlets that you'll rarely if ever feel inferior or the need to hold power over others. Not saying it'll never happen, but it'll be rare.

  4. Posted

    The Skydiver’s Standard:

    You don’t need to jump out of a plane to say skydiving looks dangerous.

    That’s the heart of the Skydiver’s Standard — a rhetorical double standard where someone demands high-stakes, full-experience immersion before you're “qualified” to critique something, while they freely judge other things with little to no experience. "You can’t criticize gymnastics unless you've trained for years." "You can’t question a religion unless you've lived it for decades." "You can’t critique a political theory unless you’ve read all 2,000 pages of its founding texts." And yet, the same person feels perfectly comfortable making casual judgments about things they haven’t gone deep into. That’s the double standard. It’s selective gatekeeping — raising the bar for critique only when it protects their own views or identity, while lowering it everywhere else.

    Examples in use:

    “You're telling me I need to read the entire Bible before I can question anything about it — that's the Skydiver’s Standard.”

    “She says I can’t have an opinion on contemporary art unless I’ve studied it for years, but she rants about video games all the time. Classic Skydiver’s Standard.”

    “I don’t need to be a chef to know when food tastes bad. Stop using the Skydiver’s Standard to deflect.”

    Why it matters:

    People often get shut down in debates because they haven’t “done the work” — not just of being informed, but of being deeply initiated. The Skydiver’s Standard exposes how that bar is applied unevenly, depending on whose worldview is under scrutiny. It gives us a simple, powerful phrase to push back: “I can understand the risks, patterns, or flaws in something without fully living it.” We don’t have to jump out of a plane to know the dangers.

    And remember, the Skydiver’s Standard is about proportional critique, not uninformed opinion. So as long as you're not using it to reject expertise, and instead using it to challenge inconsistent gatekeeping, you're encouraging fair, thoughtful discourse — not laziness.

  6. Posted · Edited by EternalForest

    #1. ChatGPT is wrong far too often to be a primary news source. I gave AI a list of films and asked it to tell me which ones were Oscar nominated. Then I fact checked the results and found that on multiple movies, it was wrong! It said Your Name won Best Animated Feature in 2016 when it didn't. If it can't even get its movie facts right, why would you trust it with something as important as world news?

    #2. Let's face it, ChatGPT has a liberal bias. Left to its own devices (pun intended), it will always put liberal sources first.

    #3. A lot of news content is pretty fucking dark and uncensored. ChatGPT is very squeamish and can't even handle R rated conversations involving sex which leads me to believe it would censor a lot of articles which aren't family friendly.

  8. Posted

    4 hours ago, aurum said:

    Is it irrational or do you just not understand it?

    None of that means women are making things as difficult as possible for you. You'd have to cherry-pick the most toxic behavior to believe that.

    This kind of combative attitude is extremely toxic and partly why guys struggle to meet quality women.

    Assume more of a collaborative frame.

    Kind of hard to have a collaborative frame when you get security called on you for approaching a girl.

  11. Posted · Edited by EternalForest

    Meh, I disagree. In my experience, I find men to be very mature. Then again, I'm in the USA but still I never understood where the whole "girls are more mature" thing comes from.

    Also @Alexop that Teal Swan video is toxic as fuck, I'm sorry. That mindset is everything that's wrong with society. Like Osho said, the problem is people think kindness is fake and hate is real, it's all backward.

    Besides, I'd rather an asshole be "fake nice" because that's better for society and ultimately at that point they're only fooling themselves, the world still benefits.

  12. Posted

    On 5/7/2025 at 9:19 AM, Schizophonia said:

    When I say ask them, I'm not talking about becoming what they want.
    I'm talking about simply asking why they left, and finding out the source of the problem.

    Lol, if he didn't do anything wrong, then he wouldn't complain on a thread.

    You rather mean it's okay to be wrong, to be confused.

    Again, this is assuming that if women don't resonate with OP. he needs to re-evaluate himself. When maybe he's selling his product to the wrong audience. That's also an option.

  13. Posted

    On 5/5/2025 at 1:42 PM, Schizophonia said:

    Ask them directly. 

    Woman are strong emotionnal mirrors that dont lie; It's about your own indecision, i would say.

     

    Even if that was true, it sounds like hell to me. Imagine watching your every subconscious move around women to such a degree that you have to work so hard to avoid having it reflected back? It's also a roundabout way of saying the woman is always right or more emotionally correct, which isn't true at all.

    OP sounds like a solid guy who isn't doing anything wrong imo. He just hasn't found the woman who really GETS him on a deep level. Relationships are deep things.

  17. Posted

    How would you feel if you were a woman and read this? If you hate women as a whole you'll never be able to truly love them. You learn that the hard way, and lose years in the process. They didn't ask to be born female just as much as you didn't ask to be born male. Think about it, man.

  20. Posted

    On 4/4/2025 at 1:31 AM, aurum said:

    No, none of that proves anything other than experience exists. It would not prove their existence as a scientist or musician.

    How do you know they aren't deceiving you?

    How do you even know what science is without going into your memory?

    "Practicality" here is a trap.

    We are not interested in practical here, we are interested in truth.

    Is it absolutely true or not?

    It proves what they are within this reality. Asking for more proof would be unreasonable no? Yes, ultimate truth may not be practical. Then again, if it's not communicable...I don't know. What if absolute truth can't be communicated?

  21. Posted · Edited by EternalForest

    19 hours ago, Vynce said:

    *My head hurts..* @EternalForest

    Joe Rogan in yellow means he has fully integrated green and has lived in it for some years.

    Where in his life has a ever walked in greens boots, let alone integrated it?

    He is pretty much the most prominent hater of anything green. 

    So there is a lot of room for contemplation on how you have come to you opinion. Of course your entire assessment for Rogan to be yellow can only be rooted in you living on the entire spiral up to yellow for years. Have you?

    I reject the idea I have to be Yellow to recognize Yellow. I don't think you have to be Turquoise to recognize someone as Turquoise, as Leo has repeatedly.

    As for why I think Rogan is Yellow, he's able to have people from all walks of life and belief systems on his show and engage with them and understand them. That's more rare than you may think.

    And if he wasn't Green then why would he have so much interest in meditation, psychedelics, hippie culture, etc? And not only have knowledge of them but integrate them in a healthy way?

  23. Posted · Edited by EternalForest

    1:55:55

    Skip to the above timestamp where he goes through the limitations of proof to see what I'm talking about ^

    I was actually on-board and following perfectly until the "you can't prove you're a scientist" analogy came up. It doesn't make sense to me and I'll tell you why: If someone told me, "Prove that you're a musician", I could easily do that by sitting down at the piano in front of them and playing a full piece. And even though music is subjective, 99.9% of people would acknowledge that yes, he knows how to play the piano. Similarly, if I asked someone to prove they're a scientist, I could ask them to show me their degree, explain and define various scientific concepts, show videos of them working in the lab, show their note books, references from other scientists, reading their name in publications, etc. Now, proving to yourself that you exist is a bit harder, and maybe I'm taking the example too literally, but in a practical sense, yes, you can prove these basic things. 

    It's more than just a memory if I can perform music in front of you.

    It's more than just a memory if my name is published in a scientific journal.