Zizzero

Member
  • Content count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Zizzero

  • Rank
    Newbie

Personal Information

  • Location
    Switzerland
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

62 profile views
  1. @theking00 Can you pay my rent?
  2. Why does it matter what Leo thinks about Jordan Peterson? If you resonate with what JP says - listen to him. If you don't resonate with him - don't. Does Leo have the ultimate opinion? When Leo says something is good then it is good and if he says it's bad then it is bad? I personally believe that Jordan Peterson is very often unfairly portrayed on this forum and that he is being competely underestimated here. Don't fall into the trap of using SD to not having to make up your own mind; just because someone whose opinion you value - like Leo - says that JP is blue/orange does not mean that 1) What JP says is invalid or bad and 2) It does not even mean that JP is actually blue/orange. Whether someone praises or criticises Jordan Peterson or anyone else, take that as what it is - an opinion. No need to start a crusade to make everyone here agree with what you think of him - regardless of whether you like him or not - and no need to change someone's mind or behavior; let people rant, let people praise.
  3. I find SD not a useful tool for practical use. I don't see how I could possibly assess myself accurately on the spiral. To understand someones values, SD alone seems too limited to tell the whole story. Also, there are too many uncertainties or simplifications with the entire model that I don't feel confident in using it too specifically. Don't get me wrong, I like SD a lot; as a model to understand societies on a macro-level; to predict and understand societal movements and changes. I feel like you can sense a general color that's surrounding a person or societal phenomenon; for that it is useful. But in general, as soon as you say something like "this person is blue/orange" or "this is something yellow people do", you're starting to get into territory that seems way too simplistic; in fact, it is so simplistic that you can easily use it as a tool to avoid having to listen to what this person or thing is arguing for by dismissing it as "orange bullshit that's just resisting green" or something of that sort. Honestly, that is what this forum often feels like; "can we agree that this thing that I don't like is low on the spiral?" or "this is something that I like. I believe that this is what yellow has to look like". What I got out of it for my pracitical use is that my worldview, like everybody elses, is not the final destination, but rather a result of where I'm at in my life. And that, instead of activly trying to move to the next stage, I'll just keep an open mind and look into things I don't resonate with from time to time. That way, I assume, I will quite naturally move up from whatever stage I'm in at that point to whatever stage comes next without having to do all the "am I green or yellow?"-stuff.
  4. I had a similar thought. Mine is that if you want to become enlightened, there is a way more efficient way to make that happen than years of meditation. To be concrete: suicide. So, if someone wants to be enlightened to end suffering; you can end suffering right now by killing the ego. If someone wants to be enlightened to find truth; you can kill what's preventing you from finding truth by killing the ego. Leo often says that the point of life is to awake; to die before death. I never understood why he believes that. Seems inconsistent. If you want to awake to the absolute truth, there are way more efficient ways than meditation or psychedelics. I get why one would want to become enlightened, but claiming that survival of the body while absence of ego is the number one priority of life does not make sense to me. At least I haven't heard or experienced anything convincing to back up that claim. Long story short; if enlightenment is the most important thing for you, there is nothing preventing you from killing your ego permanently at any moment. And as you say; enlightenment will happen one day anyway. There seems no reason to awake before you die, other than that it is something you want to do. Me: Not an expert on nonduality and never had an experience I would count as such. Just someone who tries to make sense of what he hears.
  5. Every stage can hurt others, not just the warm colors. Red: Simply because red doesn't care Blue: You don't think a muslim in a christian environment or a christian in a muslim environment will face some kind of bullying? Blue hurts others all the time and justifies it by refering to the fact that he did it to "them" and not to "us" Orange: If it helps him with his personal agenda, yes. But he's smarter about it and probably more subtle than red. Green: Go to a green event or social group and say that you support Trump; see how they react. Green can be very mean if he perceives this behavior to be just and will call it a "fight against the real bullies of red/blue/orange" Yellow: Also yellow can bully. A yellow person just would be more aware of what he's doing. But I don't see how yellow couldn't instrumentalize bullying to reach a bigger goal. To oversimplify things: warm colors hurt individuals to serve their agenda, and cold colors hurt individuals to serve the agenda of the community. So if you want to know what stage someone is in when the act without compassion, ask yourself what they attempt to get out of it. But I would definitely say that the tendency to hurt others lessens with every stage you move up.
  6. Well Carrey is a bit of a dick here imo I mean I would much rather have a conversation with him and I resonate more with what he says than the superficial popculture she represents. But basically what he's doing here is just showing off what new thing he learned about the world that others don't know of. Seriously, he should be aware in what kind of difficult situation this puts the interviewer and that average people don't even understand what he means. No idea if he's turquoise, just because someone uses nondual rhetoric or had a nondual experience doens't mean this person is turquoise. I just think that there is no need to embarrass the interviewer just to express an opinion that flies above the heads of anyone who sees the interview.
  7. Wow, this thread is very messy. But very entertaining to read through most of it today Mainly because basically anyone can post anything that's orange or green and call it yellow. So as it's been pointed out several times before; many examples aren't yellow and so this thread is more confusion than clarification about what yellow looks like. Now, after thinking about this spiral dynamics stuff for the last few weeks what I came up with was the following: Orange mistakes yellows for intelligent orange thinkers. They do this to avoid facing the fact that green values are higher up in the spiral than orange values. Green mistakes yellow for green/yellow; mainly green people who tapped into some yellow aspects like systems thinking and add this to their green worldview. Taylor04 described this in detail in his posts and it makes a lot of sense to me. I believe that yellow is just way too complex to grasp it as easily as tier 1 stages. So what yellow looks like is very speculative on a tier 1 stage and very hard to explain even if you understand it. While we can more or less assess earlier stages to examples like political believes or lifestyles; blue people are often conservatives, orange people like material wealth and green people want equality, I see a yellow person as too complex of a mind to reduce it to a simple observable variable. What I mean is this; this is my hypothesis: you put all the yellow people who exist in the same room and tell them to design a better structure for the world's society; you hand them all the political power in the world. I don't think they would agree with one another. They probably wouldn't yell and be name calling, but they would have very differing views. Because why wouldn't they? Look at yellow's typical values; those aren't goals, but rathers ways of perceiving / ways of thinking. I think at yellow you can't assume the conclusions of someones thought process. I don't find it hard to believe that a yellow person sympathizes with anarchy or libertarianism. I also don't find it hard to believe that someone on yellow would prefer left-wing politics. Yellow values go way deeper than this level; yellow's values are about its new attitude towards the other stages, its own beliefs and the thought process and consideration that go into everything. (Obviously me simplifiying yellow here as well) Yellow means understanding and seeing the previous stages; it doesn't mean liking or disliking a particular stage. In fact; that's the exact difference between it and tier 1. Yellow forms its own believes and values independently. That's what happens when green moves up; he starts to question everything and uses all the tools and knowledge he has aquired from beige to green. He doesn't limit himself to "ah I'm yellow, therefore I have to value this and stay away from that. (that's a very blue or green way of looking at things) This means yellow can form opinions about previous stages, - yellow does not mean liking every stage - yellow can pick sides, deem certain stages as more useful than others and - especially lower yellow - still judge or get triggered by other stages. What makes yellow yellow is HOW it reaches conclusions; not based on simple premises about the world, but by understanding the world and perspectives on a deeper and way more complex level. It sounds very simplistic and tier-1ish to believe that everyone who uses systems thinking and nuanced thinking reaches the same conclusion. Actually the more complex the process, the more unlikely it seems that two minds share the same opinions. Sooooo,,, maybe I'm completely wrong with what I just wrote. The problem is everyone can say they're yellow and believe it themselves, but how do we know? Most of us are not yet yellow, it is also more complex and rarer than blue/orange/green and therefore more difficult to portray in examples. My thesis is - as stated - that yellow individuals differ a lot from one another.
  8. Hey guys and girls, so I'm new on this forum :-). Following Leos YouTube channel since a few months, into personal development since maybe two years. I have a question concerning Spiral Dynamics; I am currently with one foot in stage yellow. My question is how do I best advance from here? I am more orange than green. I'd assess myself 35% orange, 30% green, 35% yellow. (Yes, I'm sure I don't mistake my yellow for orange. The percentage could be off though) I'm worried about regressing my stage yellow values back into green when attempting to move my orange believes into green. I believe the reason I'm so orange - especially emotionally - and never moved up from typically orange goals like being on top of a hierarchy, pickup or being admired is that it is hard for me to move on from those because I haven't had the proof that those wont make me happy because I don't have too much success in those areas. I haven't had a crisis in many orange areas because I haven't succeeded in orange; I haven't experienced the limit of this stage entirely. Now I could see three potential strategies. Which one would you believe to be the most efficient: 1. Diving into orange; creating individual success and gaining proof that reaching orange goals wont be fulfilling. Going orange to solve the problems orange is trying to solve. 2. Diving into green; focusing on the movement up from orange into green by embracing green values and green lifestyle. Here the worry what happens to my yellow believes; how to avoid regression? 3. Diving into yellow; integrating yellow virtues like nonjudgement or openmindedness even more and living a very yellow lifestyle; fully embodying stage yellow. Now, there is an inclination within me to do 1. Simply because my ego tells me that I cannot let go of those goals because I haven't experienced them; it first wants to taste the fruit before letting go of it. Or to ask the more general question: How do you move up or catch up in Spiral Dynamics when you still carry over values from a color at least two stages lower than your highest one?