Joshe

Give 20% and let them think it's 45 when it's more like 80.

I've witnessed some crazy shit, but knowing all was never a thing. I've rode light beams across the universe. I've experienced eternity in a single second. I've bent time and space. I've seen literal sound and heard sight. And before all that, I was questioning consciousness since I was 4 years old. But I've never experienced omniscience. Based on all my travels, I feel very safe in saying that if I did experience it, I would chalk it up as either a transient delusion or an interesting truth that isn't compatible with the current reality. Not to diminish the absurdity of it all - it's all absolutely insane and what can be imagined can be witnessed, but when the dust settles and you have to explain your experience and function in the reality before you this very moment, it's irresponsible to cling to your imaginatory revelations. THIS reality YOU are in NOW is THE actual reality that exists. If it's not clear, THIS reality is DOMINANT for A reason. You want to escape it or want it to be different, but reality demands THIS reality be dominant. My middle name is david, btw. lol

It doesn't matter what is happening outside myself right now. Since I'm talking to you, I assume you're a human on some kind of keyboard, because the dream requires that degree of coherence in order to persist. And since you mentioned a "chair", my guess is you're in a chair right now instead of a bed. But these are only abstractions that I come to be aware of as reality provides me this information. Reality reveals the truth of these abstractions as it unfolds. I do not know them before they present themselves. But omniscience is the state of knowing all. So maybe you shouldn't have used the word "omniscient". Maybe should have used a word like "construct-aware"? At the least, admit the word "omniscience" was misused.

It is a dream, and everything is imaginary. Particles are - like everything else in the dream, (including omniscience), imaginary. Particles are part of the dream if you invoke them, same as "omniscience". Back to the here and now: Does your omniscience require inquiry and effort or is your omniscience automatic? If you are truly omniscient inside a reality (that includes me) that has the potential for infinite abstractions within infinite abstractions, then you should be able to tell me about those abstractions that I otherwise wouldn't know without you telling me. So, what did I have for lunch and how did it impact my gut health? If you can't answer, then what exactly do you mean by "omniscient"?

No matter how much I disagree with you, I do like you among the best here. 😆TBH, it's because your profile picture. I can tell who you are from your profile pic alone. Last I recall, you were going through a rough time, so I hope all is well now. All good? Onto the substance: You cannot know reality fully and completely. If you could, can you tell me the exact position and composition of every particle in my body? If you can't, can you explain why? Could you answer this question even from your highest altered state? Obviously, you cannot answer these questions. Maybe you will answer "Those are just abstractions that don't exist, therefore not knowable." Weak, but ok. Thing is, I know that when I cease to exist, everything ceases to exist. But I know that I cannot cease to exist because I'm all there is and all that ever will be. But I get no special privilege from this knowledge. So what benefit is gained by knowing this? OP asked "What's the point?" What do you gain? Aside from some special subjective feeling? NOTHING! That's all there is 😂! You gain absolutely nothing except some idea. Some knowing how the magic trick works. I'm open to being wrong.

It's about time Schizo clued us in on all his mysterious ramblings. Interesting and plausible, but they don't hold up or are at least insufficient, as was Freud. Good and interesting insights to explore- but psychological coherence? No. It's true that childhood attention seeking strategies persists into adulthood, but the whole psycho-sexual frame is clearly absurd. @Schizophonia - move past Freud. You have a good foundation and good intuition, but Freud is keeping you stuck. You have to look at human psychology from your own analytic lens. Don't presuppose the pioneers got it right. They didn't. You have to take from multiple pioneers, and even more importantly, your own observations, so you don't get locked into a paradigm you didn't create. It's great to see how other paradigms comport with reality (which you do exceptionally well), but you also have to see where they fail. That benchmark has to come from your own observation of the subject matter. You're still young. Just watch humans for the next 2-3 years with no framework. Maybe your own framework will emerge. That's the path the other pioneers took. If the predominant psychologist of the time gets hung up on sexuality, of course it will seep into the psychological theory.

You can't fully understand reality. The whole pursuit is neurotic. Even if you could, you're a human. So guess what, you're understanding would amount to that of understanding how David Copperfield moves mountains. Once the magic trick is revealed, the magic is no longer magic. Back to reality. Which is why they say "chop wood carry water" before AND after enlightenment. This concept is important. What do you think you're going to achieve with some "mental recognition" or some "mental knowing"? All you have is some "special knowledge" from your meditation or psychedelic cushion that 99% of people could care less about. You can sit there and yell "YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND" for a few years until you get tired. Reality itself is entirely magical. Obviously. And you can be absolutely thrilled by it. But to hope to possess some special knowing that others don't have access to - then you're heading into psychosis. Even if you did reach that point, your best play is to keep your mouth shut and just appreciate the magic. As soon as you start professing how much you know about the magic, it's time to begin an entirely new inquiry.

When a fellow human makes a communication to other humans that they're life seems hopeless, what is the proper response? Is it to stay quiet and be indifferent because it's all a fiction? You seem to provide no value beyond telling others how they responded poorly, so I want to know specifically, what is the proper response, from your paradigm? How would you respond, human-to-human, to a human who said to you "hey Princess - I'm feeling like my life is hopeless and I'm having a hard time figuring out how to move forward".

"Safety" is a drive, not a value. It's reactionary, not proactive. The whole idea of a life purpose course assumes being proactive - taking initiative from a place of meaning, not fear. That said, your confusion is understandable because values are not fully stable - they're context-dependent. One day you might value this and the next day you value that. What you value at any given time depends on many circumstantial variables, which makes the exercise difficult. But still, there are identifiable patterns that persist for long periods of time that you naturally gravitate toward regardless of survival. These are the things to identify. These patterns remain relatively constant across life seasons. The domain might change, but the signature stays the same. A good question is "What problems do I most enjoy solving?" For example, I have this motivation to explore complexity and make it simple but only if it results in real-world benefit for myself or others. This motivation is detectable in nearly everything I do of my own volition. It's why I'm fascinated with human psychology and software engineering. I'm not into "psychology" or "software engineering". I'm into "useful coherence". Point is, there's an underlying motivation beneath all your interests and activities. Something at your core - after survival - that drives you. The idea is not to figure out a domain, but the underlying motivation: your "post-survival drive". Once you find it, point that motivation at whatever domains make sense at that time, given your specific circumstances and opportunities. I wouldn't worry too much about domain so long as you get to exercise your post-survival drive. Doors will open in time. Side note: I'd be cautious with the whole "life purpose" paradigm. I think it's more about "life trajectory". A single purpose isn't compatible with life because life is inherently too chaotic. "Life purpose" is a control fantasy and not suitable for most humans.

Kirk’s business model wasn’t centered around spreading the gospel. It was to diminish and humiliate all non-Christians. It was all in bad faith. This is very clear. Just because one is unconscious of their evil, that shouldn’t exonerate them. Unconscious evil produces very similar results as conscious evil. Im not saying turn them into devils, just that there’s a trap of not rightly calling out that which is detrimental because one has identified the evil-doer as “low consciousness and they know not what they do” and deep down, they’re a good human. Seems to me, cause and effect is the most consistent principle in reality. It trumps human intent. If we’re quoting scripture “Know them by their fruits”. The effects caused by evil, conscious or not, should not be swept under the rug, nor clung to and used to hate, but they should be condemned or called out and rejected should one find themselves in a situation where their influence matters. Cons and opportunists often rely on a veneer of virtue. Don’t be fooled motha fuckas.

The idea is solid and still hasn’t been done properly, which seems odd. People have attempted but all attempts have been weak. If you could figure out how to package the idea for mass consumption, could be a million dollar idea.

Seems odd to me to split reality into two buckets. When you conjure the construct or allow it to slip away, there’s the relative. Both are experiences that share the same background. They’re both just conceptual toggles.

It's like being born red-headed, it’s one of the many possible outcomes in a life shaped by forces set in motion long before you could influence any of it. The causal chain runs through people, not from them. There's way more that we can't influence than what we can. I'm guessing maybe generally 95/5, but it would vary depending on a few key variables. Maybe the real question is how we meet what we didn't choose.

Kinda. I wouldn't think of it as "approach", because the very idea triggers your nervous system, then you automatically start fighting yourself, searching for calm and confidence, trying your best to pretend your nervous system doesn't exist whilst you conjure up your top inner-game wisdom and affirmations. I think women are more receptive to you when you're not performing anything and you don't want them one way or the other. I think just being in your own presence - authentically - with nothing to prove and nothing to gain is all most men need to have a fair amount of prospects. This might sound like bullshit but I don't know how else to put it. If you don't have looks, as long as you have some kind of redeeming quality, whether it be confidence, charisma, humor, demeanor, sexy, interesting character, style, or whatever, all you have to do is be around women and some will bite. If you don't have a hook at all, you will just be a nice guy (which is still better than coming off like pickup weirdo). Just a couple of recent examples of how things start and potentially escalate with no effort: I recently took my dog to the dog park and saw this chick there who invited me over to let our dogs play together. Had normal human conversation. At the end, without trying or wanting anything, we exchanged phone numbers and now she texts me every time she goes to the park. And out of the blue she's telling me her bf isn't actually her bf and that it's complicated, and she's texting almost on a daily basis. I didn't do anything - there was no approach or stress. Time before that, I met a super sexy, clean hippy with armpit hair who told me what time she usually comes so I can meet her there again. Again, no approach, no thoughts about how I wanted to have sex with her - just being normal and friendly. It's almost like showing them basic respect as a person and not trying to get anything from them makes them receptive enough so that you don't have to neurotically pummel your nervous system to create a window for escalation. 🤔 You don't have to practice tactics when all you have to do is learn to be calm, cool, normal, nice, good-faith, and seeing them as a fellow human instead of your game. This method might not be for the high-standard trophy collector because it's not as targeted as pickup, but high standards = less sex. You're handicapping yourself for a pristine story. 1/3 the girls I've had sex with, you might call me disgusting for having sex with them, but some of the best sex I've had was with a girl most guys wouldn't be caught dead with in public. Multiple pieces - but really too deep to dive into here. It's mostly about listening to, respecting, and retraining your nervous system for calm, which necessitates learning to identify and letting go of thoughts that induce fear and anxiety. First step is learn to listen to and accept what your nervous system is telling you. If you ignore it, you'll always just be masking and won't have true confidence and will wonder why you can't quite get it handled. The reason you can do 1000 approaches and still experience intense emotion is because you're trying to do exposure therapy wrong. True exposure therapy pairs exposure with safety and nervous system regulation, but when you approach 1000 women, there's no safety and regulation - in fact, the opposite - which is why it doesn't work, hence the idea of building calm from the bottom-up, incrementally, with safety built-in (i.e. outside the domain of pickup). There's probably not a one-size fits all strategy. It's kind of a long game and a lot of work tbh, but so is pickup. It's healthier in the long run but maybe pickup is better if you're hard up. You could check out the book called "Befriending Your Nervous System" to get some basic ideas, but the main work would be consciousness and somatic work, which you would have to figure out on your own for the most part. FYI, I'm no expert or master on this stuff. I'm still in the learning phase of cultivating calm. Also, since I'm not looking for sex, I'm likely biased towards methods that don't produce it. It just seems to make more sense to cultivate calm incrementally in safe, low-pressure environments where the nervous system can actually learn what calm feels like and rewire itself.

You can still get tall girls as a short guy. I'm a little over 5'7 and I dated a girl that was about 4-5 inches taller. It is pretty funny though. She was weirded out the first time I kissed her without shoes on, but she got over it and we just joked about it. Another time, I tried to pull a smooth one and lift her off the ground mid-kiss - she told me to never do that again. lol.

lol, ya think? I onced mixed LSD with red wine and volunteered to take a bus load of Christian children to Cracker Barrel for breakfast, and I offered to pay for it all. 😂 I'm glad that didn't pan out. Ahhh, the ideas we have on drugs...

Maybe hunger will be enough to move them in 2028, or maybe Fox and Musk will put the word out that the hunger was actually caused by Obama and Biden. Hard to say.

There are prerequisites for producing good thoughts. Quality thoughts emerge from quality processes. But to bring it down a level, what makes thoughts better in the truth-seeking domain? Self-correction and calibration. It's how willing, honestly, and flexible a mind can update itself. Iterative self-correction. A good thinker tests their knowledge and intuitions through internal trial and error and they are very sensitive to previous errors they've made. They loop between intuition, reasoning, and reality-testing and update as needed. This pays compounding interest. This is how I produce my amazing thoughts. 😆 Also, this would not be applicable to all thought, which is what I was trying to explain in my previous post. Maybe you've answered already, but what are your top contenders?

Choose the opposite of whichever one your ego gets the most juice from.

What even is a good-quality thought? It would depend on your goals and the context in which the thought arises. If you're an artist, "good thoughts" would be different from good thoughts of a philosopher. So, what is meant by "good"? If my goal is to rest, the thought that I shouldn't have any thoughts is a good thought. "Good thought" is not static because context is not static. If you specifically mean what is a good thought in the context of intellectual pursuits, insights, etc., then the quality of thought depends on the system producing them. Maybe a better question would be: what most affects the quality of the thinking process that leads to good thoughts in situation X with the goal of Y. Given this, maybe the answer would be something like the ability to select and apply the thinking process most pertinent to a specific goal. Strategic metacognition.

@EternalForest Your strategy would highly depend on what you want to sell. You'd need an entirely different strategy for selling something like art than you would for selling a service. You could just take cookie-cutter advice, and some of it is necessary, but many others are doing the same thing. You need an original, intelligent strategy. Most likey, you need a mix of partnerships, advertising, and self-promotion. Set yourself apart with high-quality branding and a high-quality website. A good list of foundational tech skills to acquire: Visual design HTML, CSS, and Javascript. Advertising tools like Google Ads, Facebook Ads, etc. Marketing psychology and copywriting Realistically, it would take 2 years to learn these so that you can produce more polished creatives than normies can with something like Canva or ChatGPT, but it would be worth it. I just finished a website for a new residential HVAC business. Currently, the business is ranked 33 in Google local map pack. I'm going to get it in the top 6 within 6-12 months. I wouldn't have a shot at this without tech skills. It all starts with good branding and design. This site I built is possibly the best looking, most polished HVAC website on the entire internet. That's just one way to set yourself apart, but I think it's foundational. I couldn't have produced it with cookie-cutter templates.

Pony up and it's yours!

Neurosyphilis. Brothels are fun until you wind up like Fred.

The key thing to understand is we’re all living for something. We need something to live for. If that something gets weak or disappears, we look for something else. Importantly, we want that thing to give us positive energy or the prospect of it. That explains the drive. The other side of the coin is the various entities exploiting this drive. Most people are on this forum because spirituality is the thing they’ve chosen to live for. Without it, they would need something else to replace it. Sounds simple but if you can truly see this, it’s one of those cold-chills insights. It explains a ton about human behavior.

lol. @Ramasta9 sorry for contributing to the clutter. This is has just been a fallacy I've been seeing for a while and I think it needs correcting. People get a whiff of AI and lose their shit.