Joshe

Sounds like you drank the kool aid. You believe that electric cars wouldn’t be on the map if it weren’t for Mr. Mega Genius and that Tesla is one of the nicest cars in existence? Hmm. I smell something. WHAT is that smell? Is it a suppressed Elon fan disguised as a consciousness worker? Jk, but for real. The first point is false, which you can verify yourself with AI and the second is an opinion, like this: Aesthetically, the Tesla is shit. Absolute shit. It’s curves are absurd and just look at its logo. It’s like one of the worst logos ever. When you look at that logo for 30 seconds, how does it make you feel? Lol. It’s fucking repulsive. One way to contribute to the greater good is by not supporting entities that are detrimental to it. So yeah, I think it’s a responsible thing to do.

Not sure if this concept has another name but it's profound. # Psychological Placeholders: The Mental Territories We Occupy to Avoid Empty Space A psychological placeholder is a mental or emotional pattern that occupies psychological space not necessarily because of its current utility, but because it has become a familiar cognitive activity. These patterns can persist long after their original purpose has been served, creating resistance to their own dissolution simply because they represent known territory for our thought energy and provide a sense of psychological continuity in the face of existential uncertainty. Like a well-worn path through unfamiliar terrain, these patterns offer a predictable route for our consciousness to travel, even when that route no longer leads where we truly want or need to go. ## Key Characteristics ### 1. Self-Perpetuating Nature - Creates its own inertia - Resists dissolution even when no longer serving original purpose - Becomes self-justifying over time - Creates familiar thought patterns that become comfortable despite being potentially uncomfortable ### 2. Unconscious Function - Often serves purposes unknown to the conscious mind - May protect from facing other, more threatening realities - Can provide structure to mental and emotional life - Might maintain a sense of identity or purpose ### 3. Energy Investment - Occupies significant mental and emotional energy - Creates resistance to change due to uncertainty about where that energy would go - May provide a sense of purpose or direction for thought patterns - Can become a primary focus of mental activity ## Common Forms ### Resentments - Persist beyond their useful life - Provide familiar territory for thought - Create a sense of righteous purpose - May protect from more vulnerable emotions ### Fixed Beliefs - Become load-bearing walls in psychological structure - Resist modification despite evidence - Provide stable framework for understanding world - Create sense of security through certainty ### Chronic Concerns - Occupy mental space with familiar worries - Create illusion of control through constant attention - Provide known territory for thought energy - May prevent facing deeper uncertainties ### Identity Attachments - Maintain familiar self-image - Resist evidence that might require identity revision - Provide stable sense of self - Create resistance to growth that threatens self-concept ## Psychological Functions ### 1. Stability Maintenance - Provides familiar territory for thought energy - Creates psychological stability through predictability - Maintains known patterns even if uncomfortable - Resists uncertainty of change ### 2. Identity Protection - Maintains consistent self-narrative - Provides familiar roles and patterns - Protects from identity uncertainty - Creates sense of continuity ### 3. Energy Direction - Channels psychological energy in familiar patterns - Provides known paths for thought and emotion - Creates structure for mental activity - May prevent confrontation with uncertainty ## Dissolution Process ### Recognition - Becoming aware of pattern as placeholder - Noticing resistance to change - Understanding unconscious functions - Seeing self-perpetuating nature ### Uncertainty Phase - Experiencing discomfort with unknown - Facing question of where energy will go - Dealing with identity implications - Managing anxiety about change ### Integration - Allowing natural dissolution - Experiencing new space - Finding new patterns - Integrating insights ## Clinical Implications ### Therapeutic Approach - Recognizing placeholders as serving function - Working with resistance compassionately - Understanding role in psychological structure - Supporting healthy dissolution process ### Treatment Considerations - Assessing readiness for change - Supporting development of new structures - Working with identity implications - Managing uncertainty anxiety ## Broader Applications ### Personal Development - Understanding own placeholder patterns - Working with resistance constructively - Developing comfort with uncertainty - Supporting healthy pattern dissolution ### Social Understanding - Recognizing collective placeholders - Understanding social resistance patterns - Working with group development - Supporting collective growth ## Conclusion Understanding psychological placeholders provides valuable insight into why certain patterns persist despite apparent disadvantages. This framework suggests that successful personal development might require not just insight into patterns, but also: - Understanding of placeholder functions - Comfort with uncertainty - Support for transition periods - Recognition of systemic implications The concept helps explain resistance to change not as simple obstinacy, but as a complex interplay between stability needs, identity maintenance, and energy management. This understanding can lead to more effective approaches to personal and collective development. It provides a non-pathological way to frame resistance to change—not as a flaw, but as a function of psychological stability-seeking.

Not everything fits into a model or a mould. You can be a poor virgin and still care about what is true if your mind is geared that way. What makes a mind like that? Some minds just need truth. Why? Is it just naturally higher consciousness or is it unbearable suffering forces one to find higher meaning? Is it both? I think if a mind is like that, it will be like that even in poverty and without sex. Poverty and circumstance might be a detriment to the development of such a mind, but sooner or later, a mind that needs truth will prioritize it or perish. It's like a force or a need, similar to money and sex. The thing is though, after you discover so many insights and truths, truth-seeking and understanding even starts to lose appeal. It's like Alan Watts said. You start with wanting candy bars, then you grow up and want booze and then you say "no, that's not it either", and you move on to art and music until that's not it either. You just keep going up and up until after a while of noticing the games you've been playing with yourself, it does something to you. It's all seen to be futile, which makes you stop taking life so seriously. Life starts to seems more like an observation than a serious endeavor.

"Many people can grasp difficult concepts mentally while still unconsciously avoiding their emotional impact. True existential courage involves the ability to maintain presence with uncomfortable truths without activating psychological defense mechanisms. Yes, this distinction strikes at something profound. It's the difference between what we might call "map knowledge" versus actually walking the territory. Someone can intellectually understand concepts like impermanence, death, uncertainty, or their own psychological patterns, but still unconsciously flee from the lived experience of these truths. This reminds me of how some highly intellectual people can eloquently discuss psychological concepts or spiritual teachings while still being largely unconscious of their own defensive patterns in real time. They've developed sophisticated mental models but haven't developed the capacity to stay present with the raw reality these models describe. What makes this particularly challenging is that intellectual understanding can actually become a defense mechanism itself. The mind can create elegant philosophical frameworks that give the illusion of having faced these truths while actually serving as a buffer against really feeling them. It's like building a beautiful glass display case around something dangerous - you can see it clearly, but you're still protected from direct contact. The truly developed person, as you suggest, has bridged this gap. They can not only understand difficult truths intellectually but can remain present with the full emotional and existential weight of them without needing to dissociate, rationalize, or otherwise defend against the experience. This capacity seems to be what allows for genuine transformation rather than mere accumulation of knowledge."

I think the biggest thing holding humanity back from evolving right now is a lack of courage—specifically, the courage to face themselves and reality. Without that, consciousness can't expand. David Hawkins talks about this as well. If you lack courage, you'll run from reality, which is why people cling to religion and various other falsehoods. They're so afraid of the uncertainty of their existence and all the unknowns about reality, out of fear, they weave stories that distract and pacify them rather than remain open and inquire. "People often aren't aware they're running from their inner experience - they create elaborate justifications, distractions, and belief systems that serve as sophisticated avoidance mechanisms." This works well as a defense mechanism, but it also shuts them off from development. So... I see a lack of courage as possibly the largest deterrent to humanity's development. Integrity means aligning your thoughts, emotions, and actions with reality. It’s about being honest with yourself and others, not living in denial or deception. Someone with integrity is reliable, accountable, and self-respecting. They don’t sell out their values. And when people live with integrity, their consciousness expands even further, but a lack of courage prevents most from ever having a shot at becoming integrous. Lately, I’ve been thinking about how to make humanity healthier, and it seems like the first step is helping people develop courage. If they can face reality without fear, only then can integrity follow. If you think about it, can integrity even exist without courage? Without courage, people will always default to self-deception, avoidance, or rationalization to protect their egos. The idea is that courage is a prerequisite for integrity. Just throwing ideas out there. I'm sure this is true to some degree but not clear on the degree or the implications.

Related, from Claude: # Existential Courage: The Capacity to Face Reality ## Core Concepts The capacity to face existential realities isn't primarily about intellectual understanding, but about the ability to remain emotionally present with difficult truths without resorting to psychological defenses. This involves several key ideas: ### Negative Capability Coined by poet John Keats in 1817, this describes the capacity to remain in uncertainty and doubt without anxiously grasping for immediate answers or resolution. It's the ability to sit with mystery and ambiguity rather than forcing premature conclusions. This quality is particularly relevant to existential courage, as it describes the exact capacity needed to face life's fundamental uncertainties without retreating into false certainties or comforting illusions. ### Being With A term that emerged from contemplative traditions, particularly Buddhism and later adopted in Western psychology, referring to the capacity to experience reality directly without immediately trying to change, fix, or escape from it. This differs from intellectual understanding in that it's about direct experiential contact rather than conceptual knowledge. The practice of "being with" requires a fundamental courage to face whatever arises in consciousness without immediately activating defense mechanisms. ### The Gap Between Understanding and Experience The distinction between these capacities and mere intellectual understanding is crucial. Many people can grasp difficult concepts mentally while still unconsciously avoiding their emotional impact. True existential courage involves the ability to maintain presence with uncomfortable truths without activating psychological defense mechanisms. This suggests that the development of consciousness isn't primarily about acquiring new knowledge, but about developing the capacity to remain present with what we already know at a deeper level. ## Reading List ### On Negative Capability - **"The Letters of John Keats"** - Particularly his December 1817 letter to his brothers where he first introduces the concept - Provides the original context and thinking behind this influential idea - **"Negative Capability: The Intuitive Approach in Keats" by Walter Jackson Bate** - Comprehensive exploration of the concept and its implications - Examines how this capacity relates to broader human development - **"The Wisdom of Insecurity" by Alan Watts** - While not explicitly about negative capability, it explores similar themes - Examines the relationship between uncertainty and psychological freedom ### On Being With - **"Start Where You Are" by Pema Chödrön** - Excellent exploration of staying present with difficulty - Practical guidance for developing this capacity - **"Radical Acceptance" by Tara Brach** - Deep dive into the practice of being with experience - Explores the relationship between acceptance and transformation - **"The Courage to Be" by Paul Tillich** - Philosophical exploration of existential courage - Examines the relationship between anxiety and authentic existence ### On Existential Psychology - **"The Denial of Death" by Ernest Becker** - Examines how humans psychologically defend against existential awareness - Explores the roots of human avoidance behaviors - **"Existential Psychotherapy" by Irvin Yalom** - Comprehensive look at how humans face (or avoid) existential realities - Practical applications of existential understanding in psychological work - **"Faith, Hope and Carnage" by Nick Cave and Seán O'Hagan** - Recent work exploring these themes through personal experience - Contemporary perspective on facing existential realities ### On Defense Mechanisms - **"The Mechanism of Defence" by Anna Freud** - Foundational work on psychological defenses - Essential understanding of how we avoid difficult truths - **"Neurosis and Human Growth" by Karen Horney** - Explores how people develop elaborate systems to avoid facing reality - Examines the relationship between authenticity and psychological development ## Key Insights The core insight running through all these works is that genuine psychological and spiritual development requires developing the capacity to remain present with uncertainty and difficulty rather than seeking premature resolution or escape. This isn't about achieving any particular state or gaining new knowledge, but rather about removing the barriers that prevent us from facing reality as it is. This suggests that the development of existential courage might be more about unlearning our habitual avoidance patterns than about acquiring new capabilities. The capacity to face reality might be innate, but becomes covered over by psychological defenses developed in response to existential anxiety. The relationship between courage and integrity appears to be fundamental: without the courage to face our inner experience directly, we cannot develop genuine integrity, as we'll always be prone to various forms of self-deception and avoidance. This suggests that the development of existential courage might be a prerequisite for genuine psychological and spiritual development. Note: Citations should be verified as this list was compiled without access to a current database.

You should think of Americans as they are in reality, not who/what you'd like them to be. If they are collectively mostly ignorant, apathetic, gullible, prone to manipulation, and lacking common sense and basic discernment, that's just the reality. The implications of this truth prevent many from accepting reality. Emotion or personal feelings should not be placed above objectivity. It's okay that Americans are like this. I mean, it sucks, but it's the reality.

What do you think their success would look like? Of course, they would arrive at the top via falsehood, schemes, manipulation, deception, etc., and this would only work because of how polarized people are. Polarization is the name of their game. Without that, conmen like this would be rejected by the vast majority. Do you think polarization would be sufficient enough to keep them at the top? Once they win, and say they rule for a while, if there are no more political contests, polarization would decrease, along with their support. I don't think it's sustainable to rule the world by force. Anyone who tries it will eventually fail, even if they have initial success. Also, I get the sense our politicians wouldn't allow it. I agree with you on their motives but I just don't see an easy way for them to reach their goals. I see them crashing and burning long before they succeed. Of course, they'll cause a lot of damage in their attempt, but I don't see how they'll make it to the top and remain there. I haven't put much thought into it though.

Yep. He's a good salesman. He's good at making people have confidence in him. Mix that with toxic stage orange and you have a con man.

And Complacency. Things have been too cushy for too long.

@Consept Yep. It was largely psychological warfare. The people wanted what they were manipulated to want. That’s what happened, and it’s clearly the largest factor. To mostly speak of inherently bad Dems, groceries or inflation, which might account for 30% causation, is absurd when the manipulation was probably more like 70% causal, and 70 feels conservative. People get lost in a multitude of factors but it’s clear that without the manipulation, 99.999% of the US population would never have considered Trans a problem… it just wouldn’t have crossed their minds. That’s just one issue they were manipulated on. There are dozens, if not hundreds. For example, Trump might have lost this election without the Springfield Haitian lie… and that’s a fact I've yet to see anyone else recognize. That one lie got millions to side with the Rs. Where's all the analysis for that? Interesting that the poster boy for memetics, Peter Thiel, who has taken a keen interest in manipulating human behavior, is high up the chain on the right. You have these billionaires who fancy themselves APEX predators who've made deals with Trump. Trump gets Fox and the right wing propaganda arm for free, but now he access to seriously powerful intelligence. Thiel and Musk likely have entire teams of consultants, data scientists, and strategists working around the clock, running simulations, crunching numbers, and plotting their next moves to shape public opinion and political outcomes, and they are behind Donald Trump.

Analysis of Tulsi's hearing:

I know one issue is how y'all pronounce "ou". lol

He's making it up because that's what he does. Americans are mostly entitled assholes. They're addicted to their complacent mediocrity and choose that over taking life seriously, so Trump can do and say another 36,000 lies and they'd vote him in again if given the chance. I envy you Canadians for they are not your compatriots.

lol, that's fucking hilarious. Should have guessed it was yet another con.

hmm. interesting. Did Trump threaten tariffs as a negotiating tactic for making Mexico and Canada increase border security? If so, this is a win, not only for him, but maybe America, and his base and many more will love him for it. They'll start back thinking he's Mr. 4D Chess again.

I wouldn’t dismiss this outright. I’d simply hold it as a possibility until more information came to light. There’s a knee-jerk response to avoid accusations of election rigging because of How Trump and the right behaved, but it seems like an error to prematurely dismiss potential possibilities. No one would be surprised if Trump or Elon cheated/rigged it. It’s consistent with their characters, but I agree that one shouldn’t put any stock in this until it gets more traction, which doesn’t seem likely.

Idk much about it but Kyle, who follows all this stuff for a living, says it’s false.

@Myagooshki What about the ones that ain't garbage? If someone was an early fan of RFK, before all the evidence against his character came out, they'd be much more likely to disregard or whitewash the clearly damning evidence against him. Similar phenomenon with Trump. They think they are logical and are making sense, but they're totally blinded by unconscious biases they've inadvertently created by investing positive emotion in a character. Then, every argument just serves to strengthen their biases and commitment to what they want to be true. They thirst for plausible deniability because it's the only shred of hope they have to not be wrong. Personally, I don't understand why people put so much stock or faith in public figures. If I thought someone was great but they turned out to be an asshole, I'd just accept it... but hey, that's just me!

I too suspect he's being groomed for leadership. The propaganda is already swirling. I've seen a few fluff pieces in my feeds about how Baron is awesome, is funny, gets a lot of pussy, is alpha, etc.

Vaccine-related claims: In his 2021 book "The Real Anthony Fauci" and multiple interviews, claimed that vaccines are linked to autism, despite this being conclusively disproven by numerous large-scale studies Stated that thimerosal in vaccines was responsible for an "autism epidemic" - this preservative was removed from childhood vaccines in 2001 and multiple studies showed no link Claimed that vaccine mandates violated the Nuremberg Code, misrepresenting both the code and vaccine requirements Asserted that vaccines can weaken the immune system, contrary to immunological evidence COVID-19 claims: Claimed COVID-19 was "ethnically targeted" to spare Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people Stated that COVID-19 was "targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people" and that "the people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese" Suggested that COVID-19 was likely engineered to spare certain ethnic groups, a claim without scientific basis Promoted hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as COVID-19 treatments despite lack of evidence for efficacy Historical/Political claims: Stated that the 2020 election was stolen through manipulation of voting machines Claimed that electronic voting machines can be and were hacked to change votes Suggested that the CIA was involved in his uncle JFK's assassination Claimed that Sirhan Sirhan did not kill his father RFK Sr., despite eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence Digital technology claims: Stated that 5G technology was developed as a surveillance and population control tool Claimed that WiFi causes cancer and various health problems Asserted that digital currencies are primarily tools for government surveillance and control Environmental claims: Suggested that certain chemicals in water supplies are causing gender changes in frogs and affecting human sexuality Claimed without evidence that certain pesticides are responsible for specific chronic diseases These are just the few that Claude knows about.

@Myagooshki I only have my reads to go on and from what I’ve seen regarding his pseudoscientific medical claims, his switching parties, him suing NC to take his name off the ballot and suing blue states to keep his name on them, his cuckoldry to Trump, family reports that he’s a predator, his enjoyment of killing animals, his elitism, and the little history I’ve heard, I’m fairly certain this isn’t a character a wise person would put much stock in, if any. To assume his motive is to MAHA and that he has the know-how to accomplish that seems naive based on the available data and the overall vibe. It would be a nice reality where America was about to enter into a phase where the leaders were going to start prioritizing health and getting rid of all the toxic stuff that makes us sick, which is why many people cling to hope regarding RFK.

The main goal was to affect your opinion of RFK. Did your opinion of him lower at all? His total flip on abortion is about the strongest indicator you can get that he’s just a grifter who will say whatever he has to to benefit himself. He was laughed at several times when he refused to own up to his flip flop. Did that lower your view of him?

That was the beauty of those hearings. A normie watching would intuit those Democrats were decent, well-meaning people who want to do good things, simultaneously walking away with a lower view of the obviously corrupt RFK. They are more effective at getting their points across like that than they are at selling ideas the people are too selfish to care about.