integral

Good stuff man, I said that stuff about school because I thought well he went to school for let's say 4 to 5 years and then after he quit his corporate job he went and work at Uber lol clearly there was a misalignment with schooling and career and the vision he had at a young age was off. So I assumed nothing you went to school for you're using right now in business or in life, I get the impression schooling helped you during your growth Journey or something or make connections? I was sort of emphasizing that it should have been to develop a concrete skill you can rely on.

🧨 100 Shadow Epistemologies by Type Unconscious motivations behind how different archetypes distort their sense of truth The Skeptic – Belief is a threat; doubt is used to avoid emotional vulnerability. The Academic – Over-identifies with credentials; avoids paradigm shifts that risk reputation. The Rationalist – Suppresses intuition; filters reality through logic as if it’s the only valid lens. The Empath – Believes what feels good or “resonates”; resists confrontation or critique. The Healer – Rejects data that contradicts spiritual identity or natural methods. The Scientist – Mistakes the scientific method for reality itself; sees anything unmeasurable as invalid. The Conspiracy Theorist – Trauma-rooted distrust; finds patterns to gain control over uncertainty. The Guru – Builds epistemology on adoration and insulation; avoids questioning from followers. The Skeptical Debunker – Emotionally gratified by tearing others down; addicted to “being right.” The Internet Bro – Clings to contrarianism to feel edgy, smart, or “red-pilled.” The Techno-Optimist – Equates progress with truth; belief is shaped by innovation dogma. The Postmodernist – Avoids any commitment to truth; uses relativity to evade responsibility. The Fundamentalist – Anchors truth in scripture; resists inquiry that could unravel worldview. The Capitalist – Truth is what sells; suppresses inconvenient knowledge for economic advantage. The Influencer – Beliefs shaped by audience validation; confuses “resonance” with accuracy. The Politician – Truth is performative; knowledge is weaponized for persuasion or control. The New Age Hippie – Embraces beliefs for aesthetic and emotional resonance; filters out anything "dense" or “low vibe.” The Nihilist – Avoids responsibility by claiming nothing matters or can be known. The Philosopher – Uses endless abstraction to avoid grounding or personal application. The Activist – Belief is emotionally tied to moral outrage; may resist nuance. The Stoic – Suppresses emotion so strongly that emotional data is dismissed. The Trauma Survivor – Beliefs shaped by self-protection; may reject perspectives that feel unsafe, even if true. The Doomer – Sees belief in possibility as delusion; clings to pessimism as identity. The Utopian Idealist – Projects perfection onto systems or ideologies to avoid disillusionment. The Life Coach – Turns knowledge into marketable certainty; may avoid complexity that doesn’t sell. The Rebel – Believes against the mainstream simply to maintain identity as outsider. The Libertarian – Filters all truth through personal freedom; may resist collective truths. The Christian Apologist – Filters all data through scripture; belief system cannot be falsified. The Psychedelic Explorer – Overweights peak experience as ultimate truth; resists grounding in reason or shared reality. The Business Strategist – Prioritizes utility over truth; epistemology shaped by ROI. The AI Ethicist – Paralyzed by future hypotheticals; uses complexity to mask indecision. The Stoic Entrepreneur – Resists emotional data as “irrational”; overweights efficiency. The Law of Attraction Believer – Belief based on emotional confirmation and selective attention. The Occultist – Uses obscurity or esoteric language to avoid falsifiability. The Simulation Theorist – Believes reality is unreal to avoid facing human vulnerability and uncertainty. The Spiritual Narcissist – Believes their intuition is truth; avoids challenge by framing critics as “unawakened.” The Traditionalist – Epistemology rooted in nostalgia; truth = what worked before. The Productivity Hacker – Sees truth as what's efficient; ignores depth, ethics, or long-term implications. The Astrology Believer – Projects internal patterns onto celestial symbols; uses archetypes to explain everything, avoiding accountability or complexity. The Enlightenment Chaser – Seeks nondual states as escape; bypasses emotional, relational, and intellectual shadow work. The Perfectionist – Rejects ideas that don't meet impossibly high standards; uses critique to avoid commitment. The Minimalist – Conflates simplicity with truth; dismisses complexity as unnecessary clutter. The Nostalgic – Glorifies past knowledge; resists new information that threatens cherished memories. The Contrarian – Defines truth in opposition to mainstream; identity depends on disagreement. The Futurist – Dismisses present reality in favor of speculative possibilities; avoids grounding. The Pragmatist – Only values knowledge with immediate utility; dismisses theoretical truths. The Maximizer – Endlessly seeks more information; paralyzed by fear of missing something better. The Conformist – Aligns beliefs with social acceptance; truth determined by group belonging. The Self-Expert – "I know myself" shields from feedback; rejects external perspective. The Collector – Accumulates knowledge without integration; confuses information with understanding. The Devil's Advocate – Uses contrarianism as shield; avoids revealing authentic position. The Fact-Checker – Obsesses over details while missing larger patterns; uses minutiae to avoid vulnerability. The Quick Fixer – Rush to solutions prevents deeper understanding; values closure over accuracy. The Cynic – Uses world-weariness to avoid disappointment; preemptively rejects hopeful possibilities. The Worrier – Catastrophizes to feel prepared; mistakes anxiety for insight. The Summarizer – Reduces complex ideas to soundbites; avoids nuance through oversimplification. The Moderate – Assumes middle position equals truth; avoids commitment through false balance. The Absolutist – Only accepts black/white truths; avoids the discomfort of ambiguity. The People-Pleaser – Shapes beliefs to avoid conflict; truth subordinated to harmony. The Self-Improver – Truth must be actionable; rejects knowledge that doesn't optimize performance. The Relativist – Avoids judgment by claiming all perspectives are equally valid; escapes accountability through "your truth, my truth." The Compartmentalizer – Keeps contradictory beliefs in separate mental boxes; avoids integration that would force choices. The Literalist – Misses metaphor and subtext; uses rigid interpretation to avoid deeper meanings. The Historian – Over-relies on precedent; dismisses emerging truths with "it's always been this way." The Cultural Purist – Rejects knowledge from "outside" sources; uses tradition to limit perspective. The Devil-Knower – Claims intimate knowledge of evil; uses fear to elevate status and avoid scrutiny. The Provocateur – Values shock over substance; conflates reaction with revelation. The Early Adopter – Equates novelty with truth; identity tied to being first, not being accurate. The Veteran – Elevates experience over evidence; dismisses new insights with "been there, done that." The Mystifier – Uses intentional obscurity; truth as exclusivity rather than clarity. The Reductionist – Oversimplifies complex systems; comfortable only with single-cause explanations. The Evangelist – Measures truth by how many convert; confuses persuasiveness with correctness. The Generalist – Skims surface knowledge; avoids depth that would reveal gaps. The Credentialist – Judges ideas by source rather than substance; uses authority to avoid evaluation. The Virtue Signaler – Belief as social performance; truth subordinated to moral positioning. The Fatalist – Uses determinism to avoid responsibility; "why learn if nothing changes?" The Hypervigilant – Sees danger everywhere; filters knowledge through trauma lens. The Data-Hoarder – Collects facts without synthesis; substitutes information volume for understanding. The Jargon-Master – Uses specialized language to mask conceptual weakness; belonging over clarity. The Self-Deprecator – Undercuts own knowing; uses humility to avoid standing behind convictions. The Comfort-Seeker – Rejects truths that disturb emotional equilibrium; conflates discomfort with falsehood. The Trend-Follower – Aligns beliefs with cultural momentum; truth determined by popularity. The Certainty-Addict – Avoids the anxiety of unknowing; prematurely settles on explanations. The Nostradamus – Uses vague predictions; retroactively claims accuracy while avoiding falsifiability. The Passive Observer – Watches without engagement; mistakes neutrality for objectivity. The Dichotomizer – Forces complex issues into binary choices; avoids the messiness of spectrum thinking. The Premature Closer – Rushes to conclusion to avoid ambiguity; mistakes certainty for accuracy. The Fence-Sitter – Avoids commitment by perpetual deliberation; mistakes indecision for thoroughness. The Anecdotalist – Elevates personal stories over patterns; uses exceptional cases to avoid statistical truth. The Framework-Junkie – Collects models without integration; mistakes categorization for understanding. The Status-Guardian – Rejects knowledge that threatens position; truth filtered through self-preservation. The Consensus-Follower – Outsources thinking to majority; mistakes agreement for accuracy. The Outlier-Hunter – Focuses on exceptions rather than patterns; uses edge cases to undermine principles. The Myth-Maker – Creates narratives to satisfy emotional needs; prefers compelling story to messy reality. The Terminologist – Obsesses over definitions; uses semantic debates to avoid engaging with substance. The Confirmation-Seeker – Filters for evidence supporting existing views; mistakes reinforcement for validation. The Quick-Judge – Makes snap assessments; uses first impressions to avoid deeper examination. The Self-Referencer – Measures all knowledge against personal experience; dismisses what doesn't match. The Oversimplifier – Reduces complexity to maintain control; discomfort with nuance drives false clarity. The Meta-Evader – Shifts to higher levels of abstraction when challenged; uses complexity to avoid direct confrontation. 101. The AI-Trusting – Overconfidence in machine-generated content; mistakes algorithmic fluency for factual accuracy and accepts AI outputs without critical evaluation due to automation bias or perceived technological authority. --Ai assisted GPT

Just the act of wanting Financial Freedom means you think you deserve more than 99% of the population who are slaving away in jobs they hate. The only way for you to get that freedom is to take it from someone else. But you could do it while providing value to society Get used to corruption it's built into our DNA Have you ever eaten meat before like today or yesterday, congratulations you just killed something to sustain your life Your identity has to realign itself with the real world. You're lost in stage green idealism

Forget all of this! Short-term and long-term are different things. You need to build a foundation right now and the ethics involved are second. With this ethical logic you should not use a phone not use a computer because that's all child slavery and you should go live in the forest and go hunt food yourself with a bow and arrow. But that's ridiculous. So completely let go of this ethical thing and just succeed and then when you have a foundation you can then start high Consciousness businesses. Yes your values have to align to a degree like don't start a vaping company if you don't believe in that Because you will lose motivation along the way and fail, But focusing on every nuanced little ethical thing is ridiculous.

You could have stayed at your parents while keeping the corporate job for a period of two years accumulating money and investing it building up your assets, and then working on a business on the side. The game you played with school was a lack of focus, the point was for you to get credentials to make money in something you enjoy or partially enjoy. You could have gotten a degree in the medical industry and then started many different types of businesses around that for example. But instead you just wasted your time in school The most important takeaway is that you're physically healthy and that's the main criteria you need for success. Based on your writing I feel like you have the kind of brain that keeps attacking itself in uncertainty and is lost without a focused strategy. I'm still not seeing where your strategy is, what business are you building? How are you going to build assets right now?

Perfect now we can train AI on all that user data!

Blatant materialist paradigm It doesn't understand strange loops or ontological tautologies, it doesn't understand scientific Paradigm lock which plague Society, Hold science up on a pedestal of Purity and fails to see its deep corruption doesn't understand Paradigm lock Lost in relativity and Possibility hell of perspectives, cannot navigate multiple perspectives altogether to a coherent truth

Yet it's still limited by the person using it

@xeontor Stop and ask the AI what it's Paradigm is and what it's epistemology is. The AI is biased to empirical evidence as the one only epistemic benchmark that matters. This is the materialist paradigm.

@xeontor This is a mistake being made. 1) you first have to create a solid epistemic profile of Leo Gura 2) you then have to create the epistemic profile of the (AI) who is doing the audit 3) then you tell the AI to use its Paradigm to audit Leo guras 4) you then realize it's relative and you're just using one paradigm to critique another. 5) you then rise up to the next level and figure out a more inclusive conscious epistemology

😂

It must have been one hell of a mind fuck when he woke up from this dream and realized he didn't have a clue the entire time.

That looks like the female version of you lol

@hoodrow trillson Dismissive Tone, Personal Attack/Ad Hominem, Lack of Constructive Engagement Avoid doing this in the future, thank!

--Ai assisted (Integrating my insights) I asked a doctor to do a heavy metal scan and help my grandmother remove heavy metals from her body because that might be causing her Fibromyalgia. Response: We don't do that here. They have no concept of the bigger picture They exist in a smaller corrupt Healthcare bubble inside the larger corrupt scientific bubble.

@zurew I like to begin by saying that you've not demonstrated that you understand the problem. And have only managed to repeat exactly the scientific narrative that everyone believes who have not actually realized the Full extent of the problem. There is no data; it’s an epistemic profile of a person. Similarly, if you want to make an epistemic profile of Trump, what’s the best approach? You’d need to consume many perspectives, review a lot of content on the subject, and then synthesize everything into a cohesive profile +(Additional epistemic strategies). The same applies to doctors: you’re not going to ask a doctor to give you data on how their own mind works, nor will you ask the scientific community to provide data on how a doctor thinks—that's like asking the mafia to give you data on why the mafia is not corrupt. I didn't say that, a doctor is not real functional practitioner. They regurgitate a broken system, without epistemic self-awareness. With strong incentives to repeat the same mistakes. Moreover, every misconception they’ve been taught is deeply ingrained in their identity as the highest form of evidence, rigor, and intelligence. If this were 100 years ago, they’d apply the exact same mindset they used when performing lobotomies to treat mental health problems. The healthcare industry is filled with barbaric treatments—like lobotomies—that exist under everyone’s nose, disguised as strategically “the best humanity has to offer at this moment in time.” It’s plagued with false humility that this is the best we can do. ^^^ this is what the real world looks like, not what people see on tv. I only see a strawman of my position. This was the default narrative I held my entire life, and it’s what the whole world believes—until the problem is actually seen for the first time. Epistemology: experiential paradigm shift. To be clear, I’m not saying a doctor should blindly experiment. It should be within an epistemic framework—but that’s not how it plays out in practice. They try things within their Western bubble, and when those fail, they simply give up. There are two major issues. First, the treatments they tried not only didn’t work but actually made the situation worse, harming you. Second, they then tell you it’s all in your head or incurable and that you must medicate yourself for the rest of your life. If you bring a potential cure for a “difficult” disease—one they’ve been taught is incurable—they won’t integrate it. This is the heart of my critique: doctors are people who have memorized and repeat what they’ve been told without any capacity to learn, integrate, or truly understand. They don’t even recognize the simple ways they’ve harmed patients with their own treatments, because they were never prepared or warned that harm is possible. When they do cause harm, they tell you it’s in your head. They claim to understand medication risk, but in reality they underestimate the magnitude of damage these drugs cause—by a factor of a hundred—because “science” is funded, not discovered. You should ask yourself why you’re so opinionated on a topic you have no direct experience with—no real interface with doctors or insight into their world. Even if you became a doctor, you’d likely repeat the same paradigm. You have a clear bias toward data. In our past conversations, you’ve repeatedly asked me for data and evidence. You’re over‑emphasizing data as the most important form of epistemology. You're biased to one way of knowing, data. It doesn't follow that a person is incapable of pattern recognition and working with patience over a extended period of time to really narrow down the problem and the correct treatments which most doctors don't do. And then they fail to integrate anything they learn because they're not taught to be integrative. The patient is the medium for which to run experiments on... I mean you give them a treatment you carefully observe what happens and you follow through with it till the end while carefully making observations, while working with arising questions for years and decades. You carefully accumulate all the data from all your patients. You make careful observations of what worked and when they worked, you construct patterns, You build a personal repertoire on how to treat patients, You explore the problem each patient has from a wide angle set of possibilities. ^^^ What a real doctor should look like ^^^ the blind-stop of a financially corrupt Western Healthcare education system. They are not representative of real science, it's a cartoon caricature of the real thing. And their strategies is incompetent.

@LordFall I'm looking forward to Nano machines that just repair your body from the inside out, Metal Gear Solid style

I agree, maybe there's a Hidden Gem Leo could pull out with enough deep research, but treatments are always a risk that things could get even worse, I think that's one of the reasons he might not try anymore.

For the love of God they still neuter dogs and cats. Which gives them chronic hormonal problems ( never recognized or treated), and it changes their personality, can cause chronic depression, will cause cancer and other illnesses years later ( cause and effect never recognized because the time span is too long) and strongly affects their lives. Epistemology: culturally accepted assumption Yes. That’s all it is. Not tested, not questioned, not engineered — just embedded doctrine.

I made this post to help people understand how a doctor functions on a day to day basis. You guys think doctors are these deep problem solving geniuses (like on tv), when in practice they regurgitating what they were told From a epistemically corrupt education system, they cannot think holistically, have strong Paradigm lock, are very prideful, they do not learn as they interact with the real world and real people, half of people that come into contact with them directly are harmed and the big magic trick is that the patient and the doctor both have no idea that the treatment did more harm than good. A doctor will never admit or understand or even comprehend that their treatment could have caused harm. It's completely bankrupt. And this is in Canada where there is not a financial incentive for doctors because they are paid by the government, in America it's 10x worse because there's a financial incentive. They are status oriented people that strongly believe their intelligence and Academia are one of the same. Even though they've never done any real science... Epistemic fragmentation: If electro shock therapy was pushed by science and Academia like it was in the past every doctor would still be using it. 0 capacity to do deep thinking. And if you challenge them they will point you their diploma and tell you that they are more qualified than you will ever be and that your opinion isn't worth anything. If you tell the doctor you had a bad reaction to a drug they will Gaslight you by telling you that its completely impossible and it's 100% in your head. Because Academia has told them otherwise.

Chatgpt will never produce the Content that you just saw. It will praise Academia and doctors all day long. I gave it my insights and I had it create an outline of the different epistemic variables

Most of those Diagnostics are wrong that's how corrupt Academia and the healthcare industry is. 92% is them telling themselves that they are right with diagnoses that don't actually represent the systemic root problem of a person's health problems. And fake treatments that half the time to do more harm than good because they never understood the problem to begin with meaning their diagnosis was wrong to begin with. If they diagnose Leo with Hashimoto's can you see how that's not a diagnosis and that's not a solution? It's smoke and mirrors

You could also stop sub vocalizing, because doing that tends to stimulate a lot and stir up emotions because it’s high energy. It’s like sprinting. Think silently without words