Danioover9000

@Nivsch Another bunch of guesses not supported by evidence.

@Nivsch @Nivsch According you, nothing is good enough for you, you're just inserting assumptions to the Palestinian side here. They just knew if they accept a deal they accept Israel and the Jews right to settle in Gaza and West Bank, as an independent state is an assumption you're shoe horning to the Palestinians here. Again, another assumption from you, you're projecting the Palestinian's goals as diminishing Israel, when it could be the return of lands Israel took from them, so?

@Nilsi I disagree here. First of all, his interpretations of Lao Tzu and the Tai Te Cheng are inaccurate, and frankly BS attempts to hide his lack of argumentation here, to even 'justify' his approach tto empower individualism here is sloppy, felt like he was sneaking in here libertarianism. Secondly, since you inserted yourself here and your personal feelings to his 'call to action', is irrelevant to his argumentation. I find him attacking people with psychopathic traits horrible, because some percentage of psychopaths are born that way, besides the environmental conditions of developing psychopathy, so him demonizing this personality trait is uncalled for when such people make valuable assets to society, such as nurses, surgeons, policemen, security, and other social roles that require some psychopathy to be decent in. I disagree with your assertion that Schmachtenberger has more urgency and action taking, in fact he's talking out of white privilege and home schooling, and your evidence to corroborate your claims are not sufficient to justify your claims of him.

Very interesting debate and arguing between President Sunday and Andrew Wilson, will be reviewing later:

@destroyx6 Of curse, as the idiom goes: Rome is not built in one day. My specific issue of his talks is that he doesn't change his argumentation, sticks to same talking points, and is too abstract and philosophical for the general public. I think sophistry of this sort, lacking in concrete follow ups, negatively effects persuasion and charisma.

@Nilsi I will watch the whole video when I have time, but to ask you a few questions of her: Is she basically arguing for more novelty thinking for any given field? IMO, I feel like her arguments fall short as if she's just flexing and appealing to pathos and ethos and some logos as well. I think she's also biased to whatever her science interests are. Intuitively I feel like it's incomplete and simplifies creativity and actual production of things, IMO.

@Israfil Let me clarify my position. The real issue is that most of Daniel Schmachtenberger's talks are too abstract and out there that most viewers and general public won't follow him in those levels. The real issue isn't that this is just a systemic issue, the real issue is his rhetoric and persuasion and convincing ability is low if he doesn't provide a short list of steps to make his abstractions concrete, to show some real world application and implementation of solutions rather than circle jerk and philosophy and sophistry talk about the problem/solution space. The real issue isn't that you're intuition is saying this is an exclusive stage yellow, but the real issue is that these problems have concrete solutions and problems, and talking too abstractly looses the audience in those abstractions. Arguably the deeper real issue is the great bystander effect that Daniel Schmachtenberger and intellectuals like him have to overcome, and unfortunately he's so out there that as an argumentation, this lacks. His arguments lacks urgency and concrete examples, his arguments lacks even in some concrete explanations of resolving some issues. Differing to that this needs 'global coordination' when globally there's this bystander effect of each nation/country for itself, is the real problem. The real issue is that Daniel Schmachtenberger is not persuasive enough, and people like Jamie Wheel, Iain McGilchrist, and John Vervaeke are not persuasive to shock the world enough from it's bystander effect it has for itself. Expecting to shock the world with boring abstraction and intellectualization isn't realistic at all. How can you persuade the world and global systems and other cultures, other economies to coordinate with each other from pure abstract philosophizing?

https://www.actualized.org/insights/actualized-quotes-057 So, the argument then, and the conclusion that follows, is the following: 1. That if you're not doing MY version of philosophy, before awakening, then you're cringe and your philosophy is cringe. 2. That Philosophers of old and current, before an awakening experience or whatever spiritual/non dual experience, are cringe and their philosophy is cringe, AKA Zen foxes/devilry implication here that's show horned into the insight. 3. That there's an assumption of a distinct end to philosophy after god realization/awakening, but then says REAL philosophy happens AFTER god realization/awakening, so this assumption is a performative contradiction: that there's both a DISINCT END, but a REAL philosophy starts after awakening. Which is it? IMO, this insight is a miss and ironically a bit cringe considering the ramifications to other types of philosophies out there. Your thoughts? Change my mind.

@Jannes I have started a thread about this too here:

@Nilsi I think this part. IMO, is now a bit of a stretch. From how he articulated in his videos, not factoring in his forum posts, he does seem to be able to grasp and understand philosophy.

@Nilsi I'm guessing that you're referring to when @Leo Gura in this forum/blog talked about Ken Wilbur/Daniel Schmachtenberger? I remember him saying how it's a shame Ken Wilbur doesn't do psychedelics and it's a waste of intellectual talents or something like that.

@Nilsi Sure, this is more focused on his blog and the simplistic takes he has, I just feel that it can be disrespectful to predecessors of philosophy, and as an argument it falls apart on the edges. Outside this blog, and taking into account his videos and how he uses so many sources outside, it's just a bit too simple. Plus, factoring in his main method of reaching this god realization and awakening is via psychedelic substances, specifically synthetic version of 5 Meo DMT, and most mainstream media and most of society still have a large unfavorable view of psychedelic it makes it seem that the only way to experiencing awakening and god realization is psychedelics, which is very hard to teach and mass communicate to most people, and as an argument to persuade and convince it just isn't convincing to the average joe out there, unless you're just like @Leo Gura, with similar genetics, circumstances, and similar values and into self help/personal development nd spirituality, a straight A student. But that doesn't mean I'm 100% hating on him, for one his life purpose course is pretty decent, way more than other courses. And some of his videos are pretty good and packed with information that should be behind a paywall.

@Lyubov True.

Now I wonder what Daniel Schmachtenberger, Jamie Wheel, John Vervaeke, Iain McGilchrist, and some who are mostly stage yellow in their thinking will have to say about this Israel/Palestine conflict and how it would effect the whole world? So far not a signal from those intellectual thinkers, I guess they don't want to get canceled and censored huh?

@Nivsch Of course he can't enter Israel's shoes because their size is so tiny only garden gnomes can fit their size, with little empathy and understanding of human suffering, fed with misleading and misinformation campaigns from their media and most western media, from a corrupted information ecology, and factoring in many developmental factors like value structures, cognitive and moral development, personality types and psychology, Architypes, ego development, and other lines of development in person to societal domains, and ideological beliefs indoctrinated by culture, family upbringing and information consumed that conforms and influences their worldviews, and this situation being war, a dark subject matter that triggers thought terminating cliches, empathy is greatly reduced and common sense flies out the window, and regression will happen in other developmental factors.

@kenway Yes, for them it's 1 to 1 obviously not a 1 to 10,000 women and children right?

@zazen Yes, it is correct to say that. But good luck saying that to the pro Ice rails here, cuz they're cod blooded and unsympathetic to human suffering they're side is causing.

@jaylimix Okay so you're pro immigration, pro artificial means of increasing immigration then, regardless if it's genocidal means? Cute, only an atheist, secularist, egalitarian feminist would say this talking point. Yeah! Go mass immigration, displace the native population towards western countries! Yeah. Um, no, to only displace Palestinians from their lands, and some of them terrorists, by your logic, will only increase more terrorism, and SPREAD TERRORISM TO OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD! Furthermore this displacement and ethnic cleansing is itself a humanitarian crisis, and increasing the immigration crisis already felt by most western countries and some eastern countries is foolish. What we should instead is help nation build Palestine, but OH NO! The Israeli Zionist alt right in charge don't like that one bit! Don't nation build Palestine next door, even though that's part of democracy though.

@Parallax Mind European colonialism isn't all that evil, in fact some good came out of it. For example the Spaniards that discovered South America put a stop to the Aztecs Empire's ritual of human sacrifices of live warriors, and enslavement of other tribes women and children because in their catholic worldview those practices were immoral.

@PurpleTree IMO this makes sense, as this is Feminism, egalitarianism and Neoliberalism and capitalism run amok, negatively effecting the traditional and conservative moral system, which holds family unit,nation,and community highly. When you have too many women career orientated qnd on high positions, having to be more rational than feminine, you get high divorce rates and birthrate declines due to legal abortion and lackcof energy and time to family and marriage, andpoor diet, health, nutrition, and sleep due to capitalism, processed food and work culture. This is also the negatives of atheims and secularism, and liberalism, and a blind belief in egalitarianism and multiculturalism, which

@jaylimix Cool, but what about the Gazan civilians, the women and children? They have no home to return to as their homes, and buildings are RUBLE! That is part of the UN South African Genocide, and genocide doesn't have to only be kill all men women and children, it includes displacing population as Israel is already doing to Gaza. It's genocide if it includes mass killings, mass displacement of the population, destruction of facilities that handle birthrates like hospitals, which also handles aid and care, destruction of food and water supplies which kills people via starvation, and genocidal intent. Israel ticks all the boxes, and why pro Israel are so blind and in denial about this is insane. How are ya'll so...

@PurpleTree Suppose to be on the don't kill children and women, especially if HAMAs to civilians ratio is 1 to 100 or 10,000, IMO pro Israeli are worse than Penny Wise and robots if they don't get that it's immoral at this point.

@PurpleTree 😅

Found a video also covering pseudoscience, interesting watch: Funny how establishment science perceives a threat from fringe science and things outside normality and defies explanation.

Google definition, from Oxord: pseudoscience /ˈs(j)uːdəʊˌsʌɪəns/ noun a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method. "the new pseudoscience of ‘counselling’" First of all, we definitely need a more robust definition of pseudoscience, the current one is just lacking even in common sense. Also, there's a problem with some terms within that definition that needs unpacking, for instance what scientific method, and which scientific method is being referred to here, and by implication the methodology, epistemology and ontology assumed as the background for whichever scientific method cited here? This question is important to answer and clarify first because whatever your answer to which scientific method is here, determines the degree of the mistake regarded as being based on that type of scientific method, which could also further imply determination some of the nature of said 'collection of beliefs' or 'practices'(quotes of terms that need further defining or at least explaining of these premises in order to determine the degree of misperception, or mistaken regarding that such collection of beliefs/practices are based on scientific method). A few quick examples of pseudoscience: Gestalt therapy, R.E.B.T, or other alternative forms of therapy/counseling, Body language analysis, psychic methods and psychic phenomena, new age spiritual methods like witchcraft, psychic, mediums(communicating to ghosts/spirits/deceased loved ones and so on...), meditation, spiritual technics, Yoga for some time, occult methods like scrying on a crystal ball or black mirrors, soul traveling, astral projection, and many other sub fields within the supernatural/paranormal categories like Big Foot and other Cryptids, astrology, Chinese medicine and might as well Chinese anything to do with Chi or vital points, and many more historical methods and fields mainstream science considers outdated and 'woowoo'. IMO, based on many developmental factors like Spiral Dynamics stages of development(by Don Beck and Clare Graves) cognitive and moral development, personality types/traits(Myers Briggs personality types modal and the big five personality traits modal), 9 stages of ego development(by Jane Loevinger), Architypes(by Carl Jung), Integral Theory's other lines of development in personal life to societal domains(by Ken Wilbur), other ideological beliefs indoctrinated from cultural programming, family upbringing, and the information ecology we as consumers intake via news, radio, TV programs, online videos, shorts, social media feeds, and many information points that big companies manufacture consent from the masses and engineer conspicuous consumption for. Based on many of these factors I consider people who too quickly insult a person or a given field as 'pseudoscience' as immature minded and ignorant that science itself has hard and soft categories of science. For example, I don't consider body language analysis as a 'pseudoscience' but rather within the 'soft science' category which is similar to the humanities, psychology, sociology and sciences that focuses on qualitative research, approaches and methods/methodology/epistemology/ontology, and anyone slipping in the assumption that because it's not like hard sciences like engineering, technologies, chemistry, biology, mathematics, or any of those sciences that focuses on quantitative research, approaches and methods/methodology/epistemoloy/ontology, are basically misinforming the public when they label and critic a field as 'pseudoscience', just like this video here: Which IMO is a bit ignorant, immature and generalizes too much. Share your thoughts and feelings on times when scientists, or ironically 'pseudoscientists' like in YouTube, actually IMO dogmatic and deluded debunk skeptics with serious hubris problems,