possibilities

I found this interesting: July 18, 2019 - Title: Scientists stimulate neurons to induce particular perceptions in mice's minds https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/07/190718145358.htm

“To simply be” - your answer haha no way look at the way your body is built man ? those limbs and stuff are for something you gotta read the obvious signs It’s kicking ass, that’s our only purpose ”to simply be” is the comfy part of your brain saying ‘yeah let’s just chill’, well you take our technological advantages for granted think of our ancestors, they had to kick some major ass to come from the Stone Age to this point They’ve given us the opportunity to introspect. now we have to kick ass at raising our consciousness as far as possible to stand on their shoulders and honour their sacrifices the work is far from complete

Kicking ass is your only purpose. i doubt you’d like my long answer as it’s a really long kickass answer.

Thanks everyone

For me it happens pretty intuitively through my imagination. So maybe start training it. The more of the world you’ve perceived the more of the world you have to play with in your personal experience of awe. But even in just observing yourself you still have so much wonder to realise, take your hand for example, you can zoom in to incredible degrees and discover worlds beyond worlds you never previously saw or recognised, you can do the same for nearly any aspect of experience in your awareness. This is the power of the imagination.

Just 2 cents: These are all just consciousness patterns sir, prior conditioning. But with repeated honest caring self examination, the train tracks will inevitably switch to a more developed rhythm. It is all rhythm, these things pop up because of a rhythm, so in this investigation consciousness learns to more and more balance it’s loops. Your perception of existence is like a song, your internal dialogue is it’s melody.

@Emeline please see my comment just above so that you can take note of my refutation, thank you.

@Annoynymous it would just be based on the ratio between self perceived hardship and triumph (objective and subjective). You have many people that are quite well off for example that’ll never even make it to stage orange simply because of the inequality not with respect to environmental opportunities but with respect to the inequality as it pertains to this ratio. There are for example many extremely talented people that have originated from third world countries that because of this have been able to more effectively cope with their conditions and achieve greater ego development (perhaps of course more the exception than the norm but the rule still applies). I’m not an advocate of any model of anything though, just speaking theoretically, as well as practically what seems better than alternatives.

Another topic is films, some people like watching films on a screen I like watching films in my imagination. Far more stimulating, far more enjoyable, far more beneficial. So I can go an hour plus just watching and learning from the movie playing out in my head. Several hours in fact. i just got done playing table tennis with T-Rex on a sun ☀️ beam located adjacent to an avalanche in a protective glass cube. You wouldn’t believe some of the stuff that goes on in my head, and your head with training if you need any! I describe this is my previous comment in a psychedelic thread discoverable in my comment history.

If anyone wants to know how to create a psychedelic experience without psychedelics just me if you want more info. I’ve trained myself to become more conscious of subconscious experiences in my brain, now I’ve reached a point where my brain spontaneously creates imagery and general experiences that reflect what could be described as “psychedelic artwork”. To me it’s a shame that people believe that such states are reserved to those who have taken psychedelics, there’s so much more we can do with training and learning more about ourselves. All I did for my own training was to close my eyes, describe any patterns that I saw in my spontaneous imagination and then that was it. Overtime the experiences become more and more “psychedelic” in the way described above in this comment. I’ve never taken psychedelics but plan to towards the end of the year.

Theoretically speaking, as I’m not a believer in belief and think it’s detrimental to the psyche, it’s development and flexibility between contrasting viewpoints: Death. Nothing ever really truly dies, it is just transformed. The same with birth. “I” was never really born, nor am I living, I am merely an actor in the play of universal experience. It is universal experience that is living here, going through constant transformations that we see as life and death.

IQ in terms of what it attempts to measure is not a skill. Fluid intelligence can be trained (though this doesn’t make it a skill just like muscle strength isn’t a skill even though you can train for increases here) based on my estimations but it’s not at all widely known how to do so effectively and your mentions are not at all near the answer although they’re still definitely good options for stimulation. Probably less than far less than 1% of the population know how to do it so you can be sure that the answer isn’t likely going to be revealed in this thread, it’s certainly never been publicly advertised so I’d avoid false flags here. This will be my last comment in this thread, we have a range of people commenting who’s development is quite varied. The standards for discussion are a little higher for me but that’s okay I get it that some are at different stages. All the best.

What point are you trying to make exactly @Nemo28 given this has already been discussed?

@Nemo28 please see commenting history I’ve already addressed this point. @Truthority I’ve already discussed IQ in this thread, see commenting history if you’d like to take things further. Ideally I hope for discussion to be progressive, like building off what other people have already said, as opposed to regressive, which is more likely the case if the past isn’t taken into consideration. I’ve pointed out that both sides are narrow minded and that a synthesis would be a more appropriate measure. If people can’t be logical and just try and progress discussion this undoubtedly proves the point about the utility of general cognitive ability/IQ, which as already noted, is just half the problem.

@Joseph Maynor I see Leo and many others speak about spiral and other stuff as if it’s beyond that. Including yourself. It’s nothing personal, but regardless as to how right one theory seems to be like “I have a hand”, in the end it needs to be decisively differentiated between what is real, of which is always a work in progress. Theory describes our attempt at describing what is there but theory is never what is truly there, we must work to improve that gap, not pretend that we’ve filled it. Another simple example involves what appears to me as a senseless, ironically so, debate pertaining to IQ, obviously it’s a synthesis of characteristics that are important and any theory that is too narrow minded in one direction is going to be pinning the tail on the donkey merely relative to their own biases here.

With respect to value differentiation you’re probably right, externally however it’s valuation is consistently important throughout, the difference is in the experience of other qualities as one would move up this theoretical spiral where ideas like empathy and wisdom which broaden the scope of one’s faculties and in doing so, crowd notions one may have formerly had. The diminishment then is merely in cognitive awareness not in utility. This is all theory though.

@GenuinePerspectiveXC think of an advanced AI with a lust for power, it’s likely going to be highly uncooperative relative to our objects as a race if it’s intelligence outcompetes it’s empathy for not only us but future generations. Fluid intelligence or general cognitive ability is just one important ingredient in the pie. I’d you wish to have a serious discussion on the topic please do so otherwise I’d appreciate it if people stopped beating a dead horse here because they’re bored with their life or whatever. I’d much rather try to get the most I can out if the interaction and I’m sure the best of others do as well as opposed to merely playing a wasteful game of tit for tat.

To me the highest level of consciousness would be acting in a way that supported those hundreds of years into the future and beyond, at least that is one behavioural attitude I think would be correlated. This is why at the highest levels of consciousness or just with every increase, you’re going to see a different kind of morality play out that you’re not necessarily going to be comfortable with given you may have very different experiences and reference frames you’ve developed from those experiences. As for the lottery, we’ll, our future is a bit like that at the moment, which is why I’m an advocate for consciousness expansion as much as possible, from fluid intelligence to empathy to spirituality to wisdom and so on. Think of future generations, those living in other solar systems potentially, what they may have wanted if we were to survive. By raising our consciousness we reduce their future problems.

Many people misinterpret these kinds of “lessons”. The universe as far as I’m aware has no morality to it, at least with respect to how we normally conceptualise it, I mean if it did we’d likely have a completely different world. We were setup from the start to have the population and general global issues we have based on our weaknesses, we haven’t addressed those weaknesses that were built into our evolution, so in a way that is our karma (we allowed the power hungry to rule and the stupid to breed, simply said, so these are the consequences we see today several hundred years later) while at the same time it was inevitable given our level of consciousness (inclusive of but not limited to fluid intelligence) achieved overall to date.

@MasterNigel Nope. It’s purely dependent on upbringing. Upbringing is basically one side of the competition equation with respect to compatibility and survivability weighed against external forces, external forces describe the other half. So in as much as those forces outcompete the upbringing of the person, they will at least do something analogous to “retreating home”. This scenario is no different to any competitive interaction, at least when played intelligently. A gazelle will try to retreat from the positive movements from a lion because it is physically inferior to the lion and because it’s intelligence and corresponding lessons are not greater than or equal to the level required to defeat the lion. The same can be said for football games between two teams, boxing matches, debates between two presidential candidates and so on. It is all about the balance between internal and external forces with respect to the environments larger competitive outcomes. You’re a part of a competitive game that very few have the balls to be honest when it comes to properly talking about it, let alone have good comprehension of it. Good luck.

A prediction: the higher the consciousness the more they will be less inclined to watch video (because there will be less need for that emotional feedback I noted before). It’s simply too slow and doesn’t shed light on the necessary scope required to generate a cohesive understanding with increasingly less time. Video is thus a pastime, not a serious undertaking.

Yeah run towards the insecurity, learn about it, study it. That’s what tends to work best for the body-mind based on what my body-mind has experienced.

@Joseph Maynor I haven’t participated to that degree as yet, however as it pertains to the claim I have no doubt, to me it isn’t politics specific given it runs parallel to many other topics that people could distract themselves on, from the existence of God to who’s football team is superior. However on the subject itself I would say that it’s extremely important to engage with the subject with the full use of one’s intelligence so that one’s ego can develop further from the experience. Given the relationship between politics and systems thinking, morality, subjective preferences, ideology and other I’d say it’s actually an extremely good topic for people to develop themselves further on. Most do this poorly however so if I have any advice it would be to observe people’s vices here and try not to repeat them.

Also to add to my other comment @Leo Gura I’ve been doing some reading just now and it seems the ego development theory is highly biased towards IQ as well, something which if ignored is to one’s detriment in developing an understanding of the theory and how to progress through those theorised stages. Theory of which implies a society is present and thus there is this ongoing relationship between self and others, and this narrative describes the balance and growth of the ego. I predict this model (Loevinger) is at least partially flawed, albeit, still very useful. This is because it is biased towards the other in the definition of ego development when to me it is relative to the individual, given that, awareness of one’s personal state is the beginning of its transmutation, like ego development, that awareness of “other” is ancillary to this process.

@Leo Gura firstly you misinterpreted my comment, probably because you seem right up in this IQ thing at the moment, notice how I used intelligence as it relates to general cognitive ability, thus it doesn’t mean that intelligence and general cognitive ability are isomorphic, rather, that in that comment I was describing the specific kind of intelligence I was referring to. Secondly, all of these ideas are fine and reasonable, however for any of them to exist they must (unless you or someone else can prove otherwise) coexist with general cognitive ability in as much as saying that to even utter a word, you must have the level of cognitive ability equivalent to the ability to even utter that word, to understand that word is one step further of cognitive ability. To be able to come up with further words that relate to that word, even more cognitive ability, to go so far as saying that we require “wisdom, ego development, moral development and so on” is several standard deviations more cognitive ability required for not only those relationships to make sense but for those relationships to make sense in light of “what the world needs” which is a projection relative to your biology, biology of which is inclusive of all those words. Your state of consciousness, ego development and so on have absolutely zero to do with your capacity to filter perception appropriately in those contexts until the context of understanding has been properly differentiated. If I define a word to you, either you will understand that definition or you will not, this is based on your cognitive ability not your moral or ego development, these things come after as it concerns your general subjective interpretations of those words outside the scope of mere understanding. It seems you underestimate the utility of IQ whilst at the same time you’ve made the correct deduction in my opinion in your estimates that stereotypical “stage orange” over emphasises it’s utility.