aurum

Self-deception is such a super-truth. Layers, layers and more layers.

You're still looking at survival through an SD Green perspective.

What other lens would you propose?

I have shared some of it, but I'll be more specific. To whatever extent women prefer "alpha" or "beta" men, that is still a survival strategy. Hyper-particularization is a survival strategy. So is community, disconnection, connection, collaboration, cooperation, competition, loneliness, coldness, warmth, bonding, settling, not-settling, preferences, disliking survival, caring about social degeneration, monogamy, polyamory, physical appearance, and just about anything else you can think of that humans do. We're just talking about different strategies. And strategies are always extremely context-dependent. There really is no "one answer" for how to do survival, because your constraints, advantages, disadvantages and environment always different. Survival is highly, highly relative. Strategies are also unconscious because making them conscious ruins the "realness" of them. People are generally not at a level of ego development where they can handle the paradox of both having a survival strategy and recognizing it as a strategy. This is a long way of saying everything is maximizing survival. Every tree, every bacteria, every animal, every human.

That's right. In that sense, survival is pointless. But you still have to participate in it. Unless you want you and your loved ones to die? Embrace the paradox. Purpose is about doing something you find meaningful with your life. Usually in the form of contribution to the world. Geoengineering is a good purpose for humanity to pursue. It will challenge us in many ways to evolve. Potential is about what humanity could become. More developed, more powerful, more loving, more conscious, more wise. Imagine humanity as an intergalactic species. That's potential.

Survival, purpose and potential for humanity.

My relationships have been all over the map. The one constant seems to be that I find the right woman for learning whatever lesson I need at that moment. Which often only becomes clear in retrospect, after that relationship has closed. One of the highest ways of looking at relationships is as a developmental container. Not as something that is going to give you everything you think you want, but as something that expands who you are.

And what about the next crisis? Crises never end because survival never ends.

So have you given up on women, but now you're just more at peace with it? Like a voluntary celibacy.

The intelligence is GOD. And it doesn't just go "into nature", it's in humans. A breakthrough in clean affordable energy would be nice, but that's thinking way too small.

It's a legitimate question though. I don't sense you are open on this topic. Everything you outlined is your survival strategy.

Outside as in not a democrat? That's not going to happen. The most any outsider has a shot is AOC. But I doubt she will even get a nomination.

Who would you rather see if not Newsom?

You need goals and a vision that excites you. Find something that feels meaningful again.

We need a Newsom presidential run. Good to see he's getting some positive coverage out of this.

/end thread

That is generally a good idea, but it's not the highest pursuit.

I am the Earth You wrongly assume I haven't done such things.

You could make that argument about anything. Including your own perspective. Yes, I am subject to flaws, limited information and self-deception. But don't kid yourself, because so are you.

Yes, the more attached you are to things, the harder it is to let them go. Of course. I don't take it lightly, but I am open to the possibility. You are not. Which is why your vision is more limited.

Yes, I read it the other day.

I make no such guarantee.

It'll be made possible by people embracing geoengineering.

It's "wrong" in the sense that it mostly only motivates people away from negative outcomes. Defense vs offense. Leadership requires inspiration and purpose. Your thinking is so small.

Value is never equally distributed. But it's still distributed.