aurum

No amount of good intentions makes up for ignorance.

@eTorro It depends on how bad your financial situation is. If you make good money but your family is still hounding you, that's wrong. But if you can't afford the things you need, then you're wrong and are likely using spirituality as a bypass. Spirituality is not an excuse to opt out of money, because money is just the way humans survive. Unless you're not going to survive, you need money and will be a burden on others if you don't have it. Someone will need to finance your spiritual bypassing. Likely your family. Not to mention that you shouldn't even aim just to be a "lack" of a burden. You should actively aim to be a source of value for others in your life, such that they can lean on you.

Watching Leo’s IG reels on repeat to train my algorithm. Train the algorithm, or the algorithm trains you.

I'm talking about a serious stroke that leaves you permanently impaired. Obviously many strokes can be recovered from.

It's the exact opposite. You will 100% lose your awakened mind state if you get dementia / stroke, no matter who you are. Nothing about Ramana or any other spiritual teacher is so special that it would prevent that.

You could be dating someone who is excessively neurotic. But also, these sort of responses from women are often like warning bells. She doesn't feel safe / secure / containment in the relationship. She's not in her feminine. The issue is almost never just about the specific issue itself. It's about your general orientation. Are you handling survival effectively? Are you genuinely taking responsibility, or are you avoiding? Ignore these warning bells at your own peril.

Yes, but it’s more than that as well. You have to have the natural potential / talent. The natural potential is the lottery part. Practically, you don’t have control over of this. But that does not mean success is random.

Survivorship bias does not eliminate that there are real factors that determine success. Like skill. Skill trumps everything. If you are skilled and committed enough at something, you will eventually be successful.

I watched the video you linked. That was more than enough.

Sounds like typical new age, influencer BS.

If there were only relative truths, that would be an absolute.

This would not be good at all. Some degree of wealth inequality is important in a society.

Bro that cannot work in a real relationship. Your lifestyles are going to clash, it's inevitable. The question is how benign it is and whether it should be considered a dealbreaker. Assuming a decent partner, most lifestyle quirks people have are pretty benign and can be easily compromised on. The idea that you will never have to compromise in a relationship is absurd. Decide what you want. Do you want relationship and compromise, or zero compromise and isolation?

Okay, then it sounds like your standard is you don't like when people have particular ways they want things. Is that reasonable?

Marathons are definitely problematic. I see so many people destroying their bodies over these.

It's a tradeoff. If you're literally not willing to budge at all, then of course you cannot be in a relationship. It's just a question of what do you actually want. Also, consider if your standards are actually legitmate or just self-imposed absurdities. I could make a standard that no one I live with is allowed to breathe within five feet of me, and this would immediately ensure I just cut out 99.99% of people.

Yes, it's an ideological bind.

Liberals are incapable of properly understanding the manosphere, no matter how well intentioned they might be.

It's not safe to assume she has had some deep, personal transformation. Politicians flip all the time. That's just how power games work.

Anti-psychotics, yes. My understanding though is that current anti-psychotics are pretty limited. They genuinely help with the most obvious symptoms, but struggle in other areas. It seems analogous to taking an SSRI for depression.

I find the question of how to treat schizophrenic patients fascinating. If you're a psychiatrist, you cannot just tell your patient to hallucinate a stronger boundary. True or untrue, this is unlikely to be useful advice for them. So the question is, how would you translate the metaphysical truth (porosity of mind) into some kind of tangible protocol or medicine? If that protocol already existed and was part of standard of care, then I would expect a lot less people who are suffering from schizophrenia. Which makes me think that protocol does not exist. Or, perhaps such a protocol cannot be sufficiently scaled / standardized at all.

Life is not a fantasy where you can solve all your problems. The vast majority of your problems you can do nothing about. Life is in control, not you.

The documentaries on low development areas are great. But good lord, some of these journalists come off as so naive. It's like they don't comprehend that everyone is just doing whatever to survive. "Why don't the cops stop the sex tourists???" Bruh

True solipsism

Sure, but still most people will not understand that.