aurum

Looking forward to it.

What a mess. This whole conflict has been a perfect example of lose-lose dynamics unfolding.

I would agree, which is why I did not list examples or instances. I think the best way to "go meta" and describe the structure of Green would be to look at what it all has in common. What is the origin of all those Green examples and content? To that, I would say it's because the structure of the stage Green psyche has become more Relativistic. From Relativism, we can derive egalitarianism, the desire for consensus, SJWs, empathy, acceptance, pluralism, kindness, anti-authoritarianism, etc. But you can't really do the derivation the other way around. That's why I consider it "higher" than the other features.

It's true that even Hitler's conservatism is relative. At the same time, we are attempting to make distinctions here for practical purposes. We will have to be satisfied with some degree of relative truth or say nothing at all.

To be fair to him, I understood he was asking for structure and not content. I explained it in my follow up post. The structure of Green is Relativism, since all Green content can be derived from that.

You don't need to include mysticism in every conversation. Doing so in this context adds nothing.

The structure of SD Green is Relativism. That is the core feature that defines it at the highest level. All the content can be derived from that.

That sounds like a spiritual technicality to me. And also not relevant to our discussion.

Not Nazi propaganda. Do not confuse SD Green post-modernism / deconstruction. If Hitler was truly post-modern in his approach, he would have had to deconstruct and relativize his entire Nazi ideology, which of course is the exact opposite of what he did. His ideological structure was Absolutist / Blue, mixed with devilry.

Hitler was neither SD Green in content OR structure. Just because you can deconstruct narratives and blur lines does not make you Green. This is an absurd distortion of the model.

No. Deception only gets you so far. If you want to go with a "anything is possible" technicality, fine. But it's rather meaningless then. It should be obvious we are talking about likely outcomes, not what fantasy might be theoretically possible.

Actual insane people do not have that much power. Hitler tapped into deep resentment and bitterness that already existed among the German people, which is partially why he was able to do what he did. This is because the leader and the people being led are ONE SYSTEM, where their existence depends on each other. Development cuts BOTH ways. A stage Red / Blue society cannot behave like a Orange / Green society because it is not developed enough. But also, an Orange / Green society cannot behave like a Red / Blue one. At a certain point the behavior simply becomes untenable from BOTH directions. That being said, of course it is theoretically possible for a disaster to strike and for a regression in the Spiral. But it is unlikely. There are systemic forces that keep these things in check going both ways.

We'll get there in time.

Here is an article on this: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/beckley-psytech-announces-positive-initial-110000368.html Definitely seems to be some promising results so far, especially given the remission scores. We will need larger sample sizes in future but this could help inspire future funding.

@DocWatts You are writing some high quality content. I'll add that the egoic mind will weaponize relativism for its own agenda. They can exploit your open-mindedness of different perspectives to get away with their anti-social or otherwise damaging behavior. Who is to say if I really cheated on my girlfriend? That's just like, your opinion, man. So it isn't just that relativism makes it hard for us to decide what is true or not. It's that self-bias will actively corrupt it. Of course the egoic mind can weaponize any epistemology, so this is not an inherent flaw to relativism per say.

You are more than welcome to try. I agree that it's relevant for practical purposes. But the thing about God-Realization is that it transcends many of these practical concerns.

I see. So you want to know if other people are God-Realized and how you can verify that they've achieved certain realizations. In that case, the answer is that you mostly can't verify anyone's claims of God-Realization. But what you can do is to become God-Realized yourself so that it becomes more obvious when people don't know what they're talking about. You can also develop keener discernment around self-deception in general, so that you can better spot fraudsters. Also, I've found that deeper God-Realization leads to you caring much less about feeling the need to verify other people's awakenings in general. It's useful for practical purposes so you don't get duped by false teachers, but otherwise it doesn't really matter.

You aren't suppose to believe Leo or anyone else here. That's the whole point. Discover God for yourself. Practically speaking, there are many tools and practices that have been discussed at length for you to accomplish this. You will either do them and figure it out or not. Either way, your belief about it does not really matter as long as you are suffuciently open-minded to make a genuine effort.

@soos_mite_ah Turquoise to me always felt really badly defined in the SD model. Once you hit Green / Yellow, I find it's no longer that useful to keep thinking of your growth in terms of the Spiral. If by Turquoise you basically just mean doing hardcore spiritual work, then I'd say that's not something to force. You might just be in a phase where you want to focus on more basic human things. Or maybe you don't even want the highest levels of spiritual realization in this life time at all.

That’s even worse. Really think this through dude.

@Burntouted Step 1: Stop consuming manosphere content that is filling your head with this garbage Step 2: Realize that healthy relationships are indeed possible and that there are great women out there Step 3: Make a commitment to growing yourself as a man and to take responsibility for your end of said relationships Step 4: Go meet women in real life Step 5: Forget that you ever even worried about this kind of stuff

Of course. What I said implies a basic foundation of self-respect as well. If someone reading this feels like they don't have that that basic foundation, then you should make it a top priority to steadily move in that direction. At the same time, be aware that "I don't want to come across as too needy" can also turn into its own excuse / trap. You end up depriving yourself of expressing love, and by extension, receiving it. No healthy relationships can be formed this way. At some point you have to be willing to transcend / include that. Yes that's true. I would argue that I'm not suggesting a "fake it till you make it" approach. I'm talking about genuinely making an effort to shift your focus based on conscious intention. Yes, this will feel awkward and maybe "inauthentic" for a while. That's growth.

It's a good first step. One of the things misogynistic thinking does is change your selective focus so that you only see the negatives about women. So something like this where you are deliberately attempting to find the positive can help break that habit of negative selective focus. You'll also start to see that people don't treat you like a simp simply because you *gasp* said positive things about women. Actually you will likely find a lot of the opposite. Women will treat you with more respect and appreciation because fundamentally you respect and appreciate women. They will reflect back the energy you put out, just like a mirror.

A fantastic example of Green (David Pakman) doing a takedown of Blue religiosity. Key Memes: Secularism, Moral / Ethical Relativism, Scientific Progress, Rationality You could argue this is Tier 2 thinking from Joe Rogan, but I'm not so sure. For me, it lacks the true Spiral Wizardly of a solidly Tier 2 take. But he does correctly identify some of the issues with Green / Orange rationalism. Regardless, Pakman's take is essentially textbook Rational Green / Orange. He describes how secularism can work, religion is quaint and people can generate their own moral compass in life.

I see your point. He is straw-manning both sides and making them seem ridiculous, then proposing what he sees as a more reasonable, middle of the road perspective. This could lead to false equivalencies between both sides, rather than seeing how one could be more correct than the other. That’s a valid insight. At the same time, to always take the side of progressives or conservatives is also incorrect. We need to be able to see how both sides may be getting it wrong, while simultaneously holding the bigger picture of how modern progressives tend to be more evolved than conservatives. This is not some kind of false centrism, this is deeply necessary for intelligent Tier 2 politics. I am also not speaking about just moral relativism, although of course that is part of it. I am speaking about the operating system of the Green psyche and its tendency to relativize everything. Spiral Dynamics speaks on emotional maturity in the sense that it models ego development, which includes emotional maturity to a degree. People lower down the Spiral often act less emotionally mature than those higher up the Spiral, although not always. Belief systems often reflect someone’s emotional maturity. Also, Lex being able to talk to all sides of the political spectrum does not necessitate solidly Yellow development. One of the hallmarks of Green is Pluralism and seeking new perspectives. Lex may have some Yellow, but I’m not sure he is solidly there. I could be wrong. I have not done a thorough investigation of his work so I don’t have a strong opinion on this. I am just going off the few videos I have seen of him.