TheAlchemist

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    614

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TheAlchemist

  2. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    There exists a very narrow environmental state where humans can survive, and an even narrower state where human civilization in its current form with a global economy and supply chains can exist. We are deeply blind to how utterly reliant we are on nature and the Earths life-supporting systems to supply us with clean air, clean water, minerals, healthy soils, a stable climate and all the ecosystem "services". All these we take for granted.

    When the systems that enable us to live as a global species on this planet start shifting even slightly in a short period of time, we have no idea what sorts of feedback loops or unexpected changes we could trigger. We must remember that for billions of years in the Earths history it has been a totally uninhabitable place for a species like Homo Sapiens. Even modern agriculture became possible just about 10 000 - 15 000 years ago, due to suitable climate conditions.  

    But any kind of doomerism won't save us from ourselves, we need a hopeful vision and people who can inspire us to move into harmony and into long term, sustainable co-existence with the Earths life-supporting systems.

  3. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    9 hours ago, Migue Lonas said:

    Finland might be the only exception. Or am I being naive?

     

    They have done tests where they compared bottled water to tapwater in Finland and the tapwater was considerably cleaner with less chemicals and microbes.

    Most of the tap water comes from natural or semi-natural groundwater sources. I think it is about as good as tapwater can be. Also, many municipalities publish reports online on the levels of different chemicals detected in the tapwater weekly/monthly which you can check. But I think it's up to the same standard in most of the Nordics and also a few other countries..

  5. Posted

    10 hours ago, integral said:

    I agree with what you said but you took what i said out of context. I did not say well look your just irrational get over it. I pointed to santa claus to explain where her epistemology came from, the origin of her belief during the conformity years of her development. 

    I agree with your first comment, I think it just brought to mind how some folks view Christian beliefs, I didn't mean to misconstrue your views. 

  6. Posted

    There is this nice zen oriented place up in the mountains in southern India, people from all over the world are there. It costs about 10 bucks a night and it includes a room with private bathroom and the price also includes all meals (which are excellent). The schedule is also very relaxed, there is about 3 hours of scheduled meditation in the hall and just a few hours of light work in the morning like sweeping the terraces or cutting veggies for the meals. Outside of that you can spend your time meditating or reading or walking around in nature. It's quite a small place and I don't want to advertise it too much, so shoot me dm and I can send more info. 

  7. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    3 hours ago, Majed said:

    @Leo Gura exactly and even when people call themselves "atheists" the conditioning is still there, not realizing that they're taking a position towards something that is not relevant and defining their worldview as the opposite of that. 

    it's like you never define your beliefs as the opposite of animism, or greek mythology. why do it when it comes to christianity, or islam ? 

    I think the pendulum tends to swing far that way in many cases because a proper distancing from fundamentalism and magical thinking is necessary for most who have been raised and conditioned into it. Kind of like a teenager who rebels against his overprotective parents to create his own identity and sense of self. The essence is not that the person actually hates their parents, they just need to rebel for a bit to establish their own space and sense of self. Eventually most come around and come to respect their parents while being fully grown adults themselves. But yes, I think some can get stuck in the rebel phase, but ultimately the rebellion serves an important purpose in many cases and shouldn't be dismissed and might even be worth encouraging in some tactful way.  

  8. Posted

    3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    Materialism is even worse and more sneaky than Christianity. All these worldviews operate in the background, invisible to the mind.

    Do you think someone can go from being a fundamentalist Christian type straight to a post-materialist mystic? Or is the hyper rationalist scientific thinking mode a necessary stepping stone towards depth for most people who are coming from backgrounds of fundamentalism and/or magical thinking?

     

    I'm still wondering about that. For me it seems rationality and scientific thinking has been a necessary stepping stone and I have needed that as a tool to shed the fundamentalist Christianity out of me. But there are probably exceptions..

  9. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    Psychedelic states and psychosis can put you in a paranoid state of mind where you will draw connections that seem to make sense but are really just the mind grappling with reality and projecting fear, even utter terror into some finite symbol in order to maintain its idea of itself.

    I have a similiar background, being raised in evangelical environments. I once took LSD and watched a bit of Leos video on God Consciousness. I sensed that I was about to open a door that once opened could never be closed again. Right then the video started freezing up, getting very low quality and it just stopped, due to connection issues. It froze and I thought Leo looked like a total demon in that frame that froze and I thought he was deceiving me and was the devil himself. I felt quite terrified in that moment. I realized later that this was clearly my Christian conditioning coming up and through integrating it I shed the tendency to ascribe evil meanings to any forms or objects. They only have power to the extent that they are feared (or desired). 

    And I also stopped giving such authority to external figures or symbols. I wouldn't give even the figure of Leo such authority anymore. Essentially what you are doing when calling a form a demon or absolute evil is giving them a sort of metaphysical authority, saying to yourself that this form is controlling reality in some fundamental sense. And also reinforcing the idea that the nature of reality can be split into some absolute good vs. evil. Which both are strongly tied to evangelical Christian conditioning.

    These symbols and forms ultimately cannot touch what you are and ultimately they don't have power over you if you don't allow them to. It seems it is just the mind struggling with its deepest fears, it is never about the form or symbol itself, they are very much neutral. The mind just projects up all sorts of meanings onto those forms in an attempt to protect an idea it has of itself as some limited form. It does this most effectively through deep fear I believe..

     

     

    -----------

    Most people have no idea how deep the fundamentalist Christian conditioning penetrates into the mind and a persons whole being, they think its just like believing in Santa Claus and one day you just stop believing and become rational. But if you have been raised into it somce birth, your whole worldview is shaped by it and deep fears are installed in your mind to prevent you from even seriously questioning the dogma. I wouldn't call it an exagerration if someone feels that they have been truly brainwashed by the fundamentalist conditioning. It can take years or even decades to shed that conditioning, and its important to be patient and compassionate with yourself in that process. For some it is more painful than others. But it is absolutely worth the effort I believe.. 

     

    some online spaces I have found very helpful in shedding the conditioning;

    Reddit: r/exchristian and r/deconstruction

  14. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    I would usually avoid these types of disturbing movies because I have thought I can't handle all the fear and horror. I decided to watch this one anyways as it had some strange pull to it.

    I surprised myself with how well I was able to handle it, and I had a surprising realization. I realized that no movie is actually disturbing, what makes it "disturbing" is that I can't handle the reality of it, I can't handle the idea of it actually happening. So I resist it, and get disturbed. So the movie is just a reflection of reality, a reflection of what is, and I get disturbed when I can't accept that. So as you said above, "disturbing" movies can help you accept reality. Which reduces fear. (That being said, this is an extreme film and might be too much in some cases and probably shouldn't be watched by some. A little bit like a bad trip. But I think most adults with reasonably stable minds can handle seeing something like this.)

     

    Spoilers ahead:

    What stood out for me was when the woman towards the end, in utter despair and absolute suffering was reminded of advice she got about letting go of herself. She applied it and totally let go of herself and she merged wlth the Godhead, she went into total ecstasy through her total surrender. She was even able to let go of her hatred towards her perpetrators and she forgave them totally, despite the seeming impossibility of it. 

    In the end the Mademoiselle killed herself because she realized that the way to trancend, the way to God, was not through the suffering itself, but through total forgiveness, evn forgiving the greatest horrors. She realized that she represented the ultimate evil by trying to control life to satisfy her ego by creating these "martyrs". She realizes that her ego was what needed the martyrs, God didn't need martyrs. And she shot herself because she realized her mistake. 

    Shocking but powerful film. 

  15. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    China is securing lots of influence in key mineral and raw material sourcing countries around the world, especially in Africa. As the world system is slowly shifting away from an oil/fossil burning economy in favor of renewables, there will be and is already an explosion in demand for earth metals/minerals to build the needed infrastructure for solar panels, wind mills, batteries, electricity transportation etc. The US has the world oil trade gripped by the balls, but the mineral market not so much.. Interesting times ahead

  16. Posted

    3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    It's very simple:

    A woman and her children's survival depends enormously on good leadership from a man.

    What a woman is looking for is a good leader to lead her.

    A leadher ;)

    That is who she will be attracted to, get wet for, and fall in love with. The rest is monkey games.

    Not necessarily, humans just like other primates are quite quick to adapt their behavior into a changing environment. What is the optimal strategy to ensure the childrens survival largely depends on the environment, in relationship with which the genetically informed predisposition unfolds.

    For example there has been research on geographical differences in women's mate preference. In areas where there is a larger ongoing threat to survival and less affluence, women tend to prefer men as mates that show signs associated with higher testosterone, whereas in areas where there is a stronger social safety net and less danger to survival, women tend to prefer men who have lower testosterone and are more androgenous in a sense. It makes sense since why would a woman need a strong leader in a safer environment, a more equal relationship makes more sense where the man can also take a more active role in raising the child and the mother can also pursue higher needs in the maslow hierarchy. 

    In different environments vastly different strategies and preferences tend to make sense, but in general I think women do tend to prefer more leadership in a man than the other way around.

  17. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    He means it's not about your ego, it's not about your desires to get the world to be a certain way or to get the "outside" to match your preferences. That is outside the control of the limited sense of self and that is a reason for so much struggle. Life and the Earth and the whole infinite universe simply isn't about you and your preferences, so of course you struggle and complain when you try to get the whole magnificent universe to bend to your highly limited egoic will. 

    He also speaks about You in there, and how that is the most magnificent thing there is and the ground of all being, pure consciousness, love beyond comprehension. There is no end to the depths of spiritual realization. 

  18. Posted

    6 hours ago, FourCrossedWands said:

    I mean, in regular dream, there are so many illogical things happening that you realize you are inside a dream a lot of the times. Places changing their appearance, persons changing their faces, jumps in time, etc.

    Why is this reality dream so consistent that not a single illogical thing ever happens or single little detail ever changes? Every day, you wake up and your surroundings remain the same.

    A "regular dream" only seems inconsistent from the pov of waking consciousness. When you really look at this from the perspective of dreaming consciousness, everything seems consistent enough within the dream so that it maintains its perceived reality. 

    For 99% of people, probably something like 99% of dreamtime is spent believing that the dream is what it seems. The dream is entirely internally consistent. Even when very weird things happen in the dream, it usually doesn't cause an awakening into lucidity in the dream. It is just explained and rationalized away in the moment it happens in the dream. Just like in the movie Truman show. Dreaming totally lucidly is actually very very rare when you look at how much time is spent in nonlucid dreaming. Isn't it interesting that usually when we dream we totally believe we are in the "ground reality", and we usually don't even question it for a moment?

  19. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    7 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

    What model / brand do you like the most?

    Best one for me has been Feelmax, more specifically this one. The model is called "Ounas". It's just 3mm thick and is super breathable so they also don't get smelly much at all. But I'm sure there are other models that exist with similiar qualities, just haven't come across them.  ounasblackbkmed.jpg

  20. Posted · Edited by TheAlchemist

    They are really good, activates all the small muscles in your feet and lets your toes spread spread like with a proper ape. I used to have very flat feet and walking sucked, I used some super thin barefoot shoes for a few years and now walking is much more comfortable and my calf muscles and the arch of my foot have strengthened. My balance also improved and I haven't had a twisted ankle despite walking in forests quite a lot. A twisted ankle was quite a common thing for me when using normal shoes. I also love how I can feel all the contours and bumps in the roads and all the roots and rocks under my feet in the forest, makes me feel good. Stepping on some roots or rocks can feel like a kind of massage for the foot.

    But don't buy all the marketing hype, all these companies will overpromote the positives but not mention the possible negatives. You really can't jump into using them for long walks or runs after a lifetime of normal shoes, that's a recipe for injury. Gotta adjust slowly and adapt your walking style bit by bit. Patience. 

    Also if they are not thin enough I think they can do more harm, I have a pair of Vivos, which is much thicker than another barefoot shoe I have and the Vivos can have me still taking long steps and putting lots of pressure on the heel, which is not possible with the thinner ones, as it would be painful to walk without properly spreading the impact all through the foot.

    Also some of them look super weird with all the toe holes and stuff, but there are more and more decent looking options coming to the market. 

  21. Posted

    34 minutes ago, Jodistrict said:

    He's the only politician talking about the real issue - the kleptocracy - rather than this fake culture wars left/right nonsense that diverts attention away from the bad actions of the ruling class.   If Kennedy catches fire there will be no stopping him.  He transcends the fake paradigm and will attract Trump voters as well as traditional democrats and even progressives.

    I would say Marianne Williamson is very similiar in that regard, minus the anti-vaxxery. 

  24. Posted

    Yeeah I don't buy this thing about it all being an act. It's very obvious when he is acting a mental breakdown or pretending to be crying in his videos vs. when he actually had that extended one. For some reason I was following his antics a lot when he had that breakdown and it was very clear when he was actually losing his mind vs. when he was acting to try and recontextualize the whole situation as him just acting. 

    His situation was a very interesting example of what a mental breakdown can look like, a rare chance to see that kind of stuff. Seems he is more mentally stable now.