Eph75

@integral Feel free to point out what part of my views you're referring to, and how - it's long video, will add to watch later.

@DrewNows please elaborate What makes things more complicated is that green and orange could be perceived as being in parallel as many green people seemingly have bypassed orange's drive to going to town with money, power, careers and indulgence in materialism. I think that this is why orange refuses to accept that "hippie-green" is the progression, as that implies they are "better than us" and conversely, green refuses to accept that they need certain traits from orange, and recognizing that they may be missing or rejecting such. Green doesn't have to be balanced, only is if it's well integrated. Also, if you are a child of a late orange or early green society, you could adopt the value system of the green but still greatly lacking the traits from previous stage/stages that is impairing your meaning making and limiting you, rendering you unbalanced. What we perceive as "green" value systems can become ideologies and dogmatically, blindly adopted while growing up, from parents or other influences. Green can and will have orange shadows. Yellow can and will have orange and green shadows. An individual is likely to span at least two or three stages, having it's developmental center of gravity in one stage, where ones sense making predominately resides under "normal" circumstances.

Green and orange are pitted against each other due to both thinking that they're better than the other. That's only true when seen from within the paradigm of the first tier. The drive and action-ability brought by stage orange is what ultimately will drive green into yellow. As long as the orange drive is seen as an unhealthy manifestation and the orange traits being rejected/demonized leaning on a reasoning that materialism is bad, transcendence won't happen as there is a strong orange shadow hanging about, and you will see unhealthy green behaviors -- which coincidentally is what we're seeing a lot of right now, which is triggering orange stage individuals rather herding them into transition to green. That herding is a trait brought about with stage yellow sense making, so later stage green will be needed before that can happen, probably combined with orange predominately being later stage orange opening up for the change to come. Question is, who these "we" are, and depending on which group "we" belong to "we" see this differently and from green or orange perspective, there is separation. From yellow perspective they are not separable and the illusion of separation is what prevents further growth, or rather prolongs the growth cycle. In that sense, the clash between green and orange is likely to be [and already is] an epic battle, ultimately resulting in a what could be perceived as a quantum leap in developmental shift. It will be a long time til that happens though, and, things will get worse before they get better.

Spiral stages includes/builds upon the positive traits of previous stages and transcends each previous stage's limiting traits, so, each stage in it's ultimate healthy form is not limited by shadow elements from the stages that preceded it. With second tier, the way of sense making makes it readily apparent that the stages exists, they aren't pure conceptual, and that no stage is bad and hence there is no demonizing other stages anymore, as there is in the first tier. This is partly due to the knowledge of not knowing, the removal of the illusion of being "at the top", "having the ultimate truth" and "better than the others". What you're calling pink here is how SD works and not a stage in itself, and particularly what second tier brings to the SD game.

The algorithms have no agenda, they are built with AI with the only goal to maximize ad revenue. The documentary was more centered on Facebook than Google though. The AI isn't biased towards any political or otherwise agenda and will play on you getting hooked by feeding you with the information you are most likely to identify with based on lots of stuff. If you get information that is confirming or strengthening your world view, you come back for more. Conversely, if you the information is not resonating with you, you don't come back and those ad revenues diminishes. Are you implying that there is a racial element that connects happy women and white women? Would you get non-white women if you googled angry women? Or just the same and based on ethnicity, location, interests, and other information you end up getting white women. We're prone to confirmation bias, looking for the answers we want and a white woman search result gets you there, if that's the connection you are looking for. Anywho, I do recommend the documentary, it's interesting and makes you think more about the adverse effects of social media, increased understanding for these large seemingly free platforms actually having a price (selling you).. and thatyou're likely never to get the answers or confirmations you are looking for.

Watch the social dilemma on Netflix as implied by @datamonster - it about this and even mentions google searches producing different results for different people.

Lower consciousness entertainment is feeding into the autonomous being probably or possibly without being aware of how and why it entertains you. Higher consciousness entertainment moves away from the autonomous consumption of content to enjoy things from other perspectives, structures, interactions, implications and more. What the entertainment itself is matter less, the lower conscious individual can be entertained per his/her needs and the higher conscious individual can be entertained by other aspects, while both consuming "the same". Of course some forms of entertainment will become too crude to have entertaining value therein and the forms of entertainment is likely to shift along-side developmental growth. There is certainly a value in observating such crude entertainment and how it engages lower consciousness individuals and, if you like, you can call that higher consciousness entertainment if you will. It's just a matter of perspective. The "what" is then litterally left to being whatever, and the "why" and even more interestingly the "how" becomes key.

Appreciate your very kind words

Glad to being helpful Sort yourself out first, it's not egotistical, it's a must. On this path, once we've sorted ourselves and our own basic need deficiencies, we're more than likely ending up becoming helpful to others. There's a time for everything, no need to rush.

It's a bit silly question, but the trick of it is that people usually don't include themselves as being important in ones own life. Fell for it myself back in the day and it got me to reflect. We are the most important person to ourselves. We need to help ourselves before we can help others. We need to look at our needsbefore looking to others needs. Yet some of us end up putting other peoples needs before our own, downplaying ours. Having a sense of responsibily for others needs before our own. Ultimately we're not responsible for anyone else but ourselves, and we should not allow such thoughts to downplay our own value, nor comparing ourselves against others.

@SamC It sounds like you have some healthy reasoning going on with focus on taking action. We spend a lot of time getting ourselves in strange places, it takes time to reverse the process by taking actions in the right direction and consistently so. An interesting and somewhat funny question is this - who would you say are the top 3 most important people in your life?

Usually to get your self-talk in check, self-critique, negative commenting and judgement yourself. Do you do this a lot? Also looking at authentic you are. Do you not do what you want in order to please others? Are you a people pleaser? To you spend a lot of time worrying about what others would think of you?

A common misunderstanding is that letting go (detaching) from something means not having that thing in your experience. Just like with materialism, detaching from the desire of materialistic things doesn't mean that you cannot have things. As does this apply to detaching from the idea of what a relationship is and how it should be. After you have detached [from your emotionally attached ideas], your interplay with such things will be different. IF you would still choose to incorporate such things in your life, you will find yourself being freed from misconceptions and emotional triggers. You can focus on being, rather than your ideas owning and controlling what you do and how they make you feel. In some cases it can mean that you stop doing altogether. In other cases you will still do for the simple reason of it being possible, or it being convenient and not bringing toxicity with it. There is no idea of right, or wrong anymore. What we do is no longer controlled by own ideas created by expectations from self, others, society and etc. There just "is". Detachment isn't a concept, it is a realization. When conceptualized, it can itself become an idea, a need, a new attachment, that we need to let go of. Awakening makes all of this ridiculesly clear, and so very simple. Everything is still the same, yet everything is completely different. Unfortunately, awakening is not a choice. And it is only afterwards you see that it was by your own resistence to "be", that the problems percieved were created by yourself. Just as you say, detachment and repression are not the same. Healthy [and freeing] vs. unhealthy. Biological drive exists but how we relate to that drive is in us. As trancending is not denying, trancending and enjoying is a combination; trancending the idea of needing and enjoying the possibility to do - by being with it - without adding the complications that comes along with needs and dealing with unmet needs, expectations, judgement, resentment etc. Questions for contemplation still remains; how do you move from conceptualizing, to actual detachment? And when do you know when that has happened? There is no way of not knowing once this has occurred. It is as if you would ask yourself "how do I walk", the question becomes somewhat absurd once the ability to walk is effortlessly available, the need to know, or knowing if you're doing it "right or wrong" is no longer there. But until then we might just be fooling ourselves into "knowing" by strong conceptualization and conformation to that concept. Another thing to contemplate is, if you have detached from the emotional attachment to an idea of something being a certain way, will/can you be disappointed once that has happend? E.g. if you become fully detached from the idea of needing relationships and you completely loose interest in being with any man, would there be anything there that you can miss and that can make you "not happy"? If you don't like apples, you don't need apples and the non-existence of apples has no what-so-ever effect on you. If you're hungry, you can still eat the apple in front of you and likely enjoy it as it makes you not hungry. You've detached from it [or apple] being a need, and it can still serve you in ways. There is not any knowing what will happen in advance. Thinking about what might happen, is exercising our fear of change and how that change might be different from our expectations, the very same expectations that built our attachments in the first place. Letting go simply implies detaching the "tether" that bounds us to something else.

If you are serious about the monk thing, you could listen to Björn Natthiko Lindeblad who went to Thailand to be a Bhuddist monk. He has lectures and there are also YouTube interviews with him, for example the brilliant Navid Modiri on the "Hur kan vi" ("How can we") YouTube channel is a friend if his and they have a great episode together. If not for any other reason than him being an interesting person to listen to (Navid as well). It sounds like you are looking for escape from suffering rather than letting go of suffering through acceptance. We can only run for so long, what we are running from will catch up sooner or later.

Motivation for this journey needs to be intrinsic. Exactly what that motivation is, is individual. As said already, a powerful motivator is suffering, when the pain of not changing becomes too great and forces us into change. Finding your life purpose can help with motivation, a vision of what you want out of your life and a direction towards which you can start movement, step-by-step. Find your "why" and the rest will follow.

Not necessarily so. Impact feedback e.g. might come handy. Based on a feedback format that is such as "when you say/do.... the impact it has on me is.... and I'd prefer....". It can't come from agression though, or from passive-aggressiveness. It has to be authentic and constructive. It does work. I've had it work wonders with people that have not been responding to anything else. Of course there's no guarentee it works 100% of the times and you might have to be consitstent in exercising this in specific situations with sepecific people and over time. Or simplify it it to "when you... it makes me feel...".

Never mind above, forum quote glitch. The idea of not controlling things, going with the flow is one of those things that actually does change what is going to manifest in your life. If we let go of the magical side of LoA, there is no way to not practice it, and at all times. The awareness of how we exercise our mind and what/how we think about things actually changes the path we're waliking, and not only how we walk, but with whom we walk with. Of course that means that it attracted a certain someone to this discussion. The reasons why are vastly different for those it attracted. It can be to exercise ones dogma. It can be to help others see something that you yourself have seen, out of love or it could be for the simple reason of deliberatedly exercise ones ability to interact and navigate around topics where conflict is apparent. It can be to work on ones triggers. Or, it just sucked you in, by creating negative thought and something's got to burn. See how the way we want our existence thought to manifest fully determine what path we're on, consciously or unconsciously so, it is always at play. Key is becoming aware of it.

This post can be read from more than one positions, two being: A) they are just trying to find fault in everything, even where fault is not present, it is out of your hands, you are the victim under circumstances. B) your ego is preventing you from seeing what you have done/do wrong, the seductive lies of the ego paints a story where you have no part what-so-ever in what is playing out, devoiding you of any responsibility and preventing you to face the growth you need, assuming absolute personal responsibility for what is manifested in your experience. We're always prone to select A unless our eyes are open. The way forward is always B. How can we accept this, that is the question.

Was it their purpose or their lifeboat, a way to express themselves acting as a valve to release the pressure, a coping skill if you will? Being driven doesn't have to come from a pink and fluffy place. Often the case is the opposite, a lot of creative expression stems from darkness.

If a calling is deep and intention is such a great goal as end suffering of all men, the timeline is also great but progress works incrementally and the positive vibrations created will in turn attract others to that same cause and it will accelerate accordingly over time. No guarentee it will change the world in your lifetime. Simpler goals, shorter timelines. Although this works both ways, and always, for everyone, all the time. Not only consciously but also when unconscious. An example on attracting things unconsciously could be that people who are prone to only see the limitations and the negative in life and happenings are sure to have things, people and interactions working against them. Vibrationally, negatively so, we then create a ripple effect where we not only repell that which is positive but we attract that which we focus on, more negativity, more conflict, more arguments and less happiness. Just look at the many posts in a place like this, a lot of energy is invested into arguing and people, very often the same people, end up in dogmatic positioning and often around trivialities in matters. This for the simple reason that focusing on the negative give you negative experiences and friction with people give you negative relationships. At the very same time there are infinite opportunity to focus on the positive aspects if not only for the simple reason of gaining understanding for multiple perspectives, build compassion and humility to diversity, and paradoxically at the same time open up for many other positive aspects and side-effects. This positive position in view generates positive vibrations that open people up and attract others into interactions that are fruitful into whatever wants you have. Considering that people generally are not aware of their thoughts and what they attract, this becomes somewhat "magical" without understanding of the simplicity of it all. Non the less it is dealing with energies and vibrational aspects that are metaphysical, and works its "magic" regardless, affecting everyone directly or indirectly subjected to it. It's of course not metaphysical in the sense of it being possible to manifest an elephant with multiple sets of golden tusks, right in front of you. That is magical thinking. Still, we can transform negative experience into positive attraction by identifying a limitation or problem and deliberately switch from focusing on the problem into looking for desired outcomes and possible solutions that lead to positive aspects. There are always positive angles to even the seemingly most negative and dark circumstance. Holding such an understanding for, let's call it law of attraction, is in a sense "magical" It creates opportunities and possibilities everywhere, and we're never helplessly stuck in our being.

@Fran11 sorry, I hid the reply you're quotine to look it over, and don't know how to bring it back, if even possible @Any mod, feel free to unhide my post. I misunderstood the function, thought you could unhide yourself.

@Gidiot A good example of green potential lack of effectivity with red problems would be e.g. the Swedish approach to stage red crime that has surged with immigration. There have been approaches with pastry, lemonade and reasoning with criminals with a naive expectation that they have, despite being at the level of development that they are, a choice and that they just need to listen to understand. Need I say that it has and still is failing? "Vi har varit naiva..." In this sense, red needs a blue approach, which is more effective with conformation into a system that maintain order. In a sense hard-meets-hard which is needed at the time. Of course blue has other issues and will not give the results green expects, but is, more effective for that single purpose, although eggs may be broken in the process. Moving through stages have never been easy. Nor is it today in the western world. Enter yellow, who can act blue as needed in order to produce the results wanted. Integration is then evident to be the merging of the positive aspects of different cultures, not blind merge, for the sake of a "greenie" idea of all peoples expressions being equally good. Good is relevant to what is needed and wanted to be achieved. Blind integration expects to accept red stage crime to be embraced as a new accepted order, merging with Swedish standards, resulting in a regress, which clearly is not acceptable. Assimilation sounds like a dirt little word, especially if you are ideological green, as it is implying eradicating personal expression in order to fit into a different mold and that is equivalent to thinking less of, and respecting other humans less. Assimilation in regards to the negative aspects of red, while at the same time fostering and reinforcing the positive traits of red, which will accelerate into an integration process, but green, until turning towards yellow, is not able to see this clearly. So it's not so much being blue as acting in a way that is effective with red and that in a sense uses traits that blue uses to overcome stage red problems that is needed. But now we're talking about spiral wizardry which is not available until tier 2 of development. Teaching the spiral to earlier stages is meaningless if the expected outcome is solving problems, rather use the knowledge and understanding the spiral has given you to approach blue differently and to be whom you need to be in that moment to produce desired outcomes.

@purerogue Absolutely. If ideology and dogma is at the core of the problems, it is easy to hold the ones that happen to have an ideological flavor that resonates and aligns better with later stage perspectives, say "greener" world views, higher - and reversly demonize the others, say "blue-orange" world views. A greener world view can be adopted without being green. You'd just not be able reason around it, and it would be blind reguritation, an ideology. At some point camps need to meet closer to middle ground, to understand the lack of needs met of the lower group, in order to relax the tension of the polarization, purposfully, so that transformation can happen. But that's introducing second tier, so we can only hope to look forward to the greener masses to progress into a green-yellow mix. It's going to take time, and it's going to get worse before such transformation happens, and it's probably not anytime soon.

How people react to thing does not make them who they are and it doesn't make people "bad" deserving being hated. The expression is only what makes sense from where they come from and how they see the world. It is problematic but with compassion and understanding some of the problems causing their reactions could perhaps be met in order to create a greater good acceptable for all. Meeting with hatred solves nothing, it only polarizes the masses and creates an ever growing problem centering around the fact that we cannot talk to each other.

There's nothing wrong with secrets in itself, there no requirement for everyone to know everything. It is rather the reasons behind the need to keep [certain] secrets that is more interesting, gaining an understand of the need to keep something secret is most likely going to revealed something that you maybe haven't realized about yourself, or emphasize something already known. This allows us to deliberately pursue working on that aspect as it's probably something that is adding limitation to our being. What the reason is, why we feel it should be hidden and how we reason around that is far more important than a black-and-white, right-or-wrong world view that prevent seeing the nuances of any one situation. So, what is it that makes you reluctant to share a secret? Example 1) A text-book example might be that you are worried about getting ridiculed. Which might be you worrying about what others think of you. Which might be that you are a people pleaser. Which might be that you are afraid of not having social connections or friends. Which might hinder your from being your authentic self. Which is pathological. Which is preventing you from being. Which creates suffering. Which should be dealt with in some appropriate way. Rens-and-repeat and you're on your way to deconstruct your ego Example 2) You might be keeping secrets in order to be allowed to function in society. Some "secrets" revealed might get you killed in some cultures/societies. In such a case keeping a "secret" is a survival mechanism and might be necessary.