Osaid

100%. Strangely, the gender-based pseudoscience creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. @AION does not want a deep bond, because that would require him to be "vulnerable" and admit that the gender ideology isn't real and he doesn't know how every woman on the planet thinks. Within his own formulation, building a deep bond with someone who is supposedly evil or corrupt makes no sense. He does not want to bond because it would be painful to do so, and the gender ideology helps to prevent him from bonding. As soon as he accepts how he feels, the ideology would fade too, they are not actually separate. The ideology is the feeling. In a sense, he is getting exactly what he wants, at the result of emotional suppression. He picks ideology over feeling. That pesky feeling though. You can feel his resentment against the other gender building up. Instead of accepting how he feels, it's so much easier to justify it through misogynistic ideologies. "It's their fault I feel this way", "If women did this then I would feel better", etc. Anything to avoid feeling his initial assumption (that women are corrupt). Anyways, my gosh, the women of the forum are probably laughing at how confused men are.

There isn't both.

Lol yeah perhaps a better question

That is true and it is the same as what I am saying. That is the "nature" of awareness or existence. You are all the forms and therefore none of them. That which appears as multiple things can't be any of what it appears as, since then it wouldn't be whole (itself). It is all things, and therefore it isn't either thing it appears as. To say it another way, everything can't only be a part of everything. It has to be everything. A part is a form. But everything (all the parts) is no form. As soon as you point to a form, you are already aware of the pointing and the form being pointed at, therefore you aren't actually either, you are the awareness of both.

Right And are you using to think you're better than other people.

Right. Right, I got the question. I'll try my best to answer it clearly. We can say consciousness is the "witness" of experience. The witness of experience never changes because it is always in contact with whatever it is witnessing. Many forms can change and move around, but you never change or move around, because you are witnessing it, or aware of it. In this way, you can't say consciousness changed into a dog, because you were always aware/conscious of that. For example, you can say that you walked to the store. That "you" which walks into the store isn't the one aware of experience. Experience doesn't walk into a store. That "you" is based on the idea that you are a human that physically moved. Consciousness itself doesn't walk into a store. Consciousness-wise, since you were conscious of walking to the store, you never actually experienced being aware of moving anywhere, you were only ever conscious of exactly where you are. Therein, consciousness is aware of the forms, but it isn't any of the forms. Which means, there's no real change for consciousness (it doesn't become something else).

It's based on how you're defining yourself (identity). You are always more fundamental than what you think you are, though.

It doesn't because it already is. Forms aren't fundamental to consciousness, consciousness is (duh). In your formulation you're conceding that consciousness stops existing and then starts existing (becomes something else), but obviously no one is conscious of that. It's all overlooking that consciousness doesn't have a form, that's already too much of an assumption. Don't let it be a theory or idea though.

Something that you just made up. You said it yourself.

If triangles had a God they would give it 3 sides. Nice name btw.

Imagine if Buddha got up from under the tree after 49 days and said "I need to realize more!".

It's a way of describing experience, but that wouldn't be experienced. So right, it's a thought that compares experience. The word is not the thing type of deal. I know lots of people like to describe it as a dream, but I find that to be a bit poetic or flamboyant.

Yeah, in that sense, it reminds me of how people commonly treat dreams. Silly, unreal, vanishes when you wake up (or when the psych wears off, analogously). Essentially taken for granted in terms of an experience, but ultimately "real" and "direct" as something that is experienced and talked about by people. Though the real question is, how would experience ever become indirect?

Is a knife actually harmless, or are we just pretending?

The inmates are the guards. No seriously though, health and mind never had a gender to begin with. The framing is wrong from the get-go. It's really only attracting the people who are already brainwashed.

True. Psychedelics are "instant", like getting teleported up to the sky, so the mind scrambles to create lots of paradigms to make sense. It's hard to think you're a human when you have the body of a crocodile, for example. For the mind to interface with that would require a new belief system or idea about reality. So-called "metaphysics". When it wears off and the human body comes back, thought just refers to time or a past and then it actually seems like something changed about experience because of a psychedelic or something, which is hilarious. When the "ownership" of experience is washed away, the finite-thought-perceiver scrambles to stabilize in the old paradigm of separation (subject-object) and goes "am I the only one experiencing this?", which is an obvious experiential recursion and therefore unreal (based on something other than experience). It's just the same old "I-story" but more metaphysical this time. The only way for mind to make sense is recursion, though, so label it as solipsism and make it sound all fancy and call it a day.

Lone might blow your mind a bit then. I dunno how chill you'll perceive it to be, but some of his stuff is pretty chill IMO.

Yeah it's kind of like apples and oranges. Or like arguing about what the best emotion is. My taste definitely fluctuates depending on what I want to feel in the moment, so music taste seems to be a nebulous thing that can evolve or morph as your interests change. I've had phases where I would listen to one artist or genre and then completely switch to another one. There's can be an experience of "developing a taste" for certain genres. It's a matter of being able to subject yourself to the emotion or energy that the music provides. Some songs are just so good that they're "timeless" though.

Short listen to the recent blog one. Very simple and definitely invokes questioning. Lyrics are a main focus and they are literally questions. Then there's a pause or gap for the ambience to come through. Very expansive, not structured. "Freeing". Definitely like if contemplation were a song or something. Did Leo admit he uses them for contemplation? Cause I can definitely see that. Maybe. Definitely very simple compared to what I listen to. It could also be possible Leo simply hasn't ran into more complex music for him to like, but he would actually like it.

That's no excuse since I'm also an INTP. I get it though. Some people have different motives. Some people aren't even that sensitive to music. I understand that INTPs are often touted as "thinkers" and not "feelers", but they can actually get quite good at perceiving and organizing emotions and feelings if they glimpse the importance of it. Imagine if someone that was really good at thinking used that thinking to get really good at feeling, or some such thing.

Good point. If there's a real desire it seems to just happen by itself. Music or no music.

Hahaha I was gonna say, must be listening to some music while writing that.

Unserious thinking is the best type of thinking See

Ah ok I see. There's a deep desire to contemplate. Anything antithetical is rejected or seen as confusing or whatever. Thus far you've been focused on music that isn't energetic enough to override your thinking.

Oh heck no. I'm not using music to gain anything. That's like looking at a rose and going "but muh gainz". The rose isn't about you. You have to pick one or the other. What's the obsession with thinking? You wanna think real hard when listening to a good symphony?? It's very clear to me. The music is an invitation to feel something. You're either on board, or not. You wanna think. Music doesn't want you to think. It wants you to focus on the music, not you, not your gains, not your thinking. Not anything else.