Cireeric

Dude I dont know how you pull this up. To my knowledge you are really furthering the field. I really like this view of reality, it feels more rich, more open-end, more expansive and more open to possibility. I really like Ken Wilbers work and his worldview was expansive in many ways, but there was always a certain closedness that felt rather boring than alive. I really need to dive into Deleuzes work.

The last really great one I watched was Succession:

Jordan Hall, Jamie Wheal, Daniel Schmachtenberger and Marc Gafni. These guys all operate differently and always push my intellectual-edges.

crazy take

Yes, she is great! I watched the Netflix documentary and what came across besides their ambitious, maybe even crazy visionary project was just the kindness and wholesomeness of Bryans whole crew. They seem like really genuinely kind people who really care for each other. In that sense Bryan is defintely living up to his goal to be a future human.

Thanks! Yes, I watched this many times

This content is not only serving the niche but also furthering the niche.

Also a highly-developed guy is giving off the healthy version of these signals that "make women obsessed" : he isnt overly attached to her because he has purpose, values his own time and is independently fullfilled. He has healthy boundaries and he isnt overly appreciative in a nice-guy way but has his own values so he will give her good signals on the stuff he really appreciates and expresses criticism on the stuff he doesnt.

This stuff is maybe effective in a narrow, short-term sense, but destructive for the long-term possibility of healthy relationships between men and women in general, since it creates unhealthy relationship-patterns, attachment-styles and trust-issues to even trauma on both sides and I dont think we need more advice of this type.

What were your insights?

lol Law 7: GET OTHERS DO THE WORK FOR YOU, BUT ALWAYS TAKE THE CREDIT - even in his videogames he is playing power-games.

I think Ralstons next book will be well worth studying deeply when it comes out.

We just need to develop humans with capacity to navigate reality better by themselves, self-asses, self-initiate and self-direct their lifes. There needs to be room for individual expression and individualized developmental-paths. That assumes that humans are not capable of directing themselves and need a shepherd.

Finally!

Classic!

Sounds like we need some radical revolutionary activism on a global scale. Maybe launched by some strategic genius visionary leader via mass-capturing of state of the art information-technology.

I think both are arguing that we need some shared grammar of value as a basis for global coherence in order to re-establish trust and bind global multipolar-traps. And both Ian and John are trying to reconstruct a case for the sacred/ a shared grammar of value that can survive the scientific-method and postmodernism. I dont see them arguing for divine-intervention, but rather for a re-connection to the divine. I dont see Nietzschean ideas providing a basis for global coherence, the Übermensch seems rather dividing than unifying. But I dont know if I got your point there.