zurew

I understand that the realization of the absolute can be helpful sometimes (but even in those cases, it is nowhere near sufficient alone), and in most cases, knowing the Absolute is not necessary to solve a relative problem. The realization that "everything is imaginary" is completely useless , unless you can have direct control over said imagination. Here is a set of questions regarding this. 1) Can you stop imagining time? 2) Can you stop imagining your survival needs (food, water , oxygen etc) 3) Can you stop imagining all your current human limitations right now? 4) Can you stop imagining causality? 5) Can you imagine 10 million dollars to your bank account? "I have a broken arm, what should I do?" a) go to a doctor b) realize that your broken arm is just imaginary What do you think which option is more practical and helpful?

A guidance or a plan that is specifically given/created to help someone to solve/overcome a problem or a situation. Physical pain isn't absolute either, but its lack of absoluteness has literally no bearing on how bad it is for a person who has extreme physical pain. The question in this context is not whether something is absolute or not, it is whether you can change something or have an effect on something. So if the realisation of "everything is imaginary" won't have any direct effect on a problem, then in that context its useless.

Thats irrelevant to his point - his point was - that if someone wants to give a prescription, then be as concrete as possible and avoid being so vague that your prescription either won't mean anything, or won't hold any utility to that person. The whole point of giving a prescription is to provide information and things to that person that is practical to them and to their problem/situation. Whats the utility in using the word "imaginary" there? Yeah its about posturing how enlightened they are, without providing practical guidance or useful information. Its like the one kid in the class who learned something new and now use that thought to reiterate it every time he is fronted with any question or problem, regardless of how useful or practical it is for that particular problem or situation. Its almost like you are seeing Leo wannabees everywhere without his rational and practical side.

Redpill at this point is like 5% truth and 95% delusion and incompetence to deal with your trauma that you got from girls that rejected you or bullied you. The godfather of redpill (RolloTomassi) when can't debate and shit on young women, he can only give incoherent arugments and just rambling and shaking without saying anything value. If the head of an ideology is this bad, then what the fuck can we expect from all the other followers? Rolo debate starts around 12:00

You can't live without beliefs - there are things that you can't test and you need to assume to be true (for pragmatic reasons).

Bro you can do better than this, pleaase be more responsible with your threads and titles, this is like your 5th thread where you present information in a sloppy , biased and unresponsible and uncritical manner. Develop some epistemic humility, because thats rare asf here, but very much needed. This forum is supposed to be full of high conscious and well educated people, so lets at least somewhat try to live up to that standard.

This is a crazy article "GPT AI Enables Scientists to Passively Decode Thoughts in Groundbreaking Study" https://www.artisana.ai/articles/gpt-ai-enables-scientists-to-passively-decode-thoughts-in-groundbreaking

There is no proving or disproving of what you said. Proving or disproving already assumes some kind of a grounding ( a framework or an epistemic process that we agree on or take for granted ) that we can use to evaluate a claim's truth value. If you want to get to the bottom of it, you need to repeteadly ask yourself "how do I know this". and you will end up with either an infinite regress or with a paradox and with the "I can't know for sure". Not being able to know something 100%, doesn't make that thought or claim automatically true - its just lack of knowledge or lack of knowing. But then again, why focus on this conspiracy and not any other thought?

There is a difference between giving advice to an individual vs doing politics / analysing what the structural and systemic problems are and how could we make the world better. If I talk to an individual there is almost no utility in talking about all the systemic problems that makes his life more hard or worse (I can acknowledge all that to be emphatetic, but that won't solve his problems and won't give him any tools that he can use to solve his problems), the best thing I can do is to give him a toolkit that he can use, so that he can make his life better. On the other hand, we obviously shouldn't forget about the systemic issues. Its very clear already (based on a lot of empirical data), that if you grow up in a harsh environment, you will have a much much lower chance and a much harder time to become a successful human being. Is there still a possibility that you can pull it off? Yes, but the question shouldn't be about whether it is possible, but should be about this: Given all the data about your past and current circumstances, how likely it is that you can pull it off? Do you have a 30-20-10% chance or you have a 0.002% chance? After that question we can also ask: is it reasonable to hold to the same standard two different person: one person who has 0.002% chance and the other dude who is now successful, but he had 30% chance? Then after all that thinking we can come to the conclusion that it is very reasonable to consciously and carefully and thoughtfully build such structures and evironment that will produce better, more concious, more intelligent people in general.

What other tools and frameworks do you use that could be useful, when it comes to talking with an AI? I have a few to add here: 1) "What are the absolute coolest, most mind-blowing, out of the box, ChatGPT prompts that will really show off the power of ChatGPT? Give me 10" If you give this prompt to ChatGPT or to GPT4 it will generate a list of prompts that will be generally very useful or interesting or creative. Then you can grab and copy one of the prompts from the list that it gave you , open a new chat and paste the prompt and see what it says. If you want to, you can make this prompt more specific and narrow it down to this for example : "What are the absolute coolest, most mind-blowing, out of the box, ChatGPT prompts that will really show off the power of ChatGPT? Give me 10 (the context for the prompts should be earning money". Of course, if you use GPT4 then you can change ChatGPT to GPT4 in the prompts. 2) When it comes to learning about any new topic or framework, I have a list of questions that could be helpful: -what are the main axioms, what gives rise to x? -list all the main laws/main principles of that system -What are the main concepts or ideas in this topic? Create a table where in the first column you give a description of this situation/problem (analysis) and then in the second column you give a prescription -What are the main functions of this system? What is exclusive or inherent to this framework or thoughtprocess? -How the x system's main functions could be replaced in the y system? -what are the assumptions of this system/thought/framework? -what are the underlying biases? -what are the implications of this? -What are the key metrics or indicators that are used to measure the success of this concept? -What are some examples or applications of this topic? (Real world examples could be aswell) -What are some of the gaps or limitations of this concept? -What are the key debates or controversies surrounding this concept? -How does this concept apply to different contexts or situations? -What are some of the paradoxes or contradictions in this concept? -What are some of the alternative or complementary perspectives to this concept? -What evidence do you have to support this? -What counterarguments do you have against this? -What are the different stakeholders involved in this concept? How do their interests differ? -What are the most common misunderstandings about this concept? -What are the most common pitfalls and main causes for failures regarding this concept? -What kind of analysis could you offer for this concept -What are some of the patterns or trends that emerge from this concept? How has this concept evolved over time and across cultures? What are the key historical milestones? - How does system thinking could be applied here? -What are some of the sources or resources that I can use to learn more about this concept? -How does X concept affect Y concept? 3) Use AI's help to create better prompts: "I want you to become my prompt engineer. Your goal is to help me craft the best possible prompt for my needs. This prompt will be used by you. You will follow the following processes. 1. Your first response will ask me what the prompt should be about. I will provide my answer, but we will need to improve it through continual iterations by going through the next steps. 2. Based on my input, you will generate 2 sections. a) Revised prompt (provide your rewritten prompt. it should be clear, concise, and easily understood by you), b) Questions (ask any relevant questions pertaining to what additional information is needed from me to improve the prompt). 3. We will continue this iterative process with me providing additional information to you and you updating the prompt in the Revised prompt section until I say we are done."

@Bobby_2021 You said it yourself that you can't 100% disprove it, so then why entertain it? Why spend even 1 second thinking about these things, when thinking about these things is completely useless and won't get you anywhere? For some strange reason you give these thoughts more power than other thoughts, but why? You can't disprove the opposite either (that there is no big conspiracy), so why give more power and attention to the big conspiracy thought?

Don't stop there, continue with the 'Earth is flat' and you will be good.

This is a really good summary. One other way to frame it , is to say that a wise person has the ability, to provide the right prescription. It would be probably useful to try to outline the differences between being knowledgeable/smart vs wise. We will probably have a hard time outlining in a precise way what wisdom is, so one thing that could help is to talk about 'what is the opposite of wisdom' or 'what is the opposite of being wise' and by that we can narrow things down even more. Some opposites could be: - Being reductive - Having a narrow perspective - Conflating description with prescription - Having no good, embodied way to provide prescription I would add a few more things (that are probably correlated with being wise): - Having epistemic humility (the recognition and honesty of what you don't know, and knowing the edge of your knowledge) - Being extremely good at relevance realization (Having an ability to focus on and to recognize, the right things at the right time, without using a prewritten formula for it) - Having a top-down, rather than a bottom-up approach to life (Having a deep, embodied, philosophically grounded approach to life/going from meta vs only focusing on the specifics and the outcome and then trying to find/build a solution from there, without ever recognizing what generated that outcome) These are just a few things, hopefully others will be able to provide a lot more.

Nice share!

Thats not really that big of a dunk. "you would like to live in the best society possible ? dude you are just biased!"

@Schizophonia So TLDR: you have nothing tangible, other than a handful of testimonials. "Don't bother looking at the studies dude, just look for people that are agreeing with you on the subject, and that way you can be sure and confident that you are right (btw guys, I am not biased, and I am not ideogically driven, even though most of my posts only consist of bashing other diets, rather than actually making a strong case for why the carnivore diet is the best)" No one said that anyone needs to obey anyone, and we are not really talking about one authority on a subject that you need to believe blindly (although, unironically, so far your case only consist of one person, who is undeniably biased on this topic). What a reasonable person would do, is to look for the overall body of evidence, what we have on a certain topic, and not jump to conclusions immediatelly and not making strong and confident claims about things that are not verified yet. Sorry, that im not convinced by you showing one person, who is clearly a marketer of this topic. The title of this thread and your posts overall speaks volumes on what kind of epistemic process you have. You think that having a handful of testimonials is a strong enough evidence for you to completely change your diet and to even tell others that they should follow you. You seem to be very biased and unironically very ideologically driven (its blatantly obvious from your first post, where most of your posts only consis of bashing other diets rather than actually building a strong case for the carnivore diet.

You have one person (who is undeniably biased, because he built his career and a whole identity on being carnivore), but what actual long term studies you have, that would actually justify your high confidence on this topic?

The future of gaming will be insane

I think you two view the concept of 'relationship/connection' in the context of learning in a different way. Relationship/connection between two or more things can be viewed and treated in different ways depending on the problem or the situation or the categorization. 1) We can view it as a qualitatively different thing from the parts (sometimes we can view it as an emergent thing from the parts); 2)and other times it can be viewed as just a separate part on its own. I think yours is closer to the first one, and his is closer to the second one.

Im just fucking around, I agree with most of your points on learning, I think you two guys just have different definitions of "making distinctions".

He tried to make one more distinction (separating the concept of 'relationship between things' from making distinctions) and you stopped him from doing it (therefore, unironically you didn't participate in making further distinctions).

https://www.futuretools.io/

He is right tho. If this is a cultural thing it should be really easy to find at least a few examples showing that it is a normal thing there. On the other hand, the opposite could also be proven by trying to find further evidence about the Lama's pedophilic tendencies. If he actually is a pedo, then there is probably more evidence to find.

Leo has to do a crash course on epistemology, because a lot of people on this forum has a really poor understanding of it and usage of it. Do you think our ancestors lived longer than us nowadays? Since when nutrition science is limited to food corporations?