zurew

If thats the case, God should be capable to give you free will.

I didn't say that it is evidence, i just gave a response to your narrative, where you implied that even entertaining the possibility that he would do something like that makes no sense at all, or that it is almost completely out of reach.

Is it impossible to imagine that there are people in the world, who don't act in a perfectly rational way all the time and their narcissism sometimes can overwrite their rationality, and sometimes they will do and say some shit that won't lead to the best calculated outcome(s)?

What about the part where he said that he did some shady shit in the past, and he flushed his phone down the toilet when the police came, and what about the part where he said that he didn't let his women to go out anywhere? This is of course is not evidence, but it seems that top g did his own self snitching by being vaguely vocal about his shady past.

I guess the most genius and intelligent way to tackle with any question or problem is to invoke the absolute, and then virtue signal that we are so wise and spiritual.

Those two things is not necessarily mutually exclusive. There are stepping stones here, that need to be recognized. Its clear that rules can work at some places and rules are the best we have at some places.

I like the "make teachers be transparent by their own code of ethics. I don't agree with the 'as many code as you like'. I think there should be a minimum number that must cover certain things like teacher-student realtionship. It would make it so that teachers could be hold accountable to standards that they have given to themselves.

When I say "the alternative is worse" I mean the alternative when we don't do shit, if you have better ideas, then say them.

The argument is that the alternative is worse, and you have yet to make the argument why would it be worse than cults being totally free to trap people and to operate.

The point is not to give a specific number, the point is to make at least some action, more specifically a structure (like an ethics code) that can lower it, without ignoring it all together and without not giving any fucks at all.

and yet how many bad examples we can look at. This all or nothing mentality is bullshit, because basically in one hand i can take the teaching of truth and on the other hand I can put anything (any volume from the worst things possible) that can justify the teaching of truth. Also I don't see what serious teaching tool is taken away by the implementation of that list. Also, we can talk about the modification of that list (but we can't get to that point, if we can't acknowledge, that no list is = to (the spiritual teacher can do basically any fucking thing he/she wants for the sake of teaching the truth)

Google has their own shit, I don't think they need to fear anything, they have an AI that is not even public and people who used it says its good. There is definitely a competition to be the first company that can build the best AI, and this competition will be even bigger as time goes on and as more company can compete with different implementations and models.

I didn't say that, I just said its not the same as with other services or products. I guess maybe positive testimonials don't hold that much weight in this subject (at least for me), but negative ones can do a lot here and they can have a lot of weight, but the problem is that people are shy and don't know what to say or how to handle these things (when they get fucked over by a cult or and get mind raped by a teacher) so they often don't say shit, and some of them don't even know whats good or bad treatment anymore, because they get brainwashed. - thats why it would be good that some people could look and go to this list and decide which teacher is high quality and which one is low quality and unnecessarily dangerous.

Yeah but that doesn't really give you any objective image about how effective that teacher is. I don't think you can judge testimonials the same way as with a random other service or product. For example in this case in it doesn't really matter how many students claim that they got enlightened by the teachings because there is no way you can measure that objectively, you can't have access to their state or to their mind. So you are saying that people will go with the teacher , who is basically the best marketer? So claiming outrageous stuff just to lure in people? Now, I could agree with that, but that has nothing to do with how effective you are at being a teacher.

The reason why its irrelevant because following these rules won't necessarily make you less effective. So being ethical is not mutually exclusive to being effective. I don't think this is a problem. There is no good way for someone to measure which spiritual teacher is more effective than others, when you have almost no experience with the subject. There is no metrics by which you can judge which teacher is really effective ( at least I don't really know any), people will go with a teacher that they can resonate with the most.

The effectiveness is irrelevant in the context of this conversation. The effectiveness is a separate conversation, right here we care about the ethics part.

How any of those ethics rules make the teachings less effective or significantly less effective?

"there is no one to be narcissistic and there is no one to manipulate" - thats how retarded is to say that there are no teachers. That level of dismissiveness and inability to engage with the topic at hand is fabulous.

Would be curious how many spiritual teachers you could list, who checks all of the things on the list.

Again, that list is for spiritual teachers, and those things might seem obvious to you or funny, but a ton of people got fucked and tricked by spiritual teachers and got stuck in cults. So I don't think its unreasonable to talk about these things or to how to hold these people accountable. So brainwashed and manipulated people should get fucked or should we protect them from getting fucked?

The "authentic path" is a loaded term that assumes thats the right path. When you start you have no idea which path is the right path for you, so the best thing you can do is to try out a lot of paths. Also when you walk alone without taking any information from anyone that can also be a trap, because you will fall into a lot of traps that you could have avoided if you would have been open to outside info. But regardless, this thread is not for people who wants to walk alone. This thread was about how to hold spiritual teachers accountable and to what to look for when you are a seeker and you go to a spiritual teacher.

You almost never walk the path alone without searching for teachers or without gathering info from teachers, so knowing that almost everybody will seek to find some teachers, there should be given an ethical code for the sake of protecting the students. If we don't have any ethical code, that leaves the door open to all the potential negative things such as : creating a cult (consciously, or unconsciously), misleading people (make people to believe they can achieve xyz things with your teachings when you haven't achieved those things yourself and you have no data to back your claims), exploiting your students by making yourself an authority figure, and by making yourself the center and an essential part of the teachings and so many more. Also we have to note here, that the vast majority of the seekers are people with traumas or people who are depressed and people who want to deperately find meaning in their life, and just from that they are much more vulnerable than other people.

You can ask it specific questions that google won't give answer for, especially when it comes to solving certain problems. If you give it vague open questions it can't give you quality answers. Also its not just cherrypicking and ctrl c + ctrl v, it displays the data in a way where it adapts to the question, so it has some skill to apply the data and not just copy data.