Happy Lizard

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    401

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Happy Lizard

  1. Posted

    1 minute ago, gengar said:

     

    How can a world ever be nebulous? Nebulosity is only an appearance just like randomness. You might roll the dice and judge it to be random, but in reality no randomness exists. I think nebulosity works the same way - real in the practical domain but not absolute - while logic is absolute.

    The argument form meta-rationality is that cloud exits, yet you can’t find or accurately define its edge, where it ends.

    The human body is the same thing yet it’s not as obvious as a cloud, and so is the world. There is no reason why the world needs to be rock solid. 
     

    also randomness depends on what you mean, similar to how a cross can be a sacred object to a christian or two sticks stuck together for an uncontacted tribal people. You are the one who is deciding what to call a thing random or not

  2. Posted

    @Leo Gura His main point is that logic is what makes discovering truth possible and its the foundation of all knowledge, but doesn't self-reference limit logic’s ability to explain everything? 
     

    I also think he does not believe the world can be nebulous and it’s fundamentally a problem of language. 
     

    Like I said this is not my main domain, so it is not immediately obvious to me how this book fits with paradox and meta-rationality.

     

     

  3. Posted

    I’ve picked up Square One from Leo’s book list after seeing that he placed it at the top of the updated list. I started reading it after Meta-Rationality (I’ve finished the first three parts). I have to say, I feel a bit confused. Leo mentioned that the book is foundational, but I think it contradicts Deconstructing Rationality series as well as the paradox video.

    Now, I haven’t watched the three-part series on deconstructing rationality yet, and I don’t engage in heavyweight philosophy, as it’s not my domain, but I feel like the two books have opposite messages.

    Basically, what the first part of Meta-Rationality is about is that you can’t precisely arrive at a perfect reference of a thing or pin it down as a separate object, since reality includes nebulosity. He gives the example that you can’t pin down the edge of a cloud. However, depending on your purpose, you can define an edge for the cloud that corresponds to what you want to do with it. This all makes sense to me.

    it continues in the first part to show how the rational project fails, since there is no universal way to reference or pin down a world of nebulous things, neither in language nor in any referential system.

    What Square One is arguing seems fundamentally against this nebulosity. The book says that as long as you are capable of referencing a thing to begin with, you can make a statement about its state, which you can then reason about. This is what makes logic seem like such a fundamental tool that cannot be limited.
    As a novice in reasoning about these topics, I can’t tell which argument is stronger, but I lean more toward meta-rationality. It seems like Square One is just saying that language is the problem, and that if you solve the problem with better language, the nebulosity disappears. But this is exactly the kind of argument that meta-rationality specifically attacks.
     

  4. Posted · Edited by Happy Lizard

    Genuine question: Is getting familier and understanding dark aspects of society a part of this work now? With Leo’s recent blog posts and the recent booklist update, I feel like there is a turn towards this direction, which wasn’t very much the focus in the past. I just wonder what you have to use for search terms to get these results.

  6. Posted · Edited by Happy Lizard

    41 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    That is too profound to discuss casually.

    This is like discussing sex with a stranger.

    I can't explain the beauty of God to someone who doesn't even know what God is.

    Sure but then you end up like telling a kid that sex exist, which is not the right way either. I think people will get hooked if you say you experienced what buddha experienced and beyond, or that it helped you be peaceful and made you make sense of many things in the life, I have no doubt that this is the case for you but you seldom talk about these things that you might think are minor or talk in this fashion in general. You could be just wrong that people will crave the intellectual stuff you say on its own. I think people will be more moved by how they would feel about your work and they could stick to do the work then afterwards.

  8. Posted

    Knowing Leo he will probably start with the corruption of video games, which is nice, but I hope he also does the corruptions of some type of thing that we rarely think about. Because the bad qualities of some of these on the list  show very fast after a while. Its the hidden and the unknowns that blind sides us. 

  9. Posted · Edited by Happy Lizard

    @Leo Gura he has tried 5-meo though and he often in his books do interview as many diverse opinions as possible. I don’t think he will have the depth you have but its a very good effort as an intro to your kind of topics, especially given how consciousness is often not talked about from a psychedelic lens. 

  10. Posted · Edited by Happy Lizard

    @Leo Gura about the Art blog post, are you pointing out the fame-cult aspect of the art-world? Because that is different form the art itself and it’s value. 

    Even though people blindly worship some of these artists and the price tags on these paintings are overblown, they were actually very skilled and original for there time.

  13. Posted

    Cant we get semi-frequent success and dating content on the blog for the us who follow actualized content for personal success? I enjoy the philosophy and see it’s value as years pass, and if I’m motivated to understand these complex topics now, then I think my general appreciation of it will sky rocket if I can only meet some personal success criteria. I think a lot who follow actualized will agree with with me on this.

  17. Posted

    Just now, Leo Gura said:

    Of course society requires certain basic conformist building blocks to function. Language is one example. Laws against murder and rape is another.

    That is fine. That's not the problematic kind of conformity.

    Make sure you guys understand that I am NOT asking you to demonize basic social building blocks when I speak of conformity.

    I am half-expecting someone to take a shit on the dinner table and then say, "But Leo said to not be conformist!"

    I think English is a bad choice in the context of this argument. I meant to say I learned English as a second language and realized that I could have learned any other language and would have probably been able to see the world from a totally different perspective. But still there is a good case for why learning English is a great thing after all. Same as visiting some trendy places or buying some kind of shoes based on an expert recommendation, plus other things that you can temporarily confirm to until you realize another alternative.
    The problem with conformity is when it turns to blind conformity that is unquestionable and also because it weakens one's ability to think freely  and discover a better alternative or even the possibility of that existing. 

    What I'm ultimately saying is that if not enough context is given you sacrifice shifting the focus form the middle of the road way of thinking about these things, which is probably at the end what you meant to begin with.

  18. Posted · Edited by Happy Lizard

    @Leo Gura My idea is that there has to be a middle of the road kind of position to some of what can be labeled as conformity, for example using English as the most common language to communicate is conformity, but then you have to start somewhere to solve the problem before you can chose not to conform. Thats why I said what I think you are pointing at is more abstractly the function of how each thing in the list becomes a buzz that people follow blindly and then it becomes a given, not the validity of the thing itself.

  19. Posted

    @Leo Gura I can see where each of the example you gave about green health kinda makes sense, except for demonization of sugar, do you mean to point at the function of just how everything on the list became a buzz thing that people started to accept without any thinking? Because thats the common denominator between all the things you list that I can see. 

    conformity is thinking or taking action blindly based on buzz without reflecting on the belief in solitude, away form outside influences. That’s my contemplation of what conformity is.

  20. Posted

    On 11/7/2025 at 10:02 PM, Leo Gura said:

    If plenty of women sleep with a man that definitionally means he is attractive.

    Great? No.

    Many women do not sleep with unattractive men. This is a fantasy.

    Just because you don't find a man attractive based on your high consciousness values does not mean most women agree with you.

    When you say attractive you mean just physically attractive or personality charisma attractive etc as well? 
    Because this is confusing me when thinking about your content on dating and developing one’s game if it just boils down to “women sleep with hot men”. I don’t mean to say you were confusing, I just mean its not clear to me where the intersection is between what you say about dating and my experience and observation of women that you  mentioned in this post.

    I do agree that no woman choose a monk over a celebrity or good looking dude btw that’s obvious to me. 
     

     

  23. Posted

    I've been trying to get into understanding business (how to think, find ideas and start a business) however I can find no straightforward business books that teach you about starting and generating business ideas, most books assume you already have an idea or are half way through process. What about a book that educate about business or how to start ? 

    I have some of the books on Leo's booklist and have read the E myth book, yet these books assume you have at least tried your hands with one or two businesses already, are there any books you know of that talk about the fundamentals ?

  25. Posted · Edited by Happy Lizard

    @Leo Gura Great last quote about AI! I just feel like it’s so obvious but they keep throwing fuel to that fire hoping it will somehow become eternal. Even Matt Kahn out of all people is now thinking AI is conscious in his last book; It just came out, didn’t read it yet, but just the fact that they put an image of an AI model as an avatar on the book and called it one of the authors weirds me out