Elevated

Think of the stages of the Spiral as a map of reality that explains how to navigate a society at a certain level of complexity as measured by technology, population, etc. For example, Stage Purple is the map of reality that helps one navigate through Tribal life and the technology and population size that comes with it. Obviously Stage Purple can no longer properly explain the current reality because we live in a world of nearly 8 billion people and have God-like levels of technology relative to Purple society. So with that being said, self-actualization can occur at any stage as long as that stage sufficiently explains a person's reality. Our current society is predominantly Stage Orange and Stage Green, with Stage Yellow emerging at the forefront. You can become self-actualized at any stage, but the person who is operating with a Stage Yellow map of reality will be better equipped to navigate the world than someone at a lower stage.

@Dany Balan I am developing a podcast with a friend/colleague of mine that covers the use of psychedelics for personal development. We're both psychology students working toward becoming psychotherapists. I use Spiral Dynamics as a framework for approaching my psychedelic trips. We recently released an episode for integrating Stage Purple. You can also find us on Google and Apple podcasts. Besides that I would highly recommend the book The Listening Society by Hanzi Freinacht to get a bigger picture understanding of SD. It helped me put the model into a much bigger perspective.

JBP is a perfect example of high cognitive complexity and low spiral development. He lacks a map of reality sufficiently vertically complex enough to explain the complexity of the ideas he's trying to work with.

I've definitely dealt with video game addiction. I had it mostly under control by the time I decided to sell my ps4. I'll likely return to video games one day, but for now I just have bigger goals and not enough to show for it. When I'm finished my education and have a source of income I'll likely work it into my week to a small degree.

Personally I think that the real magic of Star Wars has been in the Expanded Universe for a long time now.

I disagree with your assessment of the show in totality, especially the second season, but I completely agree with the name. They fucked up the name. At least we still have Bill Burr <3

When it comes to "Growing Up" I think your best bet would be to start at the Spiral stage that most Chinese people are at. If Chinese society is at Stage Blue, begin by talking about Stage Blue personal development to attract a crowd and then slowly begin talking about Stage Orange ideas as you move forward. Keep the information authentic to yourself, but understand that playing the long game means starting at a lower level and showing people a roadmap up the Spiral. When it comes to topics of "Waking Up" definitely frame it within the context of spiritual beliefs they would be most familiar with, but again, sprinkle in some contradictory information from other traditions to begin opening up their minds to other forms of practice. Overall, my point is that you have to figure out who your target audience is, where they currently are, and a rough idea of where you want to take them. Then, meet them where they are and begin guiding them in the direction you would like to go yourself.

Seems like the franchise is in better hands now though, so maybe good things will follow the Mandalorian.

I had my first ever Enlightenment type experience while on LSD last week where I experienced myself as the Universe. I realized very intensely that I was the universe knowing itself, and that even a conversation was merely the universe speaking to itself. Another example was that I was speaking to my friend and forgot a word, then realized that the Universe had forgotten a word just so it could watch itself try to find it again. While I was sitting there just basking in this feeling of union I would think about certain people, familiar or strangers, and feel an intense feeling of love for them because they were me. It felt like everything in the room was myself. Interestingly, the feeling of "I" was still there. I still existed and so everything I experienced was still related to myself and my identity. I remember jokingly thinking, "oh now that I'm fully enlightened now I need to start a cult." I was conscious enough of the ego to know that it was very much still in place and that this was merely a first step. However, that is the trouble. Since this is my first experience, and it was on a psychedelic, I want to be sure that this was an enlightenment experience. And so that's really what I'm asking here. Is that experience really what we're getting to here? I feel that I'm overthinking it, and asking for permission, but I want to get second opinions to make sure I'm not falling for a psychedelic-induced ego trap. The following is an optional read of an unedited paragraph that I wrote while having the experience. I think I've summed up enough already so if you want to skip it, go ahead, but this more clearly encapsulates exactly what I was experiencing at the time:

Thanks for the responses, I really appreciate it. My main goal is basically just to relax. I already have a dedicated practice and readings that I take detailed notes from. I enjoy reading so I wanted to read something passively that was still higher consciousness. Either way, thanks again.

I've begun to read some of the classics of Spirituality such as the Bhagavad Gita, the Dhammapada, Tibetan Book of the Dead, etc. So far I have the Eknath Easwaran books. I'm currently finishing Passage Meditation by Eknath Easwaran, and then The Three Pillars of Zen by Philip Kapleau. After that I'll begin going through the classics themselves. It's more for passive reading in my down time rather than a deep dive into them, but I would like to have a primer on how to actually interpret the texts. If you don't think such a primer would be helpful I'd also love to hear your opinions. Thank you so much for your help.

I think the issue with many of these gender debates is the rigid structure rather than the categories themselves. Many people who agree with Postmodernist and above revelations about the nature of conceptual reality lack the sufficient ego and cognitive development to understand the ramifications enough to adequately embody them. As such, they place the fluidity of gender for example into a rigid structure that is then used as a bludgeon. It shouldn't matter if you view gender as binary or not, what matters is how you treat people who disagree with you. If you treat people who disagree with you about the nature of gender as evil, you are operating in a rigid structure in regard to gender, however fluid the content may be.

I am the Will of this podcast. I hope everyone enjoys this, it was a very meaningful trip for me. If you have any questions about my experiences or anything like that please feel free to ask.

Unfortunately RSD's programs are ridiculously overpriced, but Julien's Pimp and Derek's 10 Commandments of Game are really the only two programs you need. If I were you though, I would invest your money in getting a few boot camps. Practice is going to be far, far more worth your time than theory after a certain point.

I think spending money to get sexual favours is a problem. If you can't create the sexual relationships you desire without paying for them, then learning how to do so should be a high priority. I think for many people, BDSM desires are the result of trauma. However I've heard of a woman who first discovered she was kinky at the age of 16. She had a great upbringing, was popular, physically fit, etc. She didn't have any major traumas. While playing soccer she dislocated her knee and the pain of it gave her an orgasm. For whatever reason she has a nervous system that perceives pain as pleasurable. Given the variety of human being, this really isn't such a stretch of the imagination. Is it immoral or unhealthy for her to explore this unique feature of her nervous system merely because it is not of the norm? I don't think so. Now what about the emotional sides of BDSM? The submission, dominance, humiliation, etc. Well...is it unhealthy or immoral to watch a horror movie? To ride a rollercoaster? These things play on our negative emotions and we find that pleasurable, and yet I doubt many here would argue that enjoying horror movies and rollercoasters are evidence of some sort of deep trauma. Again, some people are merely born with a nervous system that perceives certain levels of these negative emotions, in the right context, with the right people, as pleasurable. Just because we add a sexual element to that does not mean that all instances of these pleasures are the result of trauma. Does that mean that trauma doesn't cause BDSM for many people? Like I said, absolutely not. There is a lot of trauma in the world and BDSM is merely a part of that world. I also wouldn't be surprised if there was a greater amount of trauma in the BDSM community than outside it, but I would have to see the data on that. Either way, I think that just speaks to the complexity of these issues. Reducing any aspect of reality to a single factor like, "if it's BDSM then it must be trauma," or, "if it's BDSM then it can't be trauma," just don't grasp the complexities of reality. Often enough, engaging in BDSM fantasies can actually help people integrate their traumas. For myself, I am a Dominant, and I definitely have my fair share of trauma that led to my desire for BDSM. At first I was horrified by them and thought I was a psychopath (which makes no sense because if I was I wouldn't be horrified, but that's the human mind for you), and so I quit watching porn, stopped masturbating, and spent a lot of time denying myself and shaming my sexuality. Eventually, because of self-improvement and spirituality I learned to stop judging myself and to accept my sexuality as it is even if it was pathological in some sort of way. The more emotionally healthy I became the better I felt about my desires and the less I felt desperation in regard to acting them out. That's desperation either to avoid them or to engage in them. I engage in BDSM now with my girlfriend and other partners. I can have emotional and very intimate "vanilla" sex and enjoy it. I do my best to respect myself and my boundaries, and the boundaries of my partners. I always touch in with them to make sure they are feeling okay about things and have generally become better and better at navigating the complexities of BDSM sexuality. I am not perfect by any means, but I am quite happy with where I've come to with my sexuality. I think my main point is that BDSM is an extremely complex sexual reality that few are given the necessary maps of understanding to properly navigate. If you are going to engage with BDSM, I highly encourage you to do the inner work necessary to get those maps. I think I've gone on long enough, but starting with Leo's self-help is a great start. Reading the book, "Healing the Shame that Binds You," by John Bradshaw is also a great start. He does go on about the unhealthiness of BDSM, but I think that's more to do with his religious beliefs than anything else. Either way, don't pay for sex. Do the internal work. If you have any questions feel free to ask.

Obviously there are other reasons beyond this, but the following is my reasoning. Sex is something extremely complicated emotionally, socially, and physically given our current society, historical context, biology, etc. It takes a lot of emotional maturity to properly navigate sexual relationships. By preventing children from viewing explicit materials we slowly expose them to the sexual as their development allows them to create healthy models of sexual behaviour. I am into BDSM and polyamory. There is no way in fuck I should have been exposed to these things before the age of 16, and probably 18. They are far to complicated to effectively navigate while respecting one's own health and boundaries, and the boundaries of others involved. 18 represents an agreed upon age when people, on average, are supposed to have the education and life experience necessary to navigate sexual complexity. I think 18 is a good age, but I don't agree that we do enough to prepare people. As to why our ancestors didn't do this, it's because they didn't have the maps of understanding that must be used to navigate the complexities that arise from our current technology, population, etc. Again, historical context. I don't think anyone should be judged for showing any part of their body. However, I know that some people have beliefs about being shown body parts such that seeing those body parts creates a lot of emotional trauma. I can believe that they are wrong for being susceptible to such trauma, but I do not have the right to subject them to my views of sexuality and the body. Time will see an ease in sexual laws, but for now it is better to respect people's right to emotional health. It's an extremely intimate act not only given the historical context, but also just the act itself. Again, sexuality is a complex reality to navigate. I do not want to have sex in front of people just like I don't want to shit in front of people. Why should we be okay with people having sex in public? That just seems like an odd hill to die on if anyone here is trying to die on it. Historical context, biology, the standard fair. The last few questions can really be answered by historical context, biology, the standard fair. Biology in the sense that it was evolutionarily advantageous to engage in mate guarding. I guard my female so as to ensure paternity certainty. Over time as we evolve the cognitive complexity necessary to create cultural traditions, this is embedded into culture as dogma. Obviously the truth of the matter is far more complex than this, but that is one example. We can't be reductionist. See above. See above. I don't know if this is true, but if it is true, then it's likely because they're not considered as human as free women.

I think the problem transcends any one individual. Honestly though, in my supremely uneducated opinion, Biden fucking up is still a fuck up leading to a better situation than Trump fucking up because Biden is higher on the Spiral. Does that mean every Biden fuck up is a better fuck up than a Trump fuck up? Definitely not, but again, the problem transcends single actions and individuals.

The issue is that you have people who are not at the Pluralist stage (Cook-Greuter), nor are many thinking Systematically (Michael L. Commons), but who are then given Stage Green maps of understanding. What you then have is a downward assimilated version of Stage Green informing their behaviour because you need to be at the Pluralist level of ego development and/or at a Systematic level of cognitive development to use these maps as they're intended. All that leaves you with is people who do not treat others they way they demand the victim classes be treated. Is this every SJW? Of course not, but it's rampant enough so as to be a problem.

If you approach 3 women 2 times per week during the day, and then spend a few hours on the weekend doing more approaches, you'll gain far more than wasting your time going to a place to approach that 1 girl each day. You are losing life commuting to these places and walking around looking for that one perfect set. Also, every time you have a bad set, that is an entire day of feeling bad about yourself. If you have 2 bad interactions while building momentum and end the day with 1 good interaction, you will remember that 1 good interaction to help carry you over to the next time you do approaches.

@martins name Perhaps you're right, it's something I have to do more investigations in it seems. I remain skeptical, but thank you.

If you swipe too many people, you're actually hurting your chances. Or at least it used to be that way. They literally have a score that they assign your profile, and the more you swipe the lower it goes. It dictates how often you appear in other people's stack.

The issue I have with higher stages is that we don't know enough about what society will look like with those stages. For example, how can a Blue thinker 600 years ago come up with a Green politics? Green necessitates equality of the races, sexes, of sexualities, affirmation of the existence of transgender, etc, etc. This was a time when women were literally viewed as less than men, people were enslaved based on race, homosexuals were executed. All truth was couched in an absolute God so there certainly wasn't the possibility of the Postmodern notion of subjectively created reality through systems of language. Now, were there people who were mystics and discovered Truth? Yes. Were there people who believed sexualities or sexes were equal? Yes, there probably was. The issue is that there are so few people that they cannot create an entirely new paradigm of being that each stage of the Spiral represents. They had barely begun to tap into Stage Orange at that point let alone sincerely consider the perspectives of Stage Green. Well, now we are doing the same with the higher stages. We just don't have knowledge or the numbers to effectively articulate the truly vast amounts of knowledge needed to form an entirely new stage. People have obviously tried, but I think there is far too much conjecture and speculation. I do think that certain individuals have experienced these stages themselves, but to sum up what I've said here, we simply lack the systems, language, and knowledge to properly articulate these stages in any meaningful way. Especially in light of the technological advancements and new philosophies that could come into being in the meantime. Think about how much society has changed just in the last 20 years, think about how much change happened for Blue to develop, for Orange, and for Green. I just don't think people who think about higher stages are appreciating how vast each stage really is and how dependent it is on the changes that happen between stages.

@MrBON You're demanding women reduce their decision-making about sexuality and romance down to a single factor lmao. People are more complex than that dude.

I'm not sure what you mean. Like do you begin to view the guy in the porn from the perspective of the female? Or do you mean you respond to the signals of pleasure from the woman?

@Tildae00 So basically, Hanzi defines each stage not by the colours of Spiral Dynamics, but instead by the primary philosophy that was created to encapsulate the ethos of each stage. So for example, Red is Faustianism, Blue is Postfaustianism, Orange is Modernism, and Green is Postmodernism. The "Post-" philosophies are defined by their reaction to the previous stage. Obviously each stage is a reaction to the stage before it, but the primary reaction is defined by the "Post-" prefix. Now, when we get to the Stage Yellow ethos, which is the Both/And Synthesis approach, we come to Metamodernism. It is not merely a reaction to the previous stage, but is instead an attempt to synthesize the two previous stages. It is defined by the oscillation between Modernism and Postmodernism. It is also defined by a transcendence of the Left/Right political dichotomy. It is an attempt to synthesize Both Left and Right. This is not a Centrist position because Centrism is still defined by the Left and Right. This is a brand new metasystem that cannot be clearly defined by Left or Right. So, branching off from that, we must now consider a politics in which the viewpoints of either side are consolidated and coordinated into policies that would attempt to satisfy the most and alienate the least of either side. An extraordinarily difficult task to rise to, which is why such a system can only emerge at Stage Yellow.