Jirh

@Elliott I don't even disagree with you or most of what you said. But you can't really compare USA with Iran. Sure, they may share some similarities, but they are so far apart on the level of freedom and extremity.

@Elliott USA is not radical nor extremist. But I get your point about the double standard.

Exactly. Long range ballistic missiles are an offensive weapon, not defensive. Iran is a threat to the entire world, because of its radical extremist ideology.

A proper response would be targeting and attacking the source of the attacks, like military bases and airfields and aircraft carriers. And that's not far from the Iranian capabilities. But it's too direct and too risky for them, and they are cowards. The focus should only and solely be on those military targets. Anything else is terrorism and cowardice. It's clear that Iran's strategy is mainly terrorism against civilian infrastructure while they sprinkle some missiles on military targets. They were forced into war, and they chose war of attrition because it's their best chance at surviving. It's understandable, as terrorism, and never justifiable. Nuclear threat may be a fake front, but the ballistic threat is real. We are experiencing it in real time. Why does Iran need long range ballistic missiles? For what defensive purposes exactly? You can say the same about Israel. I have no problem with that. It's just as terrible.

Ceasefire.

It's not self-defence when you attack civilian locations, civilian airports, civilian oil tankers, etc... Self-defence is attacking aircraft carriers, USA military bases, Israeli airfields, etc...

When you say survival instinct, you make it sound like an innocent unconscious reaction, like a knee jerk reaction if a tiger jumps on you and you have no will or choice but to react. But clearly this way of responding is the Iranian regime's conscious choice after much thinking, and they are still choosing to keep this terrorist act every day. Ultimately the goal is to eliminate Iran's projection of power outside its borders. Why now? Because it's perceived as the best time to do it. Who's the terrorist? All of them. But at this particular point in time, Iran is terrorizing the entire world.

Actually, most of the Western media that I've seen so far is against the war, whether pro Trump or against him. And this is the direct result of the terrorist closure of the strait of Hormuz. The Iranian regime has no way of defending itself except by pressuring Trump through causing a global economic disaster. And as I said, most people have nothing to do with the war. However, we are suffering its consequences caused by Iran.

One thing for sure is that Iran is not winning. It's getting destroyed systematically. And even though it's dealing "unacceptable damage" to the US and Israel and the world, that's no going to affect the route that has been already drawn. And holding the world's economy hostage and attacking the infrastructure of gulf states is not a valid response to war, under any circumstances. It's literally terrorism. Most of us had nothing to do with the war, and yet it's affecting each and every one of us. We are hurting because of Iran, not the USA or Israel. The iranian regime is dying and it wants to kill everyone with it. Suicidal bombers. That's who they are. Terrorists. And after seeing this, I would definitely rather see them destroyed than having nukes and threatening the globe.

No one is 100% healthy. Most are below 60% I would say. Life is hard. We're all broken in some ways. We're all wounded. But there are severe, extreme cases. Avoid anyone who smokes, drinks away, avoids, bypasses, runs away, etc... Don't look for healthy. Look for survivor, healing, or trying to heal. And if someone healthier comes your way, hang on to them.

Long-term partnership and attraction are two different things, almost opposites.

Security is not a joke. But to be fair, devastating bugs in code existed long before AI, and they killed large companies and businesses before. This has been the risk with software since the beginning. It's nothing new.

Is curiosity an issue?

Yes, but this just evades the question. It doesn't answer it. Non-duality is a great system of thinking in many areas. But it shouldn't be used to bypass deeply existential and philosophical questions. Something is clearly happening. It's not nothing.

There's a certain amount of stress and challenge that is healthy and ideal for growth. It's different for different people, but it's there. Too little makes you soft, and too much makes you hard. As a child, you want constant doses of mild to moderate stress and challenges. This build resilience and strength to handle more difficult situations as an adult.

It looks like there aren't real people with real lives anymore. Life of the ghosts. Everyone is glued to their phones, sucked into another world in another dimension, here but somewhere else, somehow. Obsessed with their online image, carefully crafting illusion after illusion, without any regards to their self-image. Chasing dopamine hits endlessly, until they're numb, so they increase the dose, and get even more numb. Elaborate games of manipulation, of deception of oneself and others. Losing everyone in the process. Fear is running the show. Deep insecurities. Increasingly so. Shallow and hollow. No depth, no reality underneath. Empty shells, perhaps attractive to the onlooker, but deeply disappointing where it matters. Deeply boring, too. Are people capable of genuine connection anymore? Are they even alive?! Prison of a different kind.

The idea of this thread is that the doing itself is a manifestation of understanding and that it's enough proof of it. Whatever you can do, is something you actually understand, on some level. The ability to do something is a testimony of your understanding. Some people seem to disagree with this, but it's clear to me that it's true. It doesn't make logical sense, but it makes intuitive sense. It doesn't apply to everything in the universe equally, but it certainly does apply to some things. You can understand driving a car without learning how a car engine works. You don't need that knowledge to understand the act of driving. Once you're able to drive, you've understood driving, in whatever narrow sense that may be. The counter argument to this claim is that there's not much conscious conceptualization going on in learning how to drive a car. It's mostly subconscious. So it doesn't qualify as conceptual understanding. But that would be comparing apples with oranges. Because conceptual understanding is a field, and intuitive understanding is another. Both has advantages and limits, but they are not opposites. They complement each other. And that's what most people who disagree are probably missing. The more you learn about something, the more you understand it. And the more you practice it, the more you understand it too. I think it's nearly impossible to disagree with this.

True. But I bet they don't understand it.

I don't know about this specific issue, but generally when browsers show unusual behaviour, my first instinct is to do a hard refresh of the page. (Shift + F5)

Exactly! But it looks like this thread is targeted at a specific audience who are supposed to understand it. It's not a discussion. It's a lazy, vague, short, personal lecture.

Don't let it go. Don't you see how far it's gone away?!

Being is definitely one form of understanding (Feminine, instinctive, non-verbal, intuitive, unconscious). The other form is intellect (Masculine, learned, verbal, logical, conscious). Both forms are valid.

Sublime Text (Free use, with occasional reminders) SpaceSniffer Draw.io

I love you, man!

I think we can say birds understand flying instinctively or unconsciously, if that makes sense. Clearly, they don't understand it cognitively or consciously.