Consept

I might be, as far as I understand you're saying that those who are investigating others of wrong doing are being labelled in a way which attacks them and makes their investigation look invalid. Those that are doing the labelling are those suspected of wrong doing. I would say a conspiracy theorist is a separate thing in that they are people that believe speculation, usually about an over arching idea of those in power trying to get more power. They look to confirm this by picking disparate information and connecting dots to come to a conclusion. I would also say that their could be some people that investigate these claims seriously and impartially, if you like you can call these investigators. However there are so many conspiracy theorists who earnestly believe in them that it detracts from any real investigation, I would say this does more damage to real investigations than any campaign those in power could do to smear conspiracy theorists

You can change the label but to say that so called 'conspiracy theorists' are just impartially questioning things that are happening would be a bit of a stretch. There's all kinds of logical fallacies, stunted reasoning, circular logic, that goes on, also most of these conspiracies are either proven to be untrue or are unprovable either way, an impartial investigator would have to say they don't know at this juncture, but from what ive seen this is rarely the case, most conspiracy theorists have a certainty about these theories, this is bad investigating. I'm sure there could be conspiracy theorists that are good investigators but I would say they would be exceptions. There's also this idea that conspiracy theorist are shown to be crazy in media, this is not entirely true, there are many films and TV shows where the only one that believes in the conspiracy is the hero, 24, Arlington Road, The Bourne Series, Conspiracy Theory with Mel Gibson, Enemy of the State, Da Vinci Code, many more. So this whole thing about conspiracy theorists being derided is simply not true in popular media. In a way we probably all want someone to expose the shadiness of those in power, but the way most conspiracy theorists try and do it actually can get in the way of those that are pointing to real corruption, just that real stuff like corporate fraud is boring, reptilian overlord sex traffickers is a lot more exciting

I dont think you should take the likes to dislikes ratio as people not understanding it or Leo being too harsh in his criticism. The fact is if you criticise the strongly held beliefs of people, they will not like it, bottom line. Try making a video criticising the bible or the quron and you'll be lucky to only get dislikes. Mick West who is a popular debunker appeared on Rogan and got about 25% dislikes on the video, he's not rude, doesnt look down on people, is actually quite compassionate, but just presents facts, he's hated amongst conspircay theories. This is what insulates the belief mindset so much, any criticism is an attack, therefore it can never truly be questioned. Regarding the video, Leo would've expected the backlash so I dont think there's anything he could've or should've done differently. If you believe conspiracies then that vid is well needed medicine, obviously no one enjoys bitter tasting medicine

I like that he did that, if the viewers offended then they need to look at why and what they're holding on to. If I know something is relatively true like the empire state building exists and someone comes along and says no it doesn't exist, I wouldn't be offended, I either wouldn't care or will think the person is kinda crazy or funny. The fact that people get so offended and defensive when it comes to conspiracies is almost proof that they at least, don't really believe them deep down

Yeah thanks Leo for doing this vid, I've been waiting for it. I'm not surprised at the comments, there is an interesting dichotomy with conspiracy theorists in that they say they're only interested in facts and the mainstream isn't interested in facts, but in reality they're the most emotionally invested people you'll come across. These are hard beliefs and if anyone even questions them at best they're sheep but at worst they're a shill or involved or whatever you get angry, defensive comments. Although I think the video is important, in reality those that are developed enough to see through conspiracies will agree and understand, but those that believe them will do some kind of mental gymnastics to sustain their beliefs, most likely it will be an attack on Leo. That's a standard tactic to discredit the speaker. So hopefully it plant's a seed in conspicists but I think fir the most part it will just get them more riled up. Either way a brave topic to cover from Leo

So been seeing this girl for a couple of years now, I like her but she's a bit of a perfectionist, very tidy, very organised, which is fine but I'm not really like that, which is also fine. Problem is every time I see her at least once she'll tell me something I need to change or something I should do. For context, materially speaking I'm doing OK, have my business, my place (we don't live together), car, go to the gym etc. What annoys me is that a lot of the time she doesn't know about what she's trying to help me with and it feels like she's doing it either because she would like to change me and be a certain way for her, or because maybe she was treated that way by her mum and she feels that's a loving way to be (I've got this impression when we've talked a bit deep). An example of her not knowing, she told me to stop doing my business because I was going through a tough spell about a year ago, keep in mind I've been doing this for 10 years and had many ups and downs. But she didn't know much about the business just because its not a traditional job I think is why she had this opinion. A couple of times she's gotten really angry for seemingly small things (one time I had a hole in my sock) and in general she's quite impatient because of her perfectionist standards, that's not exclusive to me. Everytime these things happen I talk to her properly and tell her I'm not happy with it, and she has camled down a bit and even started meditation. But now it's like in almost on edge waiting for her to nag or complain about something and I don't like that. Of course I have a lot of stuff I want to improve but I feel like it should come from me and if I need advice I'll ask. Anyway what you guys think, is it normal to get nagged, is everyone trying to change everyone, or is this a bit much?

So ive always had a problem with anxiety and ocd from a young age, its gotten a lot better as ive done more work on myself, become more awake, seen a therapist, exercise etc etc. How it plays out is all of a sudden ill get a fearful, anxious feeling and then ill resist it automatically, then it will be on my mind about future events with this feeling, sometimes ocd comes in, although ive been handling that better, i get headaches and just general uneasy nervous feeling. Now after seeing a therpist for the last 8 months or so its gotten a lot better and ive learnt how to deal with it a lot better, the last couple days ive had this feeling again though, what im noticing is im just not accepting it and i want it to be gone and because of that it stays and doesnt feel great. I will say the periods of it being intense are not as much anymore but still can be frustrating when i feel like it. I was wondering if anyone had some advice on this as it blocks me massively

So on the forum i notice that sometimes you get people with strong dogmatic beliefs, this can range from Trump is a coral genius and is going to save the world to im as enlightened as the Buddha to the law of attraction is is to do with meta physical vibrations. Now when i see these types of things i feel the urge to question them, this could be because i think truth is very important and i think just believing in anything that feels good to you can be dangerous, not only for you but you could influence others, most people that espouse these beliefs do so with unwavering certainty. Theres probably some things going on with my ego, where i want to be right about things and its almost offensive that someone can be so wrong. Theres also some compassion where i feel that someone has missed something and theyre lost in a delusion. I never try to call them out directly as in i wont just say 'youre wrong', i give reasons why theyre right as well as the other side that questions the belief. What i notice is that people are often overly defensive about them and they even start to attack or dismiss by saying things like, you dont get it because youre not conscious enough. So the question is it our responsibility as fellow people who are on some path of achieving higher consciousness, to call out delusions in others that are on a similar path? It would seem to me to be the compassionate thing to call it out rather than let someone live in delusion. Its not something that i would really do in normal life as your average person just wants to believe what they want and prizes that over truth, which is fair enough. But i feel like people are on here to drop delusions and become more conscious. Of course the question comes who is going to decide who is able to question who? For example if someone is deluded in some theory they may and probably do feel theyre being compassionate by opening your mind to it. So how do we navigate this thing or should we just let people get on with it live in their delusion and hope they get there in the end. Im well aware i could be deluded as well btw and if i am im happy for people to call me out on it and have a conversation about it

You feel that it's possible to completely disregard feelings and be some kind of objectively rational person but I would say it's close to impossible, everything goes through your feelings filter. You can see bias, feelings and different perspectives coming through people who claim to be rational all the time. Take someone like Ben Shapiro, who says 'facts don't care about your feelings', isn't it coincidental that all his objective facts lead him to conclusions that uphold his already established worldview and Conservative ideologies. If he was completely objective he wouldn't even have an established, rigid stand point. Being rational will always be through a human perspective, its like if an ant said they were rational and that led to a full understanding of the world, the ant can not see as much we can or in the way we can so it does not have a full understanding or view of the world. In the same way are view is always limited, really the only 'rational' approach would be to realise the limitations of rationality, I could argue putting rationality first before feelings would be irrational because rationality is a concept somewhat created by our feelings, so why not accept your feelings first and then add rationality as a concept after

Ultimately it still comes back to your feelings, you like a rational approach because it feels good, it gives you some kind of certainty, if it didn't feel good you wouldn't take that approach. Feelings just happen and then we put a perspective on them or act in response to them, the key is to witness or just feel the feelings without trying to work them out with language in our head. In that way you could act more consciously rather than being unconsciously thrown around by your feelings

I get your point but i think mostly these examples are ones that people can freely choose and the risks both long term and short term are known, should also note that government would probably ban sugar or tax it highly but would get a lot of pushback from people who claim they want the freedom to choose, so its always a balancing act between 'freedom' and safety. We live in a world someone can drink bleach get sick and sue the company that sold them the bleach, thats why we have 'dont drink bleach' on bleach bottles lol. The government is always in a damned if you do, damned if you dont position because if they put up safety regulations people see it as taking away freedom, if they dont people want to know why they just let whatever happen when they couldve regulated it. Seat belts are a great example, when they first came out people did not want to use them and complained in a similar way to the mask wearing, nanny state etc, but obviously seat belts do and have saved lives. With Covid, we dont know the long term effects, many people who had it months ago are still reporting effects from it, so it would make sense to take a better safe than sorry approach at least temporarily.

Yes I agree I'm not sure if that was clear in my post. A lot of people against the lockdown, that I've come accross anyway, outright reject there's even a virus, which is what a lot of the protests are about. The people on the other side are not denying the virus obviously but they're also feeling the effects of the lockdown themselves but are sacrificing for other people. A high conscious person would look at both sides and I don't think they'd deny the virus so that they could benefit

Definitely, im not sure hes that bothered either way, he just doesnt want to look bad, like with brexit lol I think to answer the op though I would say most people that are anti-lockdown, not you Charlie cos i think youre more advocating for healthy lifestyle, but most just dont want their life to be impacted and so are actively looking for reasons why there shouldnt be a lock down, it doesnt really come from a place of high consciousness in that theyre not taking the whole situation into account, for example it would be hard to keep the position if they had direct experience with it ie going to the hospital, talking to people that have had covid etc. Lock down may or not be the right choice but i feel that the intention behind the people protesting it comes more from a place of selfishness which you could call low consciousness, many people ive talked dont believe it because they dont know anyone who has it, which is pretty selfish imo as i wouldnt say cancer doesnt exist because i dont know anyone who has it. The people on the other side some are people that just will follow the government, of course thats true, but a lot of them are aware of how bad a lockdown is and are making sacrifices because they believe its the right thing, so their intention is not self interested because they too are suffering from the lockdown. So it doesnt necessarily make them higher consciousness but it means they are taken into account a wider scope and most likely you wouldnt find many highly conscious people who are staunchly against a lockdown, although i do understand your intentions are slightly different Charlie

I agree with you in that ultimately having the prevention of a healthy living standard is obviously going to improve peoples healths, mentality etc but its almost like a separate issue, because right now if people started that doing it it wouldnt get rid of covid and the situation we're in, so there does need to be emergency measures of some kind. Also, as you know, in the UK its not that easy to switch peoples habits, im sure you remember Jamie Olivers healthy food in schools campaign where the parents and kids protested and also recently when the lowered the sugar in irn-bru and Scottish people signed petitions against and i think many boycotted it. So in other words promoting habit changes seems to be hard in the UK whether its tempoary measures like the covid stuff or longer term measures like what youre talking about. The question for me is, is there trust for the government, if there is trust then you would permit them to make mistakes as you know that their intention is whats best for the population, if there isnt trust then every move they make will be questioned. That there is lack of trust really falls on the governments hands and how shady and self-serving politics has been over the years. If we hadnt had all the crap with the bankers bonus', sub-prime mortgage recession, bail outs, Brexit, austerity, trickle down economics, iraq, grenfell etc etc, all within the last 10-15 years, and the government was seen to be for the people rather than corporations then i think there wouldnt be too much distrust and the people would go along with whatever. If you look at Sweden their strategy might be right or wrong but the point is people followed along, as did most of the countries in northern europe dispite differing strategies. So really i think what were seeing is the result of poor government decisions with a capitalist mindset that has run riot. Thats not to say there arent good people in the government but the system that exists is not for the people and those are the ones rebelling. The actual actions theyre doing for covid i think people would complain either way, if you remember at the start Boris wanted to do herd immunity and literally everyone complained about it, thats why they switched the strategy to a lockdown type thing, so either way people would complain i think. Im actually suprised they did do a lockdown considering how their main concern is the economy, but guaranteed, if we didnt lockdown, people will be out protesting now about how we should lockdown and most likely would be the same people protesting now lol

Its the same here in the UK but we've been split since brexit. It would be interesting to look at countries that have a strong alt right populist movements and correlate that to how theyve done during corona, i would guess countries that are more divided probably have done the worst

The mask thing I really don't get, I understand its uncomfortable or a bit itchy or whatever but it's not that bad. Most people who are anti-mask claim it doesn't work or there aren't any studies, but either way they are not 100% sure about that, so what a gamble to make where if you're wrong and the mask is even 1% effective 1000s could lose their lives, if you're right you just had to feel slightly uncomfortable in the supermarket for nothing. The twisting they do on this issue is crazy. The whole thing though I think is a sign that people in certain countries, don't trust their governments

I get what youre saying, but i think your point of view might be different to others here. As i understand youre saying as an infinite being the law of attraction can be used to attract all reality of itself or ourself. I am right now inquiring how this is true whilst simultanously creating the reality that im inquiring about. OK yes although im probably not at the level of consciousness to experience that yet. But as i understand it, the LOA as its spoken about in books like the secret is very different to what youre talking about, I can resonate with what youre saying, but i feel like books like the Secret would actually make people miss deeper truths if they believe it dogmatically, the same as you could say the bible points to the same truths that you are talking about, but if taken dogmatically this can be missed. Have you understood my perspective through this thread because all im talking about is that using an explanation such as the one found in the secret is not the best way to go about understanding the deeper truths that you are touching on. Im not sure if im being understood or im just completely misguided

Ah ok got you. OK so we would know that theres hay there but maybe we dont know the properties or exactly how much hay there is or even why its there, so in that case its better to say 'we know hay is there but thats all we know so far', if you then guess how much is there and what the properties are and then say its definitely that just because youre aware of the hay, you will then miss out on what is actually there or any chance of becoming more conscious to realise whats there if you are stuck on what you think is there

Sorry man im having trouble grasping what your point is. Im probably missing it, are you saying LOA is basically a pointer to all experience? You would need to give me your definition of LOA because i didnt know that is what you meant. Im not saying this to debate im just trying to get what you mean. Explain like im 8

Thanks Well ultimately thoughts are a happening not something we can really do ourselves, which then would question free will, which would then affect the whole theory of LOA as how can you be consciously creating through thoughts that think themselves? But lets no go down that rabbit hole, i know what you meant. My opinion on it if thats what your asking is that there is definitely an affect that your thoughts have on reality, thats within my direct experience and can be felt even with the energy i maybe projecting and how people may act differently depending on my state. The explanation of energy and thoughts is somewhat mysterious, science has tried to explain it but of course its limited as its not actual experience. So theres a leap that has to be made with any experience when you bring in an explanation, the explanation is essentially for other people to maybe grasp what your experience was. Now i guess ultimately im now seeing that my point was that magic is not really the best explanation as in the best way for people to understand the experience, as has been said it uses purple language at least. The reason why i say its not the best explanation is there is a tendency to create dogma around it, as it sounds mystical and exciting and i think that can lead you away from what the experience actually is. My theory with religion is that someone had a genuine mystical experience, tried to explain it and had to use allegorical language to explain the unexplainable, but people took this allegorical language literally and created stories and had wars defending it. Obviously im not saying LOA is going to create wars i just think there a better ways to explain it that could avoid potential dogma. By the way i only brought up Leo as others were talking about the opinions of more well known spiritual people, i dont take anything Leo says as gospel, without my own direct experience. Ive been on this journey a while now My logical brain is shut off most of the time lol, im open for it working and im sure it will work again, its just not in my direct experience that its magic thats all im saying

@Michal__ @Thestarguitarist14 Nah honestly I'm glad it works for you guys and I'm not even saying it doesn't work, for me like I said it worked, I just don't see the link of what you attribute it to and I don't get why you're so certain it's that. My perspective is always I don't really know and it would be a leap to say I know anything outside of my direct experience. But if you're honestly saying you've had direct experience and the only way to explain the happenings is magic then it's not really for me to dispute that. If you're deluded hopefully you see clearly and if I'm not seeing what is real, which is magic, then I honestly hope I do see that as it want to know and feel what is real. I will give you a concrete example cos I was kinda into the LOA a bit, years ago. But I wrote down a few things that I wanted, one was an audi a3 specifically amongst others things. I stopped thinking about it and just put it to the side and set the intention, I completely forgot that I wrote the list. Cut to about 3 years later I found the list and a lot of things had come true including the audi which was now parked in front of my place. Now did magic from my thoughts cause this to happen or did I plant this in my sub-conscious and then when I had enough money I bought the car, who knows, maybe its kinda the same thing. But from my perspective it felt like I set it in my mind that it was possible and then it happened, if I didn't think it was possible it prob wouldn't have happened, I don't feel like I experienced magic, but maybe I'm not conscious enough to feel it or maybe mine was due to thinking and some peoples are due to magic or maybe magics a way to explain this occurance. ??‍♂️ I still think the principles are valuable to have either way

Yes you can call thought magic i have no problem, i was just stating that as we've defined spiral dynamics it would be purple along with spirit realm, magical powers, psychic powers and other things that have been mentioned in this thread. Yes i understand we are all it, in Leos video regarding this subject he explicitly states that LOA is not to do with magic, that was my only comment regarding that. It doesnt mean that hes right im just noting it. Yes the terminology is purple-ish and i would argue the reasoning is somewhat purple in that something happens and you would reason that its because of LOA, this is similar to what a tribal person might believe. If youre saying that youre on some higher consciousness and that specifically doesnt apply to you because you have a completely different outlook and understanding than most humans, then i cant argue with that and ill have to take your word for it. I assumed you would put me orange, i expected this as Leos (older views) and Sadhgurus views were dismissed or explained away, so ultimately who am i? I would say that you should be aware of your bias' because consider that if Leo or Sadhguru had expressly said they believe in magical manifestation you would have used that as confirmation of your views but because they disagreed to some extent you claimed that you knew more in this realm than Sadhguru, this strikes me as somewhat biased because essentially theres no way you could be wrong or challenged. I would also say putting someone at a lower level than yourself could be a way to keep your belief going, essentially absolutely anyone who disagrees or thinks different to you regarding this subject i think you would automatically put them at a lower level than yourself, even if in reality they could be more developed than you (im not necessarily saying i am specifically), if you dont put them at a lower level you would say that they dont understand said subject as much as you. This really smacks of bias thinking. If youve noticed ive not really been defensive or acted defensive, but i have noticed that a lot in this thread, which shows a strong attachment to belief, youll also notice i havent pegged you at a level as i dont have enough information on you and i dont need you to be lower so i can dismiss you and hold on to a belief. If i had agreed with you fully, you wouldve put me on a higher level most likely, meaning everyone who agrees is higher in your estimation than anyone who disagrees. These are just some observations ive made, but im sure you will dismiss them as not true in some way lol. But no you havent been that insulting, other posters have obviously but im not offended or anything, i know i am questioning beliefs that you guys hold dear and that of course could be true, so i guess i expected some backlash, i didnt bring it up to play the victim i was making the point that it wasnt especially high conscious to insult people that disagree with you, but i understand the reasoning behind it so its all love. To be honest there is a lot of mystery in the world which i think is amazing and i sometimes get suspicious when people have a certainty about things, because, cool if theyre right its good theyve worked it out, but if theyre wrong and then theyre mind is closed to other possibilities it means they will never actually be open to the reality of it which might be that there is no answer (not specifically talking about this thread) As they say a wise man knows he knows nothing. Anyway all the best to everyone on the thread. Heres Eckart talking about mysteries -

I havent got defensive this whole thread, despite being called names and being insulted by you yellow folks quite often, so no this wont be an exception. Its your opinion, i would question it if its based off the fact that i dont believe in magic but either way, magical thinking is usually pegged at purple, thats why i brought it up. Thats not to say a yellow person couldnt use it but it is a purple trait. Anyway yeah i guess you couldve, theres no way to prove either way through this text format so ill take your word for it

Ill have a look into it, ive never heard of magic type things in reference to stage yellow, but guess its possible. Have a go at the LSD $1000 thing, id love to see that in action

Why did you reject it in favour of the magical belief? I was assuming you rejected it it not that you werent aware of it btw Not really although it sounds fun. Like i said of tried setting intentions and all of that which then came true, in fact i would go as far as to say i do generally set intentions in my life, but i see it more as removing the mental blocks to get what i want rather than something external and magical. That does sound cool, what is it? lol