SeaMonster

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    692

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SeaMonster

  1. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    1 hour ago, Princess Arabia said:

    So if one has a habit of picking one's nose, that's a stress response? If one has a habit of hanging up on people because of whatever reason, is that a stress response. If one has a habit of waking up and first thing they do is grab a lollipop, is that a stress response, if one has a habit of driving a certain way, is that a stress response? Why do we feel that bad habits, (and I say bad because we label them that way), is a result of a stress response. It's not, it's just a response. 

    The test is simple.

    Self-awareness and harm.

    Is one aware that one is doing it, and is the habit harmful?

    If I'm doing something I know is harmful in some way (directly or indirectly), and I can't stop myself, then why am I doing it? Why can't I stop?

    I see a lot of "just because" answers on the forum.

    Please. People don't just harm themselves for no reason.  There's a pay-off.  People aren't entirely irrational.

  2. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    1 hour ago, aurum said:

    Development is happening either consciously or unconsciously. Why would unconscious development be superior to conscious development?

    As I suggested above, there's an ulterior motive to conscious development, and due to that it's rife with self-deception.

    (I'm referring to the kind of moral development Wilber hawks, not development towards some particular goal, like learning to play guitar to impress women or something like that.)

    1 hour ago, aurum said:

    That’s your particular, limited perspective on wholeness. How do you know there aren’t other more inclusive perspectives? 

    Let me explain something about Wilber -- his fatal flaw is that he takes something that is arguably observable (different people are at different stages of development) and turns it into a kind of ethics (this is the hierarchy you should climb.)

    He takes an IS and turns it into an OUGHT.

    You can be a philosopher-ethicist or you can be a developmental psychologist.  When you try to mix the two you get dogshit.  Developmental psychology is about what actually works for people, not what we would like.  If my perspective is limited, can you provide any evidence that Wilber's prescriptions actually work in the real world?

     

  4. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    22 minutes ago, aurum said:

    That’s a pretty big assumption based on just a simple book title.

    What is your beef with Wilber? Not saying the guy is right about everything, but it seems like you really don’t like him.

    I think the kinds of models he hawks for personal development just get people more into their ego (in insidious ways) as opposed to towards "wholeness."  So he's leading a lot of people astray.  Also, there's a cult-like element to the community and teachings.

    I fundamentally disagree with the premise that one should consciously develop along the dimension of structures of consciousness (in other words, Orange -> Green -> Yellow, etc.)  Anyone who suggests such a thing is either a cult leader or simply doesn't understand psychology.

    The egoic element in man loves shit like that and seizes on it with glee.  "Wholeness" is about accepting that you aren't morally perfect -- it's about finding a balance of the psyche.  All attempts at moral perfection are doomed to failure.  If naturally being at some stage isn't good enough for you, you're trying to compensate for a lack of this balance.

     

  6. Posted

    It's impossible to simply cut out bad habits without adopting good habits.

    All you're going to do is pick up other bad habits in their place since they are typically there as a stress response.

    You need to conceive of what a healthy lifestyle/routine looks like, in a holistic sense.  In other words, what good habits do you need to minimize stress and maximize well-being?  

    That's what "radical wholeness" 9_9 looks like.

  7. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    1 hour ago, aurum said:

    There are degrees of wholeness. So the title is likely appropriate.

    If he'd titled the book, "Finding Wholeness," how would it have made the meaning any different?

    It wouldn't.  He may as well  have titled it "Finding Super-Duper Wholeness" by Ken Wilber The Pretentious Asshole.

    He's basically saying "that other wholeness authors talk about? That's not the ultimate wholeness. Mine is."

    A guarantee he's full of shit, in other words.

  9. Posted

    Energy cords are a well-known concept in the area of psychic/spiritual healing.

    Supposedly, psychic healers can actually see them.

    I would have him cut the cords and see if you feel better as a result, and maybe you can get her out of your life.

    On 4/10/2024 at 6:57 AM, thierry said:

    what do you guys think about it ? I personally am openminded about this situation but isn’t it bullshits. Maybe I feel bad cause I feel bad and she is not a « demon » like this guy say ? What are your opinions. Does he really have power ?

    You haven't really provided a detailed description of her behavior, so how would one know? It sounds plausible that she's toxic af and an energy vampire.  People like that certainly exist.

  10. Posted

    54 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

    When I talk about these concepts, I introduce the possibility of Social, Financial, and Emotional IQ being recognized as of equal importance to standardized IQ results in people's thoughts about life, their future, or the future of their families and countries. It's a standard response I've repeated for many years.

    Well, the problem with this (as is the problem with the "multiple intelligences" idea) is the question of measurement.  How does one actually quantify these constructs, aside from simply opining ("hey, that guy is good with money, he must have a high financial IQ!".)

    It's pretty much where we are already anyway - subjectively recognizing that different people have different talents or abilities.

  11. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    On 4/8/2024 at 11:21 PM, Emerald said:

    The actual root of the problem is that many men are pressured and/or perceive a pressure to match up to an impossible Masculine ideal. And this produces feelings of shame because no man can actually fully embody that ideal. And this produces an intense anxiety in men at any part of them that deviates from the Masculine and is seen as Feminine.

    You have to look at this topic in a historical context.

    Before the 1960s sexual revolution, second-wave feminism, and the breakdown of traditional gender roles, there wasn't a need for pickup artistry or the manosphere.

    It's not so much about shame or pressure to match up to an impossible masculine ideal.   The issue is that women's liberation has ruptured the traditional mating market and created a lot of confusion which the manosphere has attempted to remedy.  The traditional approaches to dealing with women weren't working for men.

    Before that time, young women primarily looked for a good provider to secure as a marriage partner.  After, women could afford to engage in years of unmarried sex before settling down at a later age.  The kind of men they favored for this were often different than what one would traditionally consider as a good marriage partner.

    That's all it is.  The manosphere attempts to deal with that reality in a maximally advantageous manner for men by teaching them the skills to navigate this new environment.

    It's simple adaptation.  Roughly speaking, women in the West don't want to marry until their late 20s or early 30s.  Of course any man who doesn't understand or willfully denies this reality is not going to be successful with women.  So unless men are "naturals" with women you get guys who either give up (such as blackpill) or adapt (PUA.)

    Most women don't understand or care how the proverbial sausage is made.  They just see losers and winners and act accordingly.

  12. Posted

    On 4/14/2024 at 1:38 AM, Growly said:

    Yeah, even though it's %100 truth, I will stop consuming this disgusting ideology.

    Blackpill is not 100% truth, it's more like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    What is 100% truth is that in life you're dealt a certain hand, and your outcomes depend on how well you play that hand, not intrinsically on the hand itself.

    If you change everything you're capable of changing for the better, you're going to maximize your success in life.

    Blackpill is basically a rationalization for not doing the hard work of changing what you can change.

    Let's say you're short and ugly.  Can you hit the gym? Yes.  Can you dress well? Yes.  Can you learn how to talk well and be charming, have a sense of humor, learn how to dance, e.g., play a musical instrument? Yes.

    Those things get you a long way.

    But blackpill guys are secretly whiny, entitled babies who don't want to do hard work.  They are immature and frightened.  They are looking for an excuse to give up.  

    That's the crux of the matter.  You can maximize your potential or give up because it's hard, or you don't feel like it, or you feel entitled not to.

  13. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    On 4/9/2024 at 2:47 PM, enchanted said:

    Does your ability to do spirituality (and understand spiritual concepts) dependant on your IQ? Why or why not? 

    If you're interested in spirituality, you've probably already passed the threshold for the IQ required to get awakened.   The rest has to do with self-awareness of a certain type, which isn't necessarily something a high IQ provides.

    On 4/11/2024 at 5:56 AM, BlueOak said:

    Do you honestly think we should be measuring these two example individuals as we currently measure them?

    IQ is just IQ, it's not a global measure of a person's character, worth, professional success or mental well-being.  There are certain correlations, and it's certainly difficult to conceive of a functional modern society when the mean IQ is below a certain level, but one can't pick two individuals at random and predict their condition based on IQ disparities.  

    You could have a multimillionaire pro athlete with a 100 IQ and some guy who works at a comic book store with 150.

  14. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    On 4/9/2024 at 9:00 PM, enchanted said:

    I see. So IQ would go up with more education. That makes sense. Also Mexico and middle East are also poor and low measured IQ. 

    If this were the case, we would be able to prove it by measuring a person's IQ before and after college.  Let's say in 12th grade vs. after getting a PhD.

    Do you know a lot of studies that show this? If they existed, we would be hearing about them every day.

    No, sorry, IQ <> education.  IQ is what enables one to profit from an education.  There are raw capacities such as working memory, spatial visualization and abstract reasoning that you can't teach.

  15. Posted

    5 hours ago, Magnanimous said:

    Personally I just found that when I get in the right mood (very rare because I need the right circumstances since im not skilled enough to induce a peak socializing mood) I just get sublime results with people

    I reckon its some genetic freak shit bcoz there's no way it's normal

    I would focus on figuring out a technique to get yourself into the right mood.  Think back to these times and reverse-engineer how you got there.  There was probably a sequence of some kind.

  16. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    Because he offers a simple solution to life's problems: get ripped, get rich, learn to kick ass, and adopt a certain hypervigilant mindset towards the world.

    In other words he takes certain positive pursuits and cranks them to 11, while ignoring other approaches one needs for happiness and "the good life."

    It is good to weight train.  It is good to make money.  It is good to learn some form of self-defense and situational awareness in public is a good thing.  

    But you can easily overdo all these things as well.  The problem is that in his case it's an imbalanced, compulsive approach that - as has become clear in his case - can easily lead to self-destruction.

    This appeals to a certain subset of young men because it's highly actionable stuff that doesn't require much, if any, self-examination.

     

     

  17. Posted

    5 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

    Wait until you realize that other’s mindset and feelings are precisely your own. It’s a paradox, but actually practical. You’d stop wanting to hurt others and yourself.

    Only if I'm projecting that energy onto the other person to play out; but in some cases he could be projecting onto me, which would have nothing to do with my issues.

  20. Posted

    35 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

    Criticism is valid from a certain point of view. Understanding how the person’s mindset dictates their behavior leads to less resistance and more empathy.

    You don't need to consider the other person's mindset because it's irrelevant; you only need to objectively, honestly self-introspect to see whether it's valid and actionable.  

    42 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

    distinguish between what is painful and what is spiteful

    Yeah, that's an excellent distinction.

  21. Posted

    This is actually a good question.

    Firstly -- no, people don't fundamentally flip from not being a sociopath (in other words, having a conscience) to being a sociopath (exploiting others without a conscience.)  

    Secondly -- yes, being enlightened CAN give you certain powers of insight and therefore the option of manipulating other people, however it would unlikely be manipulation for the purpose of exploitation.  Any good coach or therapist is in essence a skillful manipulator of his clients, but it's not exploitation in a zero/sum sense.

    So yeah, it's easy to manipulate people but if you have a conscience it becomes an ethical kind of manipulation, either for the benefit of others, or, in the worst case for mutual benefit.

  23. Posted · Edited by SeaMonster

    19 minutes ago, Squeekytoy said:

    Like if she's sexually liberated then she must want to instantly jump on my raging boner when I grope her out of the blue, or else what's the difference between that and a mormon lol. Or whatever he's thinking, I can't really tell at this point.

    "Black or white" thinking is not atypical whenever someone has little experience in some area (or in autism, which I don't know if he has, but it's possible.)

  24. Posted

    45 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

    When what.. if what...you're just telling me another story. You don't know my frame of mind or how I see things, you're assuming that when the truth comes crashing down or when I'm faced with it, I'll shit my pants and all those lovey dovey shit will fly out the window. That's your story you're projecting unto me. You don't know what I'm prepared for or have accepted or whatever. 

    I suspect it's only scary for people who have no idea what they're experiencing, who kinda stumble into awakenings unprepared.

    Awakening is actually something that becomes a new normal very quickly, at each step.  You simply have no access to the former illusive state any longer.