Nilsi

Based on the conversations that actually took place there. Im not saying there is no overlap, but thats a silly statement. More often than not these heuristics are based on some underlying unconscious emotions and motivations, that can be totally disconnected from any actual realities. I know you mean well and Im unneccessarily being an asshole about it. I have some skin in the game, so my judgement might also be distorted. I just cant really relate to the reaction to this discord situation.

Your worries were unwarranted. Catastrophizing based on some availability heuristic is not exactly wisdom.

That's just a personal predisposition (high neuroticism?). I don't understand your logic. The discord was never meant to replace the forum. Meanwhile you people are participating on the other bald guys forum, which is clearly in direct competition with this one.

Base rate fallacy. People don't tend to organize themselves into doomsday cults all that often

Gives me flashbacks of me and my classmates sneaking out at night during a school trip to Rome and the teacher giving us a lecture along the lines of: "Your parents could sue me if something were to happen to you... Do you even know how reckless your behavior was?" Meanwhile we were having the night of our lives.

What stops any group of people from doing something stupid? You have a vivid imagination. Meanwhile, we were talking about astrology, music and drunk driving.

Youre a cutie.

Also, what is it with you people and Rupert Spira? I can respect his work for making spirituality accessible to ordinary folk, but I fail to see any "depth" beyond that. This is like watching an elementary school teacher and getting hyped by the way he has with kids.

There is no problem. You are the one asking for answers. I give you an answer and you get mad at me. This forum in a nutshell.

That's a fair point, but it's not obvious to me that a "serious presentation" is an effective teaching strategy. I'd take the madness of an Osho or Ralston everyday of the week over elderly Eckhart or sleepy Spira.

lol Im so triggered, I'm shaking. You are the one bringing believes into this. I will confess, that my use of irony is sometimes a bit subtle, but that you have to deal with. If you can't grasp that this is infinity, you just have more "work" to do. No reason to get salty about it.

Actually, you are mistaking your fantasies for reality

If I were experiencing your thoughts right now, I couldn't experience mine. Hence we take it one at a time.

You are directly experiencing the actual infinity right now. What are you missing? Some kind of lightshow?

Thats all good. So, it is either a choice (short term advantage + long term detriment OR long term advantage + short term detriment) OR there is actually some kind of transcendent diet that optimizes across lifespan (which is probably what we should be looking for). These long term detrimental genes have only survived, because these humans had their offspring before the point at which they became a liability. I guess all roads lead to eugenics. CRISPR will allow us to clean up these "bad genes" and remove the downside from the "advantage now" diet (not to mention, that we can genetically optimize our food to our unique genetic makeup). How long before this will be available? I dont know.

For example: One successful genetic adaptation might be "perceiving childlike features as attractive;" This is adaptive, because males who possess this trait will take more care of their children, which in turn makes those children more likely to survive and thus reproduce, spreading the gene that codes for "perceiving childlike features as attractive." This is in fact why you find young-looking women so attractive (because the specificity of this trait is low enough to where it is also triggered by adults with childlike features) Now, this kind of logic is how evolution works in every dimension. Also important: We have spent most of our evolutionary past (roughly 2.000.000 years) in foraging (hunter gatherer) societies and not in agrarian ones (which only emerged roughly 10.000 years ago), so this is where most of the adaptation took place. So, a gene that codes for something like "more optimal digestability of red meat" or "more optimal nutrient absorption of fruits," would have brought about an evolutionary advantage and thus been selected for over the generations. A gene coding for "more optimal energy utilization of grain," would have brought no advantage and would thus not have spread as rapidly as the former two, if at all. So: Our organism (which is the product of an evolutionary process) has been optimized under conditions in which we were mainly consuming meats, fruits and wild plants (Im not sure what to make of Saladinos comments on plants - it sounds plausible, but I have not seen good evidence for it; thats why I supplement my diet with AG1), which is why it is optimized to process those foods and not others (like bread or pasta or oats or whatever). Just for the sake of it: My diet consists of ground beef, eggs, fruits, honey and coconut oil. I drink coffee and water (and the occasional beer, or 2, or 3, or 4 - but thats besides the point). I supplement with AG1, Creatine, D3/K2, Omega-3 and Magnesium Glycinate.

Saladino makes a pretty compelling case for his diet. You can't ignore evolutionary realities in a holistic framework of human health. Most physiologists and dieticians are stuck in their reductionist neuroscience and don't comprehend the importance of evolutionary adaptation. We didn't evolve in a vacuum. The largest chunk of our phylogenetic development has been spent in some kind of hunter gatherer/foraging situation, so that should absolutely be at the core of how we think about diet. We acknowledge these realities in almost every aspect of what it means to be human (sex, violence, socialization, art, language), but somehow when it comes to diet, we think we are above this. For what it's worth: Im on his diet for a month now and I feel absolutely fantastic.

Neither I nor Schmachtenberger would disagree with that. But talking about it is part of how the system corrects itself, so it's kinda silly to hold that against him.

lol He isnt saying civilization is self-terminating. He is saying a civilization run on game theory with democratized technology that can wipe out all life on earth is pretty fucking fragile. If we move beyond the zero-sum dynamics and fix our coordination issues, there is no reason to self-terminate.

Gets me every time.

Fair enough, but there is obviously demand for some kind of casual "rapid fire chatting" and if you cant supply it, you should not be surprised when people seek it out elsewhere.

The user experience of this forum sucks ass, thats the problem. You cant have a conversation with someone, if you are only allowed to send a message every two minutes. If you spent half the time you worry about people leaving actually improving this site, there would be no such problem.

My 2nd edit. I will get there, just watch me.

Im beginning to learn video editing and I thought "what the heck, why not start practicing with some of Leos material" - so here goes.

Disobedience - that is the nobility of slaves!