Nilsi

Putin is not stupid, he knows very well that he can not win this war on the ground, if the west keeps pumping weapons and money into Ukraine; This is just sending a message, in my estimation, by saying "look, I'm ready to sacrifice my whole population, you think I'm afraid of using nukes?" I seriously don't understand what these western leaders think is gonna happen; Russia is not just gonna roll over and die, while having a full nuclear arsenal at hand.

Yes, but these two experiences can not possibly know of each other, and God can only imagine two separate things by forgetting it's God. It's just impossible to experience another experience lol. Of course it's plausible and necessarily the case and I find great comfort in this as well, but it's really just a nice thought.

I'm with Ray Kurzweil on this. I don't think we'll need psychedelics once we can increase our intelligence by millions of orders of magnitude via AI (which Kurzweil predicts will happen by 2045). As nuts as the guy is, he has been spot on with all his predictions and probably has thought about these things more than anyone else. We still obviously have to play our cards right to make this happen and to ensure that everyone will have access to these technologies.

Sure, but you will never know of these other visual fields unless you imagine them, at which point there will be duality/finitude again and God would be the synthesis of those different visual fields, or am I missing something here?

I guess my point is that other consciousnesses are not an experience, it's just something you create and for that you have to slice up reality into separate things, at which point you won't be Infinite anymore. I don't even know if that was the issue, but that's what I see at least.

But you're not actually conscious of infinity when you imagine other consciousnesses, at least I don't see how that would be possible; although I realize, that it's kind of silly to say this isn't possible. Actually it's kind of obvious that ultimately there are no "other consciousnesses."

Solipsism is your ticket to infinity though. As long as you imagine other consciousnesses you are less than infinite; I don't see how you could have both simultaneously. They are both true, but you cannot be in Australia and Alaska at the same time.

What kind of mad logic is this You will find yourself alone and horny at times, that's just life man. Even if I had a bunch of supermodels lined up just waiting for a booty call, there will still be times, where I would prefer to just rub one out and get it over with.

Being as well read as someone like Ken Wilber, John Vervaeke, Daniel Schmachtenberger etc. is an insane accomplishment and probably one of the more rewarding things one can do in life.

And what do you do when you're home alone and you're horny? You just hold it in til you're blue in the face? This is such silly logic. You think you're a man for getting blue balls or what?

I don't really get it either. The funniest thing is that all those men empowerment ideologues demonize porn, instead of using it to empower themselves to not be reliant on pussy all the time. The logic behind this is so twisted, I don't even know how to make sense of it.

Didn't even know he wrote an autobiography lol.

You certainly can't read something like "Sex, Ecology, Spirituality" or "The Matter With Things" in a day, but a lot of the source material of Wilber could be comfortably read in a day. Also, remember, Wilber had a clear goal for reading these books (understanding human development), so he just has to find the bits and pieces that are relevant for his endeavors. He doesn't have to understand every single word Nietzsche said or know every detail of quantum mechanics, nor did he. I don't even know how much Wilber read and I'm not making any claims on that, I'm just telling you what's possible.

Good thing I don't hold that worldview.

Wilber knew exactly what he wanted to know and he just went and did it.

I can read a medium sized book a day if I want. You can use reading techniques to multiply your speed significantly (which I'm not doing). You can also just read the parts that you care about. Some former president of the USA (I unfortunately don't remember who) used to read a book everyday before breakfast. There are levels to this game lol.

There are people that read multiple books a day.

That's not even all that much. You can easily read 400 books in a year or two, if you are serious and know what you're looking for.

It depends what you mean by stupid. Monogamy selects for traits like being nice, loyal, content etc., while polygamy selects for dominance, looks, (possibly smarts). Some may even say this is deteriorating western culture lol. From natures perspective you could argue that the best specimen should reproduce unhindered and all the other men should be monogamous and raise the children of their women (even if they are not their own). Monogamy is just the only sensible mating system in our current society. Polygamy is really only ethical, if we can ensure that everybody gets to fuck (otherwise were back to survival of the fittest again).

Its obvious that you dont give a shit about a girl you have known for one day. If you really care about monogamy, or at least want to give it a serious shot, you just have to bite the bullet of getting to know each other, going out, doing activities together etc. I wouldnt even put that on a limited capacity to love; its as with everything - the more time you spend with it, the better it gets, the more time you want to spend with it. Its just a pain in the ass to get to the point at which the relationship will be meaningful enough to justify it.

Lol pls dont tell me you were the guy recording that Daniel Schmachtenberger disstrack.

For somebody who watches so much Schmachtenberger, your confidence intervals suck balls man

Lach.

Plot twist: the pedophile Leo hung out with was actually Michael Jackson.

I appreciate it, maybe something science/philosophy related, but I definitely don't have the same passion for mysticism, or whatever you would call it, that you have.