eos_nyxia

Yea... whatever this all is, I don’t want to be a part of it moving forward. I can't do it in good faith. I am not personally convinced that this is in the collective best benefit moving forward (claiming monopolies on The Truth in a non-inclusive way, which is very much the "old way"). Nor do I find the method to be in good taste either. (Not that there isn’t a point to the message itself minus the vehicle.) Like as circular and hopelessly self-referential I (personally) find most of these dialogues to be, I recognize that they're not really meant for me. But there are also very important reasons for the breakdown of "spiritual authority" based on words, perceived social status, and claimed authority, because the things that cannot somehow be shared directly, as in through direct experience, are arguably more of the same as what came before in human history. For reference, I am one of those “born exceptionally gifted” human beings in a spiritual sense (and in a few other senses). Almost everything that I’ve done and experienced for most of my life has been in the complete absence of added substance. I try not to talk (or think) down toward people who used substance to get where they have, but to be fair, I don’t think what is talked about here on this forum AT ALL accounts for what is possible with human hardware minus substance. It's not like those people are there by accident either. Like... I don't think it's well understood what "the gifted" are capable of, but then probably you're not part of the actual conversation anyway. IMO you should be able to know pre-emptively if you are at a "true peak" before or during having a “peak” experience. To not be able to do so betrays a certain lack of both knowing and experience. Even if it's on some purely instinctive level, you need to know enough to know that you are where you are feasibly and what it definitely means, and to not be changing the goal posts repeatedly in a “this is the new peak experience!” sort of way. You should also be able to properly account for all direct human experiences with some measurable, clear, meaningful means, including for all the people who just never talk, and never would talk. Otherwise... what is the point of being at “”the peak”” and then telling people about it? This doesn't even start to get into the issue of extra-sensory powers and what not, which at their root, are not intrinsically split off from perception itself.

You speak as if this is some sort of given. It is not. Most of this is just being loved for your packaging. You get a slightly different version of this, no? If you are the recipient of this, you only believe this "love" to be true if you are very young and/or naive. Self-improvement is an "anyone" kind of thing... If you want "respect" rather than what you call "love" (blanket attention/ approval/ etc.), then you have to work on yourself and your circumstances..... just like absolutely everyone else. (And obviously, even then, it's not a given that you will get it.) Guess what? How often do you hear women complaining specifically about not being respected? If you are vulnerable to exploitation, then at least some people will attempt to exploit you (if they think you have something of value). The other side of this is being a target with an X mark on your back. Having more people who would willingly like to exploit you, given the chance... is that really a definite plus? Also, is having someone willing to perpetually rescue you from your weaknesses and vulnerabilities always an upside? I think not. Too much coddling and you become stunted. Being stunted and being actually, truly happy are not compatible factors. Any woman (or man for that matter) with any sense knows when they're dealing with fake ass shit.

I've spent some time over the years using websites like Nutrition Data to get an idea of how my micros/macro stack up on a daily basis. For the last year, I've occasionally been using this app called Cronometer from the same purpose. So this is something that I've noticed: there are a lot of nutrient dense plant foods which are very rich in micros, especially ones like magnesium (which many tend to be low in), but also B vitamins (that you would have in plant foods) and also tend to have reasonable amounts of zinc/ selenium. However, they often have a lot of manganese in them. When I'm meeting and exceeding all of my other micros, my manganese tends be WAY over the RDV (often by about 7-10 times) and technically exceeding the daily recommended MG by a decent amount. The worst offenders tend to be foods that are generally considered "very healthy" like: 1) organic sprouted, whole grain breads 2) hemp hearts 3) leafy green vegetables 4) legumes (e.g. lentils). Should I be concerned about this over the long term? I did a quick search on existing studies and info, and it's very conflicting. Quite a few sources say: it's only manganese from non-dietary sources (including manganese in water) and supplements that cause negative effects, and dietary sources are not known to cause any side effects. Other sources say: it doesn't matter what the source is, too much is too much. For what it's worth, I tend to take RDV with a grain of salt... for example: I'm not that concerned about having too much vitamin D particularly, especially with dreary Pacific Northwest winters where you wake up and it's dark and cloudy all day. Yet overdosing on fat soluble vitamins is also something that you're warned against in... what should I call it? "generic nutritional science"? @Michael569 If I remember right, you've read quite a few studies on nutrition. Is this something you know anything about?

TBH you're probably going to have to buy some sort of hippie/ specialist brand, and even then you're probably going to have to check the labels because of "greenwashing". Like I used to use both of these back in the day. I'm pretty sure they're both local brands though; I imagine what is available depends how ingredient conscious people in your country/ local area are. Like this one I think is a salon brand... ...and this one I used to pick up at a grocery store, but it was moderately expensive for a grocery store shampoo. For the last couple years I've mostly been using this, which I got from Amazon: If you can't find anything, IME almost all shampoo bars are pretty minimalist ingredient-wise; I assume it's because they don't need to add liquids so the don't need to account for preservation and the texture of the liquid shampoo itself. You could even try using diluted Dr. Bronner's as shampoo (some people apparently swear by it), but it didn't work for me personally. It made my hair feel gross. Sub in any other castile soap.

As opposed to what, BDSM?

Is this actually really a new trend?? Somehow I doubt it's anywhere as bad as it was in the 00s, though maybe the resurgence of the Y2K aesthetic is creating some sort of cultural subcurrent. Wasn't the Kim Kardashian example about her trying to fit into Marilyn Monroe's dress? (Which supposedly did some sort of damage to the dress itself.) Fashion models have been very thin for a long time? The pushback against this due to social pressure is still quite recent. (Last 10 years or so.)

The STANK from not wearing socks with these shoes is real. If you wear them a lot and sweat in them, even washing them doesn't get that smell out. ...I highly don't recommend it.

@Lincisman Look specifically for boots! If you're not specifically looking for "barefoot" shoes/ boots, "zero drop" is another term which might find you what you're looking for. I own a few like... the Vibram Furoshiki. (Personally, I have mixed feelings about it because the velcro strap which keeps the boot together tends to fly off if you do any serious sort of foot bending. However, they have lining so they are fairly warm for what they are. TBH they feel kind of like you're wearing some kind of weird slipper.) I also owned these Lems boots which I wore to death over the course of a couple of years. They are not warm. However I don't live in a place that typically has very cold winters, so I can get by with some warm socks. (IMO a thin, high wool content sock works well for these types of boots.) Someone above mentioned the brand Vivobarefoot. I own a couple of their shoes, including this boot (chukkas/ Gobi?): (These ones aren't warm at all though.) If you're used to those Vibram toe shoes, "barefoot"/ zero drop boots aren't really quite the same. You're not going to develop/ maintain the same sort of strength and dexterity you'd get in your toes and ankles that you would wearing the classic, but it will stop your ankles/ arches from weakening (in my experience) and becoming inflexible. You do get much more of a tactile ground experience than you would with other sorts of footwear, but it's not quite the same either. Maybe there is something for you here? Some of these brands I haven't heard of before, but then, I've been out of the loop for the past handful of years. They might be newer, IDK. https://nomanbefore.com/best-barefoot-winter-boots-waterproof/ https://anyasreviews.com/warmest-barefoot-winter-boots-zero-drop/ It looks like the warmest of the barefoot boots for "real winters" are mukluk-type boots. E.g. there is this brand, which is aboriginal owned: https://www.manitobah.com/collections/mukluks It looks like they have Vibram soles too. Expect to shell out anywhere from 250-500 dollars though, probably. As they tend to all be individually handmade the traditional way (as the boot was traditionally made by indigenous people of the Arctic). (Otherwise, you're probably not getting as good of a boot... and it will still probably be just as expensive anyway.)

Lately, I've been giving a few groups I've been aware of a more serious listen, like Daughter. (Who I was aware of vaguely before I heard that they were going to score Life is Strange: Before the Storm.) It's definitely some moody introvert music. Paying attention to the lyrics more now, they're definitely way darker than I remembered. I've also felt like music has been supporting me more lately, and has felt less like a sort of pretty decoration to fill up space a time... I think this is somewhat faster than the album version: Acoustic versions of Prefab Spout: This one has been living in my head rent-free the past week: (and a fall-winter mood, if I've ever heard one.) And this one, the original which was my introduction to them: Very underrated group from the 80s...

FYI matcha was used for 1000+ years by Buddhist monks to enhance focus during meditation! I've always been a caffeine-sensitive person; it's the only caffeinated beverage that I can consume in fairly strong concentration without it messing up my stomach and making me less focused than I would be naturally, without giving the jitters, etc. (Us East Asians tend to like our very tea strong compared to the rest of the world, IMO.) To the original question: other than the caffeine sensitivity, I'm also pretty sensitive to the acidity in coffee. Cold brew is somewhat better for that reason only. I like drinking the stuff, but more than that, I think I really just appreciate the ritual that is coffee. Otherwise, mentally and physically speaking, I don't feel like it adds that much to my life, personally. Even just getting in my one cup. As a person with a sensitive nervous system, who has always had a sensitive nervous system... if I am actually tired, let alone burnt out? Nervous system stimulation via coffee (but like, not in a focused way), upsetting my stomach and my nerves, and getting a crash later is literally the last thing that I need. These days I find myself pounding my digestive spices to put into my chai the old-fashioned way with a mortar and pestle: personally I like star anise, cinnamon, green cardamom, black pepper, cloves. Microplaned fresh ginger. (No fennel, ew.) IDK... it just tastes better. Also, all of these spices have a "warming", energizing effect. Even if you make a drink with those spices without the caffeine, it still has that effect.

The thing is that I came to this forum a couple years ago with a more understanding, open perspective. Like I was willing to put myself in the shoes of other people to the best of my ability, whatever was humanly possible for me to do, and to take this to an extreme. This very much includes perspectives which I don't find hospitable to me personally. Because I like to learn about all perspectives in pretty much any way, I don't feel this need to get married to ideology whether it's practical or not. I've read a lot of incel/ red pill/ black pill "philosophy" and various other things that I could get my hand on starting years ago. I'll literally read anything. You say no one understands you or cares? I do. ...for whatever that's worth. Even with me... this never-ending barrage of shitting on women turns me off. And I don't think it's right. And frankly, when you say other women don't care at all... having looked around? I'm not convinced. Women by default here make concessions of extending greater understanding and "keeping the peace" simply by being here, especially in this part of the forum.

I try not to respond to these threads in too reactive of a way (because rarely does it do much good IMO), and generally, I'm past getting particularly provoked anyway. I've pretty much seen it all, when it comes to the justifications of perspectives on the opposite side. It's mostly all the same arguments. You could say something which is basically the equivalent of >>it's just reality women should deal with it!!!<< Ok, but does this resolve people of the responsibility and ramifications of pushing out their worldview dogmatically? Where are the actual limits of just saying whatever it is you want in this space? Here's where I feel concerned: I've sometimes been talking to women who are younger than me from here in private, and it is usually this section that makes them extremely uncomfortable. To some degree, even a little bit, they wonder if they are overreacting for feeling the way that they do, for feeling that the way that women are talked about here is just wrong, particularly when it's at its worst. Like, it's degrading, condescending, hateful, etc... They wonder if dating in "the real world" is going to be this bad (and in that case, they might not want to deal with the opposite sex at all). Though I myself say that I don't think it is at all, and that in my experience, it hasn't been the case. (But that also, there might be some generational differences with technology causing some people, especially males, to not be socialized as well...) But also that there is also a much wider spectrum of male persons out there in the real world, including those who have a MUCH healthier and more positive attitude towards the opposite sex. Many people here would probably just call "normies" too, on a forum obsessed with self-development and spirituality. And say stuff which basically amounts to, well... I'm higher up the SD spiral than all of those plebians, therefore I am just better. But clearly, they have experience being better socialized with the opposite sex... Why is it, that the real, "plebian" world is much better than here with this one issue especially? Why is that ok?? How do you justify this to yourself other than "because reality/ survival + fuck women I gotta get what I want because no one else will get it for me? If you want to call and think of yourself as "better" at least have some higher moral standards for yourself? If you saw women talk about men in a similar spirit with similar language as used here, well... the result would be pretty predictable. But really, who can blame women for coming on here, reading all of this stuff, and getting concerned for their well-being as well as incredibly turned off?

Ah, the very classic strategy of "dismissing all female concerns" as being jealous/ crazy. How incredibly predictable. Personally, reading the thread that the OP mentioned actually made me really grateful for having aged out of this treatment, and basically being targeted for being a young piece of ass. It's like filtering out a bunch of people that I would rather not deal with in my spare time, likely for any reason. It's not that flattering and it never was, particularly. You're basically interchangeable.

I can't imagine at any point in my life ever doing this, lol. That's some low self-esteem... I saw this post either. I would say.... if he wants to advertise loudly and clearly that he's no prize, let him have it. But then you think of the damage that this attitude potentially does to other people, and it's just not right. It is ridiculous to suggest that a woman's only motive for critiquing this behaviour is """being jealous""". Some of us feel a sense of responsibility towards younger women and girls. I use to teach them. Do you think I want or would have ever wanted them to see them go through some of the stuff I went through, or possibly even worse? Personally, I try to take it on a case-by-case basis, keeping in mind that not all younger people have ridiculous, know-it-all attitudes (which I also try to take in stride). I also try to keep in mind what it was like to be dismissed by older people when I was younger (for things that I was right about), and I try to keep that in mind.

This is anecdotally just not true for many of us. Do you think women are crying about "aging out" of being harassed in a menacing way in public, some of us, starting from about 12 years old? (I've heard younger as well, at times.) Are you serious? What sort of reality bubble do you guys live in? Must be nice to have the opportunity to be so utterly clueless about what a large segment of the population goes through. Yea, part of it is this thing called self-protective boundaries which prevents you from getting screwed over in the first place.

In no particular order, if I was sorting through your thoughts as if I was you: What makes you think that he is truly happy, as opposed to putting on a facade? Or that he is not simply experiencing the absence of pain due to suppression and consequent numbness? For example: if you took away all of his toys and put him alone in a room for a while... how long would it take for him to fall into pieces (and to be reduced to a childish stub of a person) due to being forced to be around himself and his own psyche? And what would be left of him after this? IMO, even speaking moderately from personal experience as my upbringing was very harsh and emotionally suppressive in many ways: you can't have that kind of harsh, stitled tone when you talk all the time... and actually be capable of real happiness. And that tone is likely the result of someone who has taken all of his vulnerable, most childish emotions, thoughts, dreams, and impulses, and just CRUSHED it down into near-nothingness so he can "be a man". Happiness expresses itself in the body as being a sort of ease and expansive quality, generally. This can be seen in people's body language, and generally, it's very easy to spot in the way that people can usually tell a fake smile from a genuine smile.... what do you think? There are multiple versions of "fierce" spirituality embodied well but this is not what it looks like, IMO. First and foremost: It FLOWS freely. It is not so stilted and tense. This particular microcosm of the internet tends to really emphasize "absolute responsibility" over your reality more than other places. Perhaps it's the self-help bent? There are a ton of upsides to this stance, even in taking it to an extreme, but it's also a recipe for absolute misery for everything that you have somehow failed to address and account for. You can delay this with temporary copes, but eventually it comes back to you, like pulling a rubber band and it snapping against your wrist. And when it does, it hits hard. Even with the numbness. And guess what? It never ends. By definition, you cause yourself suffering in this way if you don't learn how to loosen your grip a bit. In general, living in a state where one is taking a narrow, aggressive, goal-orientated focus is not actually that conducive for happiness. Because all there ever is... is "right now". But it is conducive for bailing yourself out of situations and creating new ones, with the way that he is using it. In my experience, to be happy while also having goals and objectives is to embrace all the meaning and pleasure you take in your purpose... but RIGHT NOW. Not later. Now. Actually, are you aware that Buddhism also advocates for total personal responsibility? (That this is what ends "karma", which is mainly really just referring to the cycle of entanglements in causes and effects?:) Hinduism (at least theoretically) operates on the same principle.

Yes, but the delivery of a message matters, even as people say that it should not, that people shouldn't be obsessed with things being palatable, or the form container or superficial image of the message. Personally, I've myself gone through a phase semi-recently where I felt like I needed to SCREAM MY TRUTH OUT in a public place. But when I was writing here, I kept it contained within my own journaling. I don't consider it to be a socially responsible vibe to be spreading around, personally. Though I get that some people respond well to this (including to being "berated" which is still checking boxes for fulfilling the guru/ master role, which I also find dysfunctional in the long term). And anyways, "beating people over the head with the truth" works best when you use it strategically and in small doses, assuming that you care about the effect. It's like making a painting only out of all vivid colours, like this: You might think it would be more effective than using a lot of muted colours mixed in with a few brightish colours, because it's all BOLD BRIGHT colours, right? Nope. Bright colours register as "bright" against neutral colours... and the "bright" colours that you use don't even need to be quite so bright too. Equal loudness registers all as "sameness" visually, and so ultimately it has no real lasting impact. It's the same thing with our words when we use too much force indiscriminately. The message gets lost in the medium of expression. It's beyond just frustrating or antagonizing people. You numb them. Take this with a grain of salt though, I guess. Not that I post a lot in the forums, but I know they are probably sometimes perceived as obnoxiously long for the medium and are skipped/ skimmed over. But hey, at least I weed out people who have no intention span with words.

I offered questions because they're often more beneficial than critiques (IMHO). They're potential starting points for finding your own answer for things, and it's a bit more direct than trying to interpret a critique (though that can be helpful too.. assuming that "help" is actually what you're looking for rather than something else. Like maybe masochism? ) The concern with not handing over one's power is a valid one. However, do you not agree that practicing quality control matters? That what we put out into the world (or don't)... that this matters? (Which is why I asked the question about the "loudness war".) Everyone screaming at each other leads to a whole culture of people screaming at each other, and over each other. And this echos on and on. All people can do is scream even louder to be heard, until they lose their voice or they just burn out emotionally and mentally. Or have to pull "better" (as in, more attention-getting) stunts in order to be heard at all. This is partially why our online culture is the way it is IMO. A degree of self-restraint and moderation and thinking carefully before you speak is really nice for everyone else. It's a sort of culture of ME ME ME ME ME, and in the long term it's good for no one individual anyway, IMO.

I have experience with both things, especially when I was younger (in my teens and twenties). If there is a sort of "spiritual"/ developmental upside to this all: it's that you learn how to do so much more, with less. You become more efficient in your thinking, maybe. You are forced to eventually make clear what it is that you truly value, instead of being scattered in your desires and intentions, instead of doing things the way that you are used to doing things, using "force" or this idea of "effort" (which creates a lot of internal resistance and is by nature energy consuming and draining). There is this movement toward doing things in state of FLOW, toward actions, intentions, and experiences that are completely weightless in the psyche. You eliminate the weight that is unresolved, tangled emotion/ thought and trauma. "WEIGHTLESS" is the way that things ideally should be, even if the conditions that lead up to it are not so ideal. At least, this is what I have learned how to do. And many, many things open up to you as a result, that were simply not possible before. A serious question though: how much of "chronic fatigue" is a direct response to environmental sensitivities (and developing greater environmental sensitivities, because an aspect of spirituality is "embodiment" which involves developing your perception and body senses)? Anyway, as more people become more sensitive and more perceptive, society, technology, and living conditions will inevitably be adapted to suit our changing needs. As it always has. And frankly, we must live on this planet in a different way, a more harmonious way. Change is necessary for all of us.

Here's a confession: for many years (especially as a teenager), I would not stand directly in front of a microwave. I specifically mean putting my face/ brain up to close to it. It always gave off an extremely dodgy, chaotic energy which did not feel good in my body. Almost as if one's cells were being scrambled, or could start to break down somehow. It was a very ancient microwave though, and kind of a POS. The door got jammed a lot. I was not fully convinced at the time that I wasn't being overly paranoid and vigilant about it, like: But I was much more hypersensitive in a very porous way, like it felt like my body was not strong enough to handle my environment in many ways. Another example? Having to stay in places with fluorescent lighting was significantly worse than dealing with microwaves. A real vitality sapper. Even now, excessive fluorescent lighting over extended periods of time does make me feel less energetic. IMO the approach I take these days is that it's better to build up vitality (including in one's emotions, attitudes, and thoughts, whenever possible) rather than to obsess too much about every possible thing which could be doing you harm in this world....many things which are unavoidable. And a nearly uncountable number of factors, some which we likely have no awareness of them yet because we lack the perception/ sensitivity overall as a species. Change what you can, but the stress and the fear and the hypervigilance, and feeling like you need to put up walls and barriers (or live in some sort of protective glass ball) to survive also has a profoundly negative, anti-life effect. (I've been there before, so I know what it's like.) But microwaved food? I never noticed anything bad about it, even as a hypersensitive person... Also: most newer microwaves seem fine to me. EDIT: apparently the FDA advises against standing in front of microwave doors, lest radiation leaks from it (I'm guessing it's a door construction/ repair issue?) They're a pretty conservative institution too, as government organizations tend to be. Interesting. https://www.epa.gov/radtown/non-ionizing-radiation-used-microwave-ovens

You writing about yourself is quite interesting! I guess I come from the opposite perspective. I have a number of talents and affinities that might be considered extraordinary (intellectual, spiritual, sometimes creative), and I have been this way since I was very very young, though they were not especially played up at first. You could say that I came into this world in this way. My "gifts" stressed out my parents a lot and as a result, paradoxically, I developed much more of an inferior complex about them rather than a superior complex. That I was a massive inconvenience. I came into adulthood feeling deeply ashamed about things that I loved and that provided me meaning and pleasure originally: it just so happens that what you love and value and dedicate yourself wholly toward, it is also what develops talent/ genius, etc. It is no accident. Anyway, it took a while to fully sort it out, as it does. Probably as a direct result of this, I find myself in the opposite position of many people: I think there is great beauty and value in the ordinary and the mundane. I think there are small things in people, in circumstances, in life, which go unseen and unappreciated all the time. I think a lot of things that people find very ordinary to be extraordinary. There is also no shame needed either in being an ordinary person, specifically if you find real joy and purpose in an ordinary life. At times, especially when growing up, I wished I was more ordinary so I didn't stand out as much. I spent a lot of time and energy up until I was 14 finding ways to minimize myself, trying to make myself more invisible and myself more passably "normal. Honestly though? People devaluing themselves so they can value what I have never brought me much pleasure. People trying to knock me down a peg because they thought I too highly estimated my own talents and skills (?? when really, I was still trying to not take up too much space, I was simply mentioning that I had had problems growing up) seemed very petty and like it was not done in good spirit. I'm sorry that your dad called you stupid growing up. This sort of thing should be a sort of crime for how much damage it does to kids overall. Teachers do a lot of damage to kids this way as well. I used to teach and I would NEVER say anything like that, like literally: over my dead body. As a related note: I've known many people over the years who also rejected this self-image imposed onto them by teachers and relatives, though I have noticed that it seems to have always left some scars. Knowing that people who do and say these things, that deep down they don't know their own value or intrinsic self-worth, or that they often have this void or a lack of meaningful anchoring in their lives? Knowing this has made it a bit easier for me.

The need/ desire for a guru (aka. some form of authority figure) precedes the guru itself. Whether it's a religious/ spiritual figure, a beloved politician, an intellectual, a parent, a doctor (or some other professional health authority) or some other form of mentor. And like any other person in a large, complex society, they fulfill a specialized role. The urge ought not to be either fetishized OR demonized (demonization is so much like fetishization anyway), in a similar way that we shouldn't be screaming at people for wanting parents. (Though eventually, we all do grow up one way or another. Life has a way of making that happen whether we want this or not.) I used to feel very ill-at-ease about authority figures and if they were legibly worth the price tag (monetary, emotional, spiritual, etc.). These days, I try to consider it on a case-by-case basis, and also within cultural context (like Indian gurus, who are filling a social role/ "job position" that is still considered to be of value). And from there, to consider their value in relation to those factors, and various other factors. To simply cut it all out wholesale and without discernment may very well be a net negative for the greater whole. Not to mention, it is likely just impossible. When you suddenly create a void, the thing that immediately fills it is often not so great. Is whatever surrounds that void and people's wants, expectations, and fancies. You have effectively replaced a system (which yes, does technically limit and hold you back) with something much more haphazard. This ought to be well-accounted for, one way or another. This obviously assumes you care about harmony, wellness, and social order alongside human development. I remember Sadhguru said something like, gurus are for people who don't want to jump into the Void by themselves. The rest of us just do it anyways because we are nuts. Realistically, you have to work with whatever it is that you have on hand. We all do. Whatever legibly gets you where you need and want to go, I guess.

I mainly just have a bunch of Qs: What is the proportion of you practising/ learning/ studying/ "embodying"/ listening, for how long you've practised... and how much do you speak and preach in comparison to this? (...and why? What are your motives?) Where do you think your authority to know "Truth" comes from, especially so that you might justifiably negate others without taking into account what they say? What are the tangible results of your practice? And with your way of approaching and speaking of all of this... IDK, are you trying to win the loudness war? (Isn't the internet already this way, and hasn't it becoming more this way? Is this a net positive, especially in the long term? Is this a temporary phase?) Is this how you want to communicate? Is this how you think we all ought to communicate? Also...what is the greater point of this all? Your communication? (Which is why I asked about your objectives/ agenda originally. Finally: do you have any real, deep appreciation for "the game" that is life?

the openness to raw reality + the willingness to be wrong and to adapt your perspective >>> models. If you get this backward, I think you can't avoid reaping what you sow, you are chained to your models forever like a slave. You cannot dispense with it that easily even when it truly does not serve you anymore: say that you've truly outgrown whatever the original use is. And so the thing which originally gave you meaning and value quite freely, it now binds you. Eventually, you get less and less fresh value in return, but you do keep getting a meaning that you're addicted to. It functions like an addiction. And if you can't (at least theoretically) dispense with your models, it actually also limits how well you can work with them. I think a lot of flexibility and adaptability are required to best make use of any sort of mental construct or mechanism. Detachment and "having some space" from any of your models of use frees you up to make use of them in a more creative, ingenious way. Also: people's attachment to hierarchies and what it means, and has to mean.... this is also straight-up a sort of mental/ emotional slavery. You may not feel it at first, but it does bind you. Keeping things a bit looser/ open-ended at least clears up your path of movement a bit, including in the RIGHT NOW. From this perspective of needing models: There are rules about ascending through hierarchies. And they MUST be obeyed. I tend to think of it as a sort of game with a bunch of rules, the rules may be anywhere from very explicitly said, to being so implicit that the people playing it barely see it at all. Hierarchies... are ultimately also a mental invention or construction (that may or may not be relatively well-built for its purpose). But is it ever the fastest, most efficient way to do anything? Very rarely is this the case. The nature of its construction makes this so. This isn't about "skipping steps in development"/ attempts at spiritual bypassing (which is a valid issue in the sense that people do end up less developed in certain ways), but about the whole structure of mental hierarchization being super-rigged by nature. We call this "reality" and this keeps us in our place. Along with that, there is also this urge to impose meaning onto others by telling people what it means, and thereby restricting other people's pathways as well... isn't there? Great, now we're all enslaved by our models.

Realistically, if you have biases that you insist on protecting in a way that you get super attached to, and you get defensive about it... Congrats! You got emotions. Defensiveness is rooted in emotionality. Just because it is latent does not mean that it doesn't exist, haha. You make decisions based on such all the same.