Schizophonia

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    9,990

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Schizophonia

  1. Posted

    24 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

    "Mirror neurons" specifically refer to empathy.

    Even if you're the worst psychopath you'll still feel close (I'm using this term for the sake of non-duality) to the five people you spend the most time with because they become your language.

    If you only know kebabs, the kebab language (the name "kebab," the smell, the taste, the linguistics of the ingredients themselves; in a "fractal model," you could say—always the same story—) it will make you become kebab; your world will revolve around the kebab.

    The question is—and this is where the issue of "conformity" might lead us—whether there's a form of language inherent to human beings, such as Chomsky's idea. by extension Lévi-Strauss, Heidegger and the more or less naturalist guys like that (I'm citing those I know); or not as the postmoderns think.

     

    In this instance @Leo Gura is clearly a lowkey naturalist in its notion of conformity; which is anti-non duality because from a non-dual point of view every-thing, every phenomenon, every subject-object relationship is just the ego; it's purely relative.

  3. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    4 hours ago, AION said:

    Children have higher level of mirror neurons so they are more suggestable to conforming. Healthy. humans have a lot of mirror neurons too. And if you hang out long enough with a certain type of people you become it. That is why they say you are the average of the 5 people you hang out with. So we all conform subconsciously. This thread has perverted the notion of conformity. Conforming to the perverted concept of conformity has becoming conformity. It is so sad. 

    "Mirror neurons" specifically refer to empathy.

    Even if you're the worst psychopath you'll still feel close (I'm using this term for the sake of non-duality) to the five people you spend the most time with because they become your language.

    If you only know kebabs, the kebab language (the name "kebab," the smell, the taste, the linguistics of the ingredients themselves; in a "fractal model," you could say—always the same story—) it will make you become kebab; your world will revolve around the kebab.

    The question is—and this is where the issue of "conformity" might lead us—whether there's a form of language inherent to human beings, such as Chomsky's idea. by extension Lévi-Strauss, Heidegger and the more or less naturalist guys like that (I'm citing those I know); or not as the postmoderns think.

     

  4. Posted

    2 hours ago, Basman said:

    You will definitely learn something from a philosophy education, but it won't be a "lean" education. Most of it is essentially philosophical history. Your not going to remember most of nuances and ideas of the various concepts and philosophers and it mostly doesn't really matter unless it is your autism hole. What Kant thought about duty is the academic philosophy equivalent of the mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell. You don't really practice philosophizing that much.

    The real value of a philosophy education is the rigor, rationality and language they instill in you. You gain a heightened sense of objectivity, making you better at detecting nuances and turning points in logic. It's useful for anything communicative and logical, like programming, law work, arguments and debates, etc. The issue is that it is not really worth 3-5 years of school + debt when the education itself has so much fat and is so contrived. The biggest regret of graduates is not studying something more profitable. I would only recommend philosophy as a minor subject if there's no alternatives more relevant to your goals.

    Generally you study philosophy for pure pleasure, or to work as a philosophy professor or in more specific professions like medical ethics.

  9. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    31 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

    Haha, do you listen to his videos? I wouldn’t say his concepts are shallow at all…

    It depends; his videos on spirituality/non-duality are very good, and his speaking style makes him pleasant to listen to.

    Those that discuss psychology, sociology, or politics are less good.

    When I criticize of course it's because I like confrontation; I'm not spitting in the soup.

  11. Posted

    Nobody says that lol except for women who are in a ruminatory delirium (i just invented this term) here and there especially on social media

    We're essentially among balls here so we don't see it but women have the same ruminatory deliriums.

    One could say yes but they're at the opposite polarity; like they complain about not having a boyfriend, but it's because they have too many choices, whereas for us it's the opposite blablabla.

    But actually if you look at your closest women mirrors (your mother, your sister, their friends, your own female friends...), you'll see that they tend towards shortage (they settle for random or even clearly low quality men, with no reciprocal effort from the men they flirt with...) if you too.

    Because the problem is not the signifier (the opposite sex) but the signified (the object of desire, the "phallus"); it's neurotic. 

    The idea is always the same; to see oneself as a victim because a victim is a hero; that is to say someone who integrates into the collective subject.

    The more individualistic, capitalist and/or lacking traditional collective structures a state is the more automatically people will become weak, depressed, and crazy; neurotic and sometimes psychotic especially socially disadvantaged subjects.

  12. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    Paying a university to learn philosophy is literally a scam. The only reason it is done is out of conformity and ignorance.

    That's why you get lost or avoid almost all debates, and why you're stuck in shallow concepts; typical example is conformism; you can't explain your intuition, so you just throw your exemples out there like begins the question and if someone asks questions you just reply, "Ugh you're annoying me, just contemplate."

    Reading and studying philosophy or even simply watching good videos, not just browsing Wikipedia, in addition to being a pleasure, will provide you with elements of language, concepts, even epistemology with a "dialectical" approach and/or scientific evidence in favor of it (although we, as non-dualists, know that positivism is an illusion and autistic bullshit 😏).

    At some point you didn't learn how to make Skyrim mods by reading the C++ Wikipedia page it doesn’t makes sense.

  13. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    On 14/12/2025 at 0:54 PM, AION said:

    Basically all cults are conformity like Veganism, where there is a lot of pressure to be part of the club and have some self rightiousness

     

    Notice how most of these people are physically unattractive. 

    If you have an individualistic bias, it will seem paradoxical to you that they are doing even more harm to themselves; but if you see individuality as an illusion, whose the signified is actually the reproduction of larger-scale structures (like an ant and the intelligence of the anthill), of collective subjects one might say from a more directly Marxist point of view, you understand that they are only reproducing what they think they must do, what they think they deserve.

    Before, I would have thought of a cope like "If I hurt myself now it will benefit me later because I'm ugly, so I have to be particularly careful"—a kind of (paranoid) projective functioning—but in fact that doesn't work, because projection implies a rational will on an individual level, which isn't the case here since these people aren't any happier--on the contrary-- and deep down they know it's antisocial; this doesn't suggest they might receive an increase in love from the group in exchange for certain efforts, criterias that are met.

    They were simply bullied, labeled as worthless at an early age, and reproduce the collective will regarding their individuality, which dictates that they deserve a certain amount of love, of survival on some form.

    Hence the intuitively skeptical stance of Marxists towards personal development, and particularly the New Age movement, because it is a vehicle for authoritarianism; and what lies behind authoritarian logic is the mental conditioning to function (again, we are herd animals, our pseudo-individuality actually reflects structures and in particularly human social/collective ones, even if it's repressed) within a world of social classes, specifically in a socially disadvantaged position.

    For exemple typically there is something extremely suspicious about taking "psychedelics for self-medication."

    Firstly because it doesn't work—the whole "people changing their personality/life after a trip" thing is in my opinion a load of bullshit and basically doesn't exist; i don't believe it a minute—and secondly because it's an authoritarian way of thinking that is to say which is part of the greater belief of being socially disadvantaged.

    "I'm going to become a better person by ingesting a vasoconstrictive violent hallucinogen." The same goes for believing that reading crappy self-help books is going to change your life.

    The more honest you are with yourself and the more you learn about human psychology, the more you realize that the only thing that truly and substantially improves a person's "quality" in the long run is their social conditions; as a survivalist and a collective being (from a non-dual perspective, I wouldn't even make that distinction).

    If tomorrow I put you in a strict bourgeois family you will become the ideal son-in-law much, MUCH faster than with any self-help book, psychedelic, or any other tool.

    Why? Because humans REFLECT STRUCTURES

     

    I should start a thread about this to develop and tidy it up.

     

  16. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    On 13/12/2025 at 6:38 AM, OmniNaut said:

    The conformity of non conformity.

    All cleavage is an illusion; everything is its opposite depending on the point of view

    That's why I insisted that the best episemiology is the one that eliminates the highest degree of cleavage.

    Indeed the conformity thing is shaky; Leo is always quite shaky because he comes from personal development and has little sociological culture.

    Non-duality and Structuralism are two of the things I'm thinking of that can explain this divide (and by extension, the low-key philosophies surrounding this divide, like Baudrillard's hypermatrix for example), thus rendering it obsolete.

    Thus there are no longer conformist/non-conformist actions; there is simply --reciprocally--, an ego, structures.

    The Marxism I sometimes talk about is a form of structuralism.

  18. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    11 hours ago, LordFall said:

    @Schizophonia It is interesting to study the excess of the human psyche when placed in positions of extreme abundance. 

    The more abundant you are the more you can indulge in your vices, but that doesn't mean it includes killing people; a shadow like that is extremely rare and probably more something associated with socially marginalized people.

  19. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    15 minutes ago, Jowblob said:

    Every time i'm reading some of your posts you always include the word Narcissism. I just want to tell you, that when your base consciousness isn't experiencing any form of unity, you're gonna have a lot of narcissm yourself, that is because when you live in full seperation all you can experience and love is your body and not the world out there as you don't feel it. So in actuality these is no such things as narcissm, it's just you projecting your ego self on to others. Hopefully this helps, keep in mind that psychology or the beautifull words that you like to use from the psychological perspective are all part of seperation and ego, and you're indulging in it big time.

    Being in a state of separation doesn't necessarily make you more narcissistic.

    When you prefer playing on your computer to talking to people because they're "jerks" (separation), your attention always shifts to an "external" object (you understand why I put it in quotes; non-duality and all that), a computer.

    And you can be a big bimbo who wears tons of makeup, love dramas ans cie (quite narcissistic) and still be awake.

  21. Posted · Edited by Schizophonia

    1 hour ago, Butters said:

    What do you base all these theories on? Clinical narcissists are deeply ashamed of who they truly are, and for a constant fear of being exposed they exercise this narcissistic behavior. Narcissistic supply is nothing more than externalizing everything, because truly looking inside is too painful for them. 

    No that's paranoid personality disorder; Hence indeed the intense projective mechanism, the tendency to be ruthless with the weak and submissive, even fetishistic with the strong, etc.

    Narcissism is simply exaggerated "self-love": Self-love not in the spiritual sense lol but in the sense of using "oneself" as a libidinal object.

  23. Posted

    4 hours ago, Judy2 said:

    i might be wrong but i think many sleeping medications have antipsychotic effects. to quiet the mind.

    *not that many, but it's a thing.

    They (benzodiazepines/Z drugs ?)quiet the mind but aren’t efficient to make a psychotic people efficient; even the opposite because high doses of then will quickly make you very tired and potentialy high, even more delusional.

    Like alcohol.

  24. Posted

    5 minutes ago, Sugarcoat said:

    I think in life, if you find yourself in a desperate situation economically, for example you’re a student who applies to jobs but you get none except sales or something that you feel isn’t truly aligned with your values, then it’s okay to take such a job and understand that it’s a part of your path to something greater, it’s not your ultimate destination. For example I’ve worked at fast food restaurant, I don’t think it’s particularly unethical because it’s a personal choice to consume such food,  but it still isn’t something I’d wanna work with long term because I find it doesn’t provide any value in society. 
     

    Sales has a similarity, sure most of it isn’t high conscious but it still is a personal choice to buy the stuff, even if they’re being manipulated. 
     

    As I said you can see it as temporary stepping stone towards something greater in your path.

    I think it’s possible to do conscious sales, but then it requires that the product/service you’re selling is high conscious (let’s say something like a good supplement). And also that the method you’re using to sell is authentic, and that is something you can notice if you’re doing yourself, in particular if you’re not personally attached to making sales so you’re less likely to be deceived by your own bias. 
     

    Also another factor is in the production process of the product. A product can be “high conscious” and of genuine value but be produced in a way that harms the planet and exploits poor people. So then I cannot rank it as much high conscious anymore. So it’s different factor. 
     

    Bottom line i think it’s okay to play into the system to a degree as long as you are working towards something higher conscious long term (if that’s your inclination, it’s ok to be normie too)

    Plot twist : You do escorting to pay your studies