YIDIRYIDIR

So reading daily would be motivated by fear? what if you can't avoid every trap there is?

@Basman They might find it interesting, but not for learning reasons. it's either for teacher's and peer validation, or for status, or identity, or other unrelated reasons. No absolute single one person on earth who's sole purpose is learning for learning's sake loves the educational system.

@Basman this just proves my point. school is memorization and indoctrination, you think school is for learning? all i learned in school is what I'm curious about, the rest is subjects i forced my self to study for grades.

the "never implemented a habit" is a wrong accusation. i don't have to stick to it for a year to have had tried it. it's enough to experiment with it for a while and see if it gets results. that's what i did. that's the point of experimentation. That's just false mind reading. You're the one frustrated from my opinion. all i did is share what i learned from my experience, and listed arguments for it.

@Basman you would do that for learning a skill for example, or a creative project, or a business.the index fund logic works there. but learning? in my experience, learning doesn't happen like that.

@Leo Gura You read so many books, probably more than any of us. can you enlighten us with you take on this?

it's not that i didn't try it. but i always found it not practical. i tried to implement it multiple times, and failed, mainly because it doesn't suit my attitude. there are times where i learn an equivalent of 3 hours a day of reading. and then others where i barely learn anything and I'm implementing after all the clarity and contemplation i got.

I'm not saying reading book is bad. it's the attitude. 20 minutes a day will be useful only if you already have the attitude of a researcher. and you probably won't respect that 20 minutes because you got questions to answer and won't stop untill you do. you would implement a 20 minutes a day reading if you have tight schedule

@Ulax Let's take your example of wanting to make a historical theory: You would be acting like a researcher, you would be curious all the time. because what got you to making that theory in the first place? Curiosity. you'll likely get into a phase of intense research where you find it effortless to read books without caring about how much you read, all you care about is to satisfy your curiosity, get answers. once you get those answers, reading becomes useless. after that, you'll move to another phase of theorizing and deep implementation and synthesis where you take more action than learning. that'll probably trigger more curiosity and the cycle continues.

I didn't say to not read books. the idea is about the attitude in which you read them and other knowledge sources. I disagree. it's more like a trick to horde information and mentally masturbate. if you don't put that to use, the brain is gonna dispose of it. there's something called mental obesity, it's when you expose yourself to so much information without using any, your brain stops remembering anything and you become someone who reads for stimulation and identity, not as a curious researcher. it isn't Neurodivergent at all. this cycle applies to so many aspects of life. life is not linear. just like mastery happens in long plateaus and short bursts of improvement, just like in life, you go through cycles of feeling lost and unproductive, developing clarity and vision, getting into intensity phase where where you are getting results and you're on fire, then another where shit doesn't feel the same anymore and about to be lost again. if you live an entrepreneurial life, you'll understand this.

For all my multi-talented friends, this is for you. instead of "think outside the box" consider this : "think inside so many boxes to a point where you create your own box where only you can create" this aligns with how creativity works and how humans who are able to be authentic create. this is how you you copy your way into originality.

I'm talking about the context of any creative endeavour that requires either expressive creativity or creativity as problem-solving, or both. like writing, content, painting, music, podcast, filmmaking, business....

@CARDOZZO for me, i meant the opposite. i never made a habit of reading books daily.

Didn’t expect to see this shift happening this soon… anyone else following this? "It’s official: several education boards in America just approved a pilot program introducing Consciousness studies; a branch in primary school curriculum including: • History of spirituality • Psychedelic studies: history and practices • metaphysical Love • 2-hour meditation sessions. and more." Honestly, I’m just sitting here like… what is happening in the world right now? the same world where trump exists and the war with Iran, and this?? Have things escalated this fast, or is this just a very niche pilot that somehow finally got traction?

@CARDOZZO yes, the thing though is I've been doing that unconsciously and couldn't articulate it until lately.

"2-hour meditation sessions" haha that won't happen in decades. sorry guys, happy april fools

i can relate to this

yes just yes. 100%

There’s a point in personal development where you run into a strange problem: the deeper your understanding becomes, the less practical it seems to be. You start to understand ideas like “there is no self,” “there is no free will,” or “reality is an illusion.” At first, these feel profound. They expand your perspective, reduce your ego, and help you detach from unnecessary suffering. but i believe it is a mistake to try make them practical, by using them to improve life in a practical way. So i have a question: At what point does Absolute Truth stop being 'practically' useful and become purely contemplative and for understanding only? Why do certain “ultimate truths” (like no-self, no free will, reality as imaginary) fail as 'practical' frameworks for living, even if they’re valid at a deeper level?

@Butters I'm just replying to the title. brotherrrr trauma makes you weak as fuck. healing from trauma is what makes you stronger.

@Joseph Maynor i was just giving that as an example of a mental model. it is a lense and it is limited and used for contexts where it fits.

Why what's wrong with it, I'm curious

yeah true my bad, i meant "mental model" not framework. i consider anything that is true (realization, law, theory...) and can be considered a lense in which to view something a mental model. for example, "everything is a skill". it is a realization that everything in the finite is a skill, but also one lense in which i view things.

aww now it's clear, i get it. another framework in the bag for me. i will think about this. great one