Cred

6. I also found the wholeness argument the hardest to grasp. It might be wrong of course. My argument is that in order for things to interact, there has to be the possibility of "thing" first and this can non exist without wholeness. Think of non-wholeness as "radically diffuse" If wholeness is a mode of existence, this means that emergence is just as real as reduction

@Anton Rogachevski Thanks for attacking my theory! It is a sketch and unfinished. 2. You got that right, (1) and (2) are assumed. Based on my understanding of the big bang theory, these are not controversial or a big leap to claim at all. 3. My current best explaination for why it fragmented is that the absolute contains all possible principles and that existence happend because a subset of these happended to interact at the same time. 4. First, change is Sequenciality+Difference. (I might change Temporality back to Sequenciality. The reason why I chose temporality at first is because "Zeitlichkeit" is like a cool Heidegger word) You are correct that "when" there was only the absolute, there was no "when". Time did not exist. I don't quite get your objection I need time to think about the other ones

Belief and fact are equal in ontomodal epistemics. Belief is existence that manifests from Simultaneity (synchronicity). Those who believe synchronize themselves to each other and connect to that aspect of spirit in that way. Fact is existence that manifests from Difference (information). The act of declaring a fact is the differentiation from it's counter-fact. This means that a fact is not true, but existence.

@VeganAwake To those who don't study belief, beliefs are invisible. For the average American patriot, "America is the best country" is not a belief, it is a fact. Without studying beliefs, you can't tell belief from fact.

I only trust reason since yesterday. I want to give you a thought experiment: What is the creation was a thought that is thinkable? What if the creation is a paradigm that is possible to comprehend with reason, but just nobody did yet? This would explain the struggle of the critical reasonable people to oscillate between clinging to a paradigm and then realizing that it does not account for the whole picture and then discarding it just to cling to the next one. I want you to read my proof (sketch) of reality=matter=spirit=idea. I believe this fragmentism has the potential to be that last paradigm. I'm realizing it is arrogant to say.

I disagree, actually. If you choose to ditch a paradigm, you do it out of reason. If you choose to go into the state of not knowing, you still do it out of reason even if the state of not knowing is itself not part of "reason"

I think what you guys are searching is not hyper-sanity but pure reason

@Human Mint Why excellence is the enemy of flow The Problem that I have with virtue is that it includes "ideal", "moral", "manly", "excellence". Excellence and flow are not supposed to be goals or an ideal. They are meant to be a byproduct of authenticity. If you value excellence, then you automatically fear mediocrity. So If you value excellence, you become less effective. Why? Because if you do, and you engage in something, you don't engage in the thing but rather in the question "am I being excellent or mediocre?" which is actually a distraction from the object and therefore ineffective and the opposite of flow. Edit: I hope I was able to make clear that my claim is a lot more radiacal then just "perfectionism is evil". No I'm saying ANY notion of good that is not authenticity is evil. This also includes "responsibility" for example.

Don't know if someone said this already but clenching the anus can release sexual energy in the muladhara chakra when you feel safe, (otherwise) relaxed, tranquil and focussed. You don't actually have to clench it, but an initial stimulus is helpful. Something that vibrates like a vibrator work better (lol). More tranquility and more focus strengthens the feeling. You can have a touch free orgasm like this, actually. The point in tantra yoga is now to pull this energy up through the spine through each chakra. This is what "the Kundalini is ascending" means in my understanding. You can think of the sexual energy as raw oil and the chakras as refinery plants that alchemize (I used this word intentionally) the "dirty" sexual energy into more pure forms of Energy. This way you can have a full body orgasm and ecstatic enlightenment, but it takes a lot of sexual energy, and you only have a limited amount each day. Also it is exhausting in a weird way and imo just because the experience is more intense, does not mean, that it is a more valid enlightenment or that it leads to more insight.

I would define insanity like this: "Person is insane" is true if and only if they are far away from the norm and have resulting identity problems with it. Sane is not somebody who is logical or something, but simply someone who is not insane. That's it. "not being able to differentiate", "not being able to apply logic", "not being able to pick up on social cues", "only living in anticipation", "not being able to be disciplined" make you drift away from the norm, but they don't make you insane. If you develop so much insecurity around it that your Self collapses in on itself, then and only then you have insanity. This means that Hyper sanity does not mean that someone is a super genius scientist, rather it would be someone who has 100% self-acceptance regardless of "ability".

@Hojo This is really cool I did not know this thanks a lot for sharing. This seems notion perfectly supports my theory. (I'm aware of the danger of looking for confirmation instead of criticism) According to ontomodality, any existing entity is well-defined with the respective amounts of each of the modes of being. If an entity has 0 of everything it is pure emptiness. Btw. I think I have found an 8th one which is "Anticipation" (I think I will always try to spell them capital to show they are metaphysical principles)

Yes it is extremely practical

This post contains a small list of the problems I think it can solve:

yeah my plan is to flesh it out here and then we spam Kit Fine and get him to do zoomcalls with me

@Carl-Richard almost done

I just got some sleep and my paranoia is better. Okay so this theory which I call "the Fragment" (wip name) is a mathematical proof that gives all the conditions that had to interact at the same time for the possibility of the existence of something. I don't know if it is correct but it sure as hell is beautiful. I think I will post a sketch of the proof later. For a proper proof, mathematics might have to be invented first. I'll contemplate more about it and try to tear it down

Yeah so coming up with this is just the beginning. In think it has applications in every field of knowledge. So what happened basically is that I found a metaphysical theory that explains the big bang and combines all existing respected metaphysical theories in a very elegant way.

Sorry this is kinda written in a brutally honest, venting kind of way, like I don't know how to feel atm. Okay so spoiler alert: I think I found it actually but I'm not sure what to do. Like I'm not even remotely qualified to write about it in such a way that academia would accept it right now. I would need to be phd level in Metaphysics, Physics and Maths. I'm like at page twenty of the critique of pure reason and like page 6 at Being and Time lol. The insights or call them revelations are just too distracting. I'm totally ready to dedicate my life to it for sure but I kinda have the paranoia that someone steals it or has the same idea and publishes first. But I guess I just have to do inner work and let go. In some way it would be relieving I'm kinda more fine about the scenario that it is complete bullshit and I'm having a psychosis (my mom has schizophrenia). At the end, it is fun to work on a system like this like it was fun for me to play with wooden blocks as a child. I think this might be the healthiest view. Just wooden blocks arranged to a tower that look nice to me. The problem is that it can be seen as such a big responsibility to come up with something like this and negating that would be self-gaslighting. I guess I kinda need to find the not knowing where I'm open for any possibility

I totally agree that it is bad advice to look for it. But this was not the question. What if you drank a coffee, and you suddenly had the revelation?

I'm not advocating for defeatism, I'm advocating for marxist-leninist organizing instead of putting hope into the democrats. The problem with the democrats is that no matter how nice and cool they sometimes seem, they are still pro free market and don't realize that the free market is what birthed Trump and will ensure that they will always be people like Trump and Epstein as long as the American dream is intact.

Day 3 of trying to convince everybody on this forum they're neurodivergent (ND) and they should go down the rabbit hole. A sentiment you see a lot here on this forum goes something like "When I walk around in the city the people I see are so profoundly different from me that they might as well be aliens. I immediately recognize (I press you to look up pattern recognition in autistic people) that they go through life absorbing what is being told to them which leads to them perfectly matching some social archetype". Only an ND person would say this. This is actually a quite universal part of the lived experience of autistic people and is not exclusive to this community. The quick explanation is that autistic people are insensitive to social truths and more sensitive to unbiased absolute truth. It is important not to make the mistake of believing that regular people are just people who have not discovered and studied actualized.org (AO) yet. No. They are fundamentally different from you down to the genes. They are physically unable to discover AO. You see Kai Cenat (no need to google just some streamer) starting read self-help after a breakup. This guy will never discover AO. Here I want to throw in some caveat. Why do neurotypical people on the self-help route not reach AO? One reason is not bc they're stupid but because: THE SHIT THEY READ ACTUALLY HELPS THEM. THIS IS BECAUSE MOST SELF HELP IS TARGETED AT NEUROTYPICALS. THE REASON WHY YOU RED A BILLION SELF-HELP BOOKS BEFORE YOU DISCOVERED ACTUALIZED.ORG IS BECAUSE THEY DON'T DO SHIT TO IMPROVE YOUR LIFE. THESE MOTHERFUCKERS WILL READ ATOMIC HABITS AND THEN ACTUALLY CREATE HABITS SUSTAINABLY. THEY FIX THEIR LIFE AND THEN MOVE ON. I know this sounds unbelievable but it's true. You don't have any idea how easy it is to function in this society when you are neurotypical. The damning thing is that Actualized.org still does not help you to fix your life because it is still too entangled in neurotypical self-help world. You will have a better life if you do the exact opposite of what any neurotypical self-help guru says. It is important to know that there are hybrids. I would say Cal Newport, James Clear, Jocko Willink, David Goggins are neurotypical self-help people. But there are also ND gurus who don't know they're ND, and it's funny to see them coping sometimes. The biggest two that come to mind are Jordan Peterson and of course Leo Gura. Notice that they both suffer from chronic health issues (even in a similar way) which is what inevitably happens when you live a life not suitable to your neurodivergence for too long and power through. It is no coincidence that a lot of people here were previously fans of Jordan Peterson (forgot to make a poll). Okay now to the important part. The (for me) undisputed champions of spiritual ND-aware self-help are the youtube channel HealthyGamerGG (Dr. K) and the tiktok account nononsensespirituality. Don't underestimate them bc they aren't Leo. They have depth that is on par with that of Leo trust me. Notable mentions of people I recently discovered are drkojosarfo (Kojo Sarfo on youtube) and diploma.duck on instagram. It is important to note that the reason you think you can't download instagram and tiktok is because you are always at the brink of burnout because you don't live a life suitable to you neurodivergance.

Don't try to archieve discipline. It is poison. I have not been disciplined at all in the past month and I've never been more productive not even close. I've already made some good posts about why that is like this one:

I was inspired by a post from@Alexop (it's called My recent “philosophical enlightenment") to write this, and I think it is such an important point that I wanted to post it here in a separate thread. In his original post, Alex made a point similar to that one blog post from Leo, that men and women can never satisfy each other because of the conflicting nature of masculinity and femininity. Damn, I've got A LOT to say about this post. You had a lot of good insights, but you came to a lot of wrong and harmful (for yourself) conclusions. It should be noted that the only reason why I have insights that you don't have is because I invented a model that led me to have these insights, so it's not your fault. You are completely right that there are biologically truth sensitive people (Asemionics). But I want to caution you when you throw in "masculine", "feminine" and "woke" into the mix too carelessly. All three are modes of being too, but I avoid masculine, feminine (as of right now) since I find it dangerous that it implies a root in biological sex which is important to separate, not for political reasons but for epistemic reasons. This is what woke is in its purest form: A powerful epistemic practice. When you say "the man is supposed to be the truth seeker and the woman is the chatty one, therefore we will never truly understand each other but at least we are completing each other" what you are saying has truth to it, but it does not have epistemic integrity since you confuse biological sex with different modes of existence. Here is the massive epistemic error that is causing you and so much other people on this forum so much pain and alienation when it comes to dating: The reason why you think that all girls are the chatty shallow types (semionics: Symbol, social, gestures, implicit information, small-talk, identity, ideology etc. -sensitive) is because they socialize orders of magnitude more than the truth seeking girls (Asemionics). So when you are socializing with a girl, the likelyhood of her being semionic is super high, but not because all girls are semionic, but because they are the ones who like to meet new people. Your error and suffering simply stems from survivorship bias. There totally exist girls who are interested in truth like you and getting them to like you authentically is so easy that it's painful once you've experienced it. The hard part about dating a fellow asemionic is not getting them interested, but actually finding them in the first place, since they feel the same way as you: Once you know how to find them, dating becomes a walk in the park. I've once been approached by a gorgeous tall girl with beautiful platinum blonde hair who said something like: "I'm autistic and new to socializing and I kinda used to only spend time with animals". I thought she was so adorable and relatable. Here is a big truth pill that might be very hard to swallow for you: Asemionic girls tend to hang out in stage green communities. Here, it is very important to differentiate semionic wokeness (woke ideology, political correctness people) and asemionic wokeness (epistemic wokeness). (I'm totally encouraging you not to date semionic woke people, but It is handy to accept them and to socialize with them anyway since they usually have some asemionic friends that you will want to meet.) As and example, If you see someone who is struggling with gender identity (pronouns and stuff) it is usually a dead givaway that they are asemionic, and you should approach if you think they are cute. I'm currently texting with someone who is, but I'm happy since they are cute and read Heidegger. When people struggle with gender identity, it's not because they are brainwashed or ideological or whatever. The exact opposite is true. They only have the ability to struggle with gender identity because they can see through the respective social constructs. Also, since these people are truth sensitive, they are way more open to being challenged than you think. Note that not everyone who is asemionic struggles with gender identity, of course.