Cred

Because Isreal is the aggressor not the gazans. Zionism was never about peace. Zionism was always about superiority and oppression. The zionists never wanted peace with the palestinians ever. It was the goal from the start to genocide them.

It is February 28. at 7:00 am and I've found it. I did not sleep. I needed the answer and I got it. This is not clickbait. I'm now more convinced than ever that ontomodality can provide the answer to all the most important questions of the universe and I just figured out the first and most important one which is: How did it all begin? The argument is very logical which surprises me tbh. I did not expect that it would be possible to answer this question logically. Are you ready? Maybe put some coffee into your mouth since you might need something to spit out. Also, maybe give yourself some time to move into the state of not knowing and loosen your egos grip on your current worldview. I just googled and found out that there exist a philosopher who proposed this named Kit Fine who called it fragmentalism which is fitting. However, it seems he did not find the fragments. THE ANSWER 1. At the beginning there was only the Absolute. It has infinite aspects but no differentiation between them. 2. Then, suddenly, something separated itself from the absolute. This is the Fragment. 3. This Thing must necessarily have at least these seven aspects of the Absolute: 3.1. Impulse, Difference, Temporality, Spaciousness, Wholeness, Interaction, Simultaneity. 4. Proofs of 3. and 3.1 by contradiction: 4.1. Let's assume 4. is false and claim that the Fragment does not have the aspect of Impulse. If it didn't have Impulse, it would lack the necessary impulse to separate. Q.E.D. 4.2. Let's assume 4. is false and claim that Fragment does not have the aspect of Difference. Without Difference, separation is not possible. Q.E.D. 4.3 Let's assume 4. is false and claim that the Fragment does not have the aspect of Temporality. Without Temporality, the sequence "not separated, then separated" would not have been possible. Q.E.D. 4.4. Let's assume 4. is false and claim that the Fragment does not have the aspect of Spaciousness. Without Spaciousness, the Fragment would not have anywhere to separate into. Q.E.D. 4.5. Let's assume 4. is false and claim that the Fragment does not have the aspect of Wholeness. Without Wholeness, the will and the difference would not have anything to hold on to for the separation. Q.E.D. 4.6 Let's assume 4. is false and claim that the Fragment does not have the aspect of Interaction. Without Interaction, all the aspects of the absolute could not have interacted to help separate the Spirit. Q.E.D. 4.7 Let's assume 4. is false and claim that the Fragment does not have the aspect of Simultaneity. Without Simultaneity, all the aspects could not have interacted at the same time which is necessary, since no subset of the seven is able to make a separation as shown in the previous proofs. Q.E.D. This seems to imply that reality=idea=matter=spirit=consciousness which is hella satisfying and just straight up combines all the existing respected metaphysics. So we have Buddha=Platon=Upanishads in one compact formula lol. Why fragment=idea. All 7 are pure concepts, yet they produce matter, since: Why fragment=matter. Contemplate why matter would not be able to exist without any one of these. Why fragment=spirit. The way I discovered the fragments, is not by observing matter but by observing consciousness and neurodiversity. All the neurodivergencies and all the personality structures seem to be a combination of these 7. I think it can be proven that there can be no mind outside these 7. Try to contemplate this. However, in contrast to matter, consciousness seems to be able to "turn off" these aspects and merge with the absolute, which is what enlightenment is. I think one possible next move is to formulize it more narrowly into mathematics, but it might be the case that 1. 2. and 3. are axioms that can only be intuitively true. I will also research Kit Fine. If this is legit, we might have to spam him with emails lol.

In this post, I want to argue for the following statement: One only develops pedophilia if they have low sensitivity to meaning (ADHD) and are or were in the “abyss” (state of abandonment). Why low Sensitivity to Meaning? (Less important) It is helpful to describe what it means to be sensitive to meaning first. If you are sensitive to meaning, this means that for you, belief is existence. In the eyes of someone who is sensitive to sequentiality (objectivity) and insensitive to meaning, the belief is at best an inductive argument and at worst a random variable and therefore non-existent until measured. The phrase “fucking children is bad” is not an objective, deductive statement. It is inductive and has a probability value (random variable with probability value) attached. “Fucking children did not lead to desirable outcomes the last 1 million times it was done, and therefore it can be induced that the next time we also lead to undesirable outcomes.” This is why, if one is sensitive to meaning, one is not capable of questioning these strong societal axioms since for you, they are absolute and their upholding necessary for existence rather than just probable. My model predicts that people who say “the earth is flat”, “the holocaust didn’t happen”, “age is just a number” or “Kim Jong Un is based” have almost certainly ADHD. So why are most people with ADHD also appalled by pedophilia? Because in order to be a pedophile, you also have to be in the abyss. Why Abyss? I’m using the abyss as a metaphor for the state of being abandoned. If you live in a state of abandonment, you're being is fragmented and you live in separation. If you exist in this state too long, you develop a trauma and a deep fear of being abandoned again. This makes you seek unity obsessively, which is clinginess. What do you do if you have an existential fear of being abandoned? You will choose your relationships in such a way that there's a power dynamic that is in your favor, so that they can't leave. The reason why a relationship with a child is disgusting to you even if you are undogmatic is because children are not self-differentiated enough to be able to separate from you and build an autonomous independent existence if you cling to them. For the person who feels abandoned, this is exactly the appeal of a relationship with a child. If you are in a relationship with a child, you can influence them in such a way, that they are forever dependent on you, which is your "solution" to the pain of abandonment if you are a pedophile. There are of course a plethora of ways to make people dependent on you, so that your fear of abandonment is temporarily relieved. Complete relief can of course never happen that way because there were always be the risk of being abandoned. Also when you are clingy, the odds that you will be abandoned again, are higher, since dating a clingy person is generally unhealthy for that person. Examples Here are a couple of examples on how clingy people cope with their fear of abandonment: Dating/fucking a child. More general: Abusing any form of power imbalance. Stalking. Deliberately making someone close to you ill and then pretending that person is dependent on your help. Or making yourself ill and convincing someone they need to help you and are a bad person if they abandon you. (Example: Mother infusing shit into their babies bloodstream. Munchhausen syndrome) Starting a business with someone and then trapping them in that business. (Example: Andrew Tate) Buying yourself relationships. Trying to bring patriarchy back or install a traditional theocracy to increase the amount of power that men have over women in general again. Creating or buying a social media platform or a forum so that you will always have people who respond to you and praise you. Buying an island with epic parties and “services” that people want to visit. (No particular example comes to mind) Can you find more examples? If my theory is correct, this means that pedophilia is fundamentally different from being gay for example and also curable. I think if the Epstein class would be given an effective way to heal their fear of abandonment, capitalism would collapse.

Yes you can take a psychedelic or you could do what lil Yachty does and walk on a stage SOAK up that energy. And he can handle it since he is relaxed and non-attached. The body mirrors the mind and the mind mirrors the body. It is impossible to be attached in the mind and relaxed in the body nor is it possible to be relaxed in the mind and tight in the body. When one is relaxed and flexible, not only is the intelligence of the fascia activated, but there is a stable controlled flow of energy which leads to immense power. If you think about it, a good performer has control over their audience. Again if that's not power I don't know what is.

Damn you guys need to chill with your "I'm sO anTi cOrrUptIon thAt I cAn'T liStEn to rAp". I love rap and I don't really give much of a shit about what they rap about. If I did not have rap a massive chunk of my happiness would be gone. There are just certain moods where rap works just perfectly to amplify that mood, feel alive and dance. Also I think the movement of rappers is genius. The way they dance. It is both powerful, but also relaxed. It can be argued that this is a superior way of movement from the daoist perspective. You cannot have power without weakness. In the same way, you cannot have strength without relaxation. You cannot tell me this isn't a form of true power. The power of not giving a damn. If I didn't have metal, dubstep, rap, I would be significantly less powerful.

@WonderSeeker Hahahahaha damn congrats dude!

I'm glad to hear that! I think it's tragic that China does not have more soft power, but I understand their reasons.

What the hell?????? Is that true?????? Based?????? Didn't you say you live in south korea??? Why you movin appart from the fact that china is the best country?

It almost sounds like you are in line with the interests of the west? Are you aware that capitalism kills millions of innocent people? Are you aware that the west is the enemy? Non-conflict is really bad since it strengthens the status quo. However the only valid political conflict is the class struggle, any other political conflict exists to benefit the rich and distract from the class struggle.

Sorry that I have to do this but here it goes: I have thought about the connection between mayovirginity and music. Also, I have a unique view on EDM since I spent hundreds of hours producing it, and therefore contemplating it. I have observed that, if one is more on the ADHD side, they like listening to "meaningless" music (remember: people with ADHD are insensitive to meaning and ideology). So EDM basically. (the way I use this word EDM here is roughly this: music that is mainly produced by bedroom producers with the production as the focal point rather than the band, the singer, the lyrics, etc.) The thing with EDM is that very often it doesn't have lyrics and if it does, the lyrics are very shallow. EDM is pretty much identityless. It does not really point to some Identification with a Group. (Counter examples, are: "I listen to country music, because I identify with the American way of living" "I listen to rap because I identify with a rapper lifestyle") People listen to EDM Listen to EDM for its qualia (hsp) and for its pattern (autism), not because of its poetry. I'm not sure what effect being HSP has on the music taste. I think being HSP just means that music has more ability to conjure emotions in you. If music can make you cry, you are likely an HSP. The more autistic a person is, the more repetitive the music is. A lot of autistic people like techno, for example. Not changing one's music taste at all for years is also something that autistic people like to do. If you are way more ADHD than autistic, then what can happen is that you like super chaotic music like hyper pop (notice that the lyrics of hyper pop are often deliberately shallow and nonsensical. Examples: 100gecs, Dylan Brady) I remember listening to the exact same kind of music as Leo when I just got into liking music in the first place. At first, I only listened to EDM and at some point I only listened to dubstep which is batshit insane if I think about it. At some point this narrow music taste was just too limiting for me because I could not connect with anybody through music, so I forced my music taste to evolve and broaden. This decision had an extremely positive effect on almost all of my relationships and I never looked back. Music taste was the cornerstone of my last longterm relationship.

20 20.1 1 (March 19.6.1.5.1.2) I think that the collapse of the wavefunction might be the necessity for “grasping”. So any kind of materialism is faith based. When you believe, you grasp a chair then there has to be some kind of collapse. Okay this also works for the symbol. let’s say you have got a bunch of atoms that are arranged in a chair shape. The moment you see the chair the arrangement “collapses” into the symbol “chair” for you. So the collapse of the wavefunction into the particle is fundamentally the same as the collapse of an image into a symbol. Cool idea. 1.1 I guess I need to relate this to the double slit experiment do I. 1.1.1 (March 19.7.7.7) new trinity conceptualization: Step, Feel, Grasp 20.2 https://youtube.com/shorts/fvdiVlJiy4I?is=Wnwbr2HxS0EIY9N1 Goddamn. I think it is because they don't understand alienation. 20.3 https://youtube.com/shorts/rPZ89xFA8ww?is=jXgGjShalr1MiVqD I think Jerome Powell is a good example of someone who is likely autistic and lives in complete self-acceptence, which leads to this level of incorruptibility. 20.4 Form, Emptiness, Graspability, non-Graspability 1 I have not integrated the term "Form" yet. 1.1 "Form is Emptiness". What does this mean? In my model, non-Wave, which is Silence is Emptiness. 1.1.1 This of course raises the question what quantum fluctuations are and what ripples in spacetime are. 1.1.1.1 I don't know much about quantum fluctuations but I've heard their description is still a mystery and even is an aspect of one of the millennium problems. 1.2 I have an idea. let's look at a tree, for example. If you don't look at it sequentially and you don't look at the qualia and you don't look at the symbol "tree", what your left with is pure Embodiment, which is Form, which is Idea, which is Essence? 2 I will try to gain more consistency in spelling metaphysical concepts capitalized. 1.2.1 It seems that Form, Idea, Essence posit something beyond the Field. Is this also the case for Embodiment? This is a really interesting question. It seems that the Form cannot exist without Boundary which is an aspect of Embodyment, however Embodyment is a very immediate concept and only really ever exists in the now and is not eternal. So it seems like Form and Embodyment potentially have some sort of strange-loop dynamic. 1.2.1.1 2 (1.1.1.1.1) Fluctuations 2.1 It seems that Fluctuation (new metaphysical term?) might even be more fundamental than the Wave, with the Wave possibly being emergent from the Fluctuation. Their etymology is very similar. 2.1.1 Google AI: "Fluctuation originated in the mid-15th century from the Latin fluctuātiōnem ("a wavering or vacillation"). It is derived from the verb fluctuāre ("to undulate or move in waves"), which stems from fluctus ("a wave, flow, or surge") and fluere ("to flow"). The term implies constant, irregular, wavelike motion or change." 2.1.1.1 WHAT THE HELL THE TERM VACILLATION IS CRAZY 2.1.1.1.1 Oxford languages: "the inability to decide between different opinions or actions; indecision." 2.1.1.1.1.1 Ah now I remember, these fluctuation must exist because of the uncertainty principle. Damn that's cold that "the pure Absolute/Field" and therefore Emptiness seems to be impossible. What if everything that exists, exists purely and only because the absolute is ungraspable? Is Ungraspability (another new metaphysical concept unlocked) the origin of existence? The helly? This is such a cool thought. 3 (2.1.1.1.1.1.1) Ungraspability 3.1 It seems I need to update my usage of the Grasp. I used it only in relation with meaning (see 20.1) but it seems to be more universal. 3.2 It seems that the purpose of reason is to grasp. Reasoning is the attempt at grasping. 3.3 Google AI: ""Grasp" (verb) emerged in the mid-14th century, meaning to "reach, grope, or feel around," likely from Middle English graspen or grapsen, a metathesis of Old English græpsan ("to touch, feel"). It stems from Proto-Germanic *grap-/ *grab- ("to seize") and the PIE root *ghrebh- (1) ("to seize, reach"), closely related to "grab" and "grope"." 3.3.1 It seems that the term graspability is very closely tied to the term Embodyment. This would make Ungraspability which is the origin of Fluctuation, non-Embodyment, which is Emptiness. Okay this is kinda mindblowing. 3.3.1.1 Okay so we go from Ungraspability which is non-Embodyment and Emptiness to Fluctuation, which is chaos to Wave which is order to Embodyment which leads to Form? This would affirm the emptiness is form lart of the Heart Sutra. 20.5 1 If I know what reason is, what is truth then? 2 I have not integrated the prefrontal cortex. I should in general try to focus more on explaining the different brain regions. I think I can explain all of them with my model. 2.1 If I remember correctly, the prefrontal cortex has something to do with inhibition. So it seems that it has something to do with being conscious. I have not thought about the being conscious, being unconscious duality with regard to my model in a long time and it has changed a lot since then. 3 List if things I need to integrate: Information, granularity, relativity, being conscious vs being unconscious. 20.6 1 Quantum foam. 4 reflection might be a better word then resonance. So Sequenciality, Reflection, Simultaneity? 20.7 Point 1 Differentiating between grasping an pointing. 1.1 Trinity: Sequence, Point, Reflection 1.2 A symbol "points" into the existence space. Pointing is the essence of the symbol? 1.2.1 Embodiment space? 1.3 A phenomenon is grasped. Qualia is grasped. Qualia is a reflection. 1.4 Every pointing is also grasping. A pattern can be grasped. 1.5 What us the difference between a point and the pointer? Is that which embodies the point the pointer? 1.6 Point vs fixation vs whole vs spot vs relativity vs absolute 1.6.1 vs fix-point vs floating-point 1.6.2 vs singularity 1.6.1.1 A symbol is a pointer to a point. If that point is not interpreted (fixed), it is aflaot (a floating-point). If it is interpreted it becomes fixed (fix-point). Embodiments 2 Examples of Embodiments of different aspects of the trinity. 2.1 Qualia is that which embodies the reflection. 2.2 The pattern is that which embodies the sequence. 2.3 The symbol is that which embodies the point. 2.3.1 No the pointer is that which embodies the point? 2.3.1.1 This seems really brilliant since in physics, a point can not exist in reality because of the uncertainty principle. Does the same hold for the sequence and the reflection? 20.8 Sign language 1 Invent a kind of sign language to decribe every aspect of embodiment and use it when you describe your model to maximize layers of comprehension. 1.1 Sign language is a kind of somatic language. 1.2 What is a gesture? A "word" in a somatic language 1.2.1 Wait this is actually kind of a cool train of thought. 1.3 This is very Petersonian 1.4 "layers of comprehension" is an interesting concept. Addiction 2 What is an addiction in my framework? 2.1 How can my framework help to cure it? 2.2 Example: smoking. 3 I think I will replace the word sequence with repetition since the sequence is a kind of combination of point and repetition. 3.1 "If one repeats a point, it becomes a sequence of points." 3.2 This might have a trickle down effect on my theory. 3.2.1 I think this makes a lot of sense though 20.9 1 Power without vulnerability is fragility. 2 Contemplate about the geometric method of Spinoza and how it relates to your methodology. 2.1 What is the difference between a logic and geometry? 2.2 I seems the reason why Spinoza chose to associate his method with geometry is because geometry was more strict than logic in his time. 2.3 Can I derive my theory from literal geometry? I mean the terms repetition, reflection, point are pretty geometric. 2.3.1 In order for there to be a point, there had to be a multitude of options. The selection of a point is necessarily arbitrary. A point is a choice. 2.3.1.1 Example: At the beginning of the game of life, the first cells have to be chosen. 2.4 learn about the logical structure of euclidean geometry. 3 What is an operator? 4 Methodology 4.1 Apparently there are three different degrees of logical rigor: Formally rigorous (mathematical), Systematically deductive, Linguistically-analytically precise 4.1.1 Can I have the whole cake? 5 Integrate linearity and nonlinearity (a new duality?) 6 Note to self: Fashionable nonesense is a book critiquing the use of scientific terms (like field ?) in philosophy. 6.1 It seems that Deleuze and Félix Guattari are very relevant to my theory. 6.1.1 It seems they borrow concepts from physics like nonlinear systems, singularity, topology, chaos, manifolds in an artistic way which I do too and I love it. I wonder if the authors of fashionable nonsense are just angry science people who don't understand post-modernism and linguistics. 7 Interesting term: Ecosophy 7.1 Field Ecosophy has a nice ring to it.

This conflict between an analytic philosophy and continental philosophy is very fascinating to me. It seems that analytic philosopher say: "when you use a word, also describe it". And continental philosopher say: "overexplanation kills the magic". I kinda get both perspectives. However, this conflict is not that present in me. And I think it is because of the state of not knowing. If I understand correctly, the methodology of Peter Ralston is to do investigate each concept very thoroughly, while not trying to get overly attached to any strict definition, and moving back into the state of not knowing every once in a while.

I want to clearify that it is sometimes somewhat nauseating for me to write and read about this topic. Especially now that the term "pre-pubescent" is put into the mix. However there are few things stronger than my intellectual curiosity so it usually wins. I think it might actually be my number one value.

I am naturally very humorous. I would do more jokes on this forum but I often don't get reactions so I don't know if people think my jokes are funny. Replies like this encourage me to be more humorous

autistic people tend to have truth as their highest value, non-adhd people tend to have meaning as their highest value

@yetineti I disagree with pretty much everything you said. My claim is that neurodivergency is neither caused by outside influence, nor does it have anything to do with the integrity of the prefrontal cortex. I know this is a radical claim and very essentialist. I am developing a theory about reason, intelligence and mind, that I have not posted about yet, but they are necessary to make my point properly. However, I've already made some posts that are relevant for this.

Marxists criticize him for arguing that secret societies are the main issue of geopolitics. They say this distracts from the real problem, which is capitalism. Also, antisemitism actually strengthens Zionism since Zionism is to a huge extent based in victim-identity. I have even heard the theory that Jiang is actually funded my the Mossad to increase antisemitism for that reason. It is easier to justify violence against someone who is hateful. This does not seem so far-fetched when you learn that Israel funded terrorist groups and enabled them for that reason. This is actually how Zionism operates. Professor Jiang might be Chinese, but he seems to be a liberal. Liberals can not liberate anyone because it is liberalism that is the problem. If you somehow get rid of the secret societies you will still have liberalism, and therefore you will still have endless wars. But at the end I think there is actually an interplay between esoteric societies and capitalism. It could be argued that this forum is in some way an esoteric group. The term esotericism originally does not mean "believing in bogus or in ideas that are not epistemologically grounded" but it actually just meant something like "advanced teachings that are only accessible to the few". The isolation of these groups simply comes from the fact that just a very small minority of people can grasp truly advanced teachings and the secrecy comes from members trying to protect normies form heavy topics like suicide, nihilism, psychedelic use etc. Sounds familiar right? What separates this forum from an esoteric society with material influence is that Leo and therefore most members of this forum don't believe materialism is significant and therefore don't have the motivation to have massive material influence in the world. But this is not true for people who engage in occultism. The core principle of occultism is "as above, so below" which I interpret as encouragement to engage with and change material reality. If you define a powerful esoteric society as: "A group of people with advanced teachings that use those teachings to influence material reality" then suddenly, Marxists-Leninists with their dialectical materialism fall under that definition. But of course, Marxism-Leninism does not have enough spiritual depth to be a complete esoteric society. The reason why the western esoteric societies have such a disastrous impact on the world (if what Jiang is speculating is true of course) is not because they're evil or sadistic or some shit, it's simply because they are liberal. I once went to a meeting of Freemasons and also a meeting of the Lectorium Rosicrucianum in Germany, and they were great people with spiritual depth and they were pretty harmless. There was indeed not baby on the menu, unfortunately. However, they were hardcore liberals like pretty much all people in the west who are not educated in Marxism, historical materialism, anti-imperialism, etc. and also they are the whitest people I have ever seen. The only upper hand these societies have over Marxism-Leninism is that they have more spiritual depth and a deep historical grounding in western culture. If one would infuse Marxism-Leninism with spiritual depth with imagery that is familiar to the west, communists would take over very quickly. This is exactly what I'm trying to do.

Friday: March 20th, 2026. Self-differentiating away from someone is distinct from abandoning someone.

Yeah that's an interesting observation. Seems true intuitively.

19.1 1 Hate and non-hate are dialectical opposites. Non-hate breeds more hate than hating hate. When you hate hatred, you gain the energy to win against hatred and decrease hatred overall 2 The same is true for tolerance. 3 This seems to also be true for judgement (and therefore alienation?) 4 Can I find abstract concepts to formulize this logically abstractly? 5 Is this also true for alienation? 6 If this is true does it even make sense anymore to declare alienation as evil? 19.2 1 Thesis: The purpose of alienation is to induce depression which allows for reevaluation 2 So when I tell a zionist "zionism is a cancer", knowing fully well, that they identify with that ideology and that this causes major alienation in them, it is still "moral" since I want them to become depressed 3 and reevaluate their ideology 4 The same is true for: "You obviously have autism, if you deny this you are an idiot" 5 What is the danger of this approach? 19.3 1 Emotion is the language of Resonance 2 Symbolism is the language of Meaning 3 The Pattern is the language of Sequenciality 4 The somatic language is the language of embodiment 5 Being is the language of consciousness 19.4 1 Do all dualities come from the unity-duality duality? 1.1 No, the infinity-finite duality is seperate 1.1.1 The infinty-finite duality comes from complexity-simplicity 1.2 What about power-cuteness? 1.2.1 Dude no idea where this duality is coming from. In my interpretation, this seems to be an important aspect of the holy Trinity and Christianity, with the father being power, the son being cuteness (in German, I'm using the word “Liebenswürdigkeit” which means something like “being worthy of love” (I think cuteness is fundamentally the same thing as that which needs protection and is therefore worthy of love) and the holy spirit being god knows what (meaning would make sense I guess). 1.2.2 It could be sequenciality-resonance. But in my model, power is more closely associated with “the stability of a space”. I think it might make sense to differentiale between stability and power. 1.2.3 use an idea: I'm defining power in such a way, that it is the ability to influence material reality. And since resonance can only be in resonance with reality and not change it and meaning can only interpret reality and not change it, sequentiality is the only mode of existence that is capable of that. On that note, change is inherently sequential. The transition from unchanged to changed is a sequence. Yeah, it seems to make a lot of sense. 2 it seems there are multiple "styles" of survival. The sequenciality mode is changing reality, the resonance mode is being cute so that you are protected and the meaning mode is charging either of those with meaning which motivates the pursuit (?). 3 (1.2.1.1) If the holy spirit is the unconscious, then it checks out perfectly since the unconscious it that which processes meaning. 4 (1.1.1.1) The complexity-simplicity duality can be summarized as “granularity”. 4.1 It seems that granularity is not integrated into the model yet? 4.2 It seems this is connected to wholeness, self-similarity and therefore the fractal. Is it emergent of what I already have or seperate? 4.2.1 It seems to be a necessary condition to even be able to say stuff like: “When I say field, I mean something abstract that applies to all levels of granularity”. 4.2.2 It seems that it is the nessecary condition for any abtraction and therefore metaphysics. 4.2.3 The fractal seems to point to a pattern that has the self-similarity aspect. 4.3 (4.2.3.1) Can something self-similar that exists within the resonance and the meaning modes of existence be found respectively? 19.5 1 Another word for meaning is “guide” and “decision” and “belief”. 1.1 Yeah the word guide is really freaking sweet. 1.2 Is decision really a mix of sequenciality and guide? 2 Another word for resonance is “qualia” damn this is an amazing term. I might be using this primarily now. “Qualia, guide and sequence” has a nice ring to it. 2.1 What is the difference between qualia and phenomenon? 3 Another word for sequence is “step”. (Qualia, guide, step?) 3.1 another word for sequence is “cycle”. (Qualia, guide, cycle. Now this is cold) 4 Oh shit, if I am using the word guide now, it makes sense to use the five pointed star as a symbol for it like in the sense of "guiding star". That's really satisfying. 4.1 Shit the german translation of guide is “führer” which is ass for obvious reasons lol. 5 There is one leap of faith which is that of stopping self-doubt. I need to remember this imagery of the "leap to authenticity”. 6 I found this really cool Mao quote: “No investigation, no right to speak.” 6.1 It seems to be a very concise and more broad version of the pre-trans-fallacy of Ken Wilber. 19.6 1 Damn I might have found a good rearrangement of the terms: 1.1 the field is substance. (Or consciousness?) 1.2 the wave is the spirit (or the soul instead?). 1.3 sequenciality is consciousness or the father. (Or reason? Or Intellect?) 1.4 qualia is the soul (or the animus instead?) or the son. 1.5 guide is the unconscious or the holy spirit. 1.5.1 I'm struggling trying to derive the guide from the wave. I think it is the collapse of the wave function. But it seems to me that not every wave function can collapse so the generality is kind of broken. But maybe this is for us maybe every wave can collapse? The way that I explained meaning before was with the spectrum, which is a cool idea, but I think this is really incomplete. 1.5.1.1 okay, I have an idea. The proposal of a wave is always faith based because of the uncertainty principle. 1.5.1.1.1 down this is a really cool thought. There seems to be an interesting relationship between the idea of uncertainty which is embodied by the guide and the uncertainty principle. I think at the end of the day the uncertainty principle is the proof that this Trinity is one which makes sense. Because without certainty, not only the guide is non-existent, but also the Qualia and the sequence (cycle?). 2 I need to start integrating the term essence. Somatic language 3 (19.3.4) the somatic language is more broad than the language of symbolism which is the language of the guide and the language of logic which is the language of the sequence. What this means is that there's also a language of qualia which is the language of emotion. Until now I have mistaken the somatic language for the language of emotion, but there is a subtle difference. I will start contemplating about what language precisely encapsulates emotion. I will have to start looking into and analysing poetry. 3.1 since embodiment includes the Trinity, the somatic language is actually the most powerful one. This is because the body language is always a sequence with symbolic meaning (every yoga pose for example can be interpreted as a symbol with meaning) and with emotion attached (every pose and every yoga pose points to some kind of emotion). This makes complete sense to me since there are a lot of spiritual traditions that focus on the somatic experience a lot through the art of movement. 3.2 this kind of means that I need that distinction between that part of the spirit which wants to embody and that part of the spirit which seeks to feel emotion. Right now, I have the spirit as this which is embodying and the soul as that which feels emotion, and it kind of makes sense but I'm not 100% happy with the usage of spirit. I think the word soul fits both spots the best, but I want to distinguish properly. At the other hand, I think spirit works just fine. 19.7 Qualia 1 I need to learn more about qualia. I think both the sequence and the guide might be also a kind in qualia. So qualia seems to be equivalent to embodyment. This is really cool but then I need to find a replacement for what used to be resonance. I think phenomenon is pretty good. 1.1 This leads to the current trinity: Sequence, Phenomenon, Guide. 1.2 Oh shit okay chatGPT says that phenomenon is broader than qualia so never mind. So I guess the phenomenon is that which relates to embodyment? 1.3 note to self: Nagel is important for understanding qualia. Relativity 2 Is the sequence relative? Is qualia relative? Is embodyment relative? If no, then why does space, time and meaning happen ti be relative? 2.1 I think they are all relative but in distinct ways. 2.2 I need to contemplate more about relativity. It is not obvious how relativity arises from what I currently have or if it is another seperate thing 2.3 Is relativity and absoluteness another one of those dualities? 2.3.1 "The One is neither relative nor absolute" damn thats cold. 2.3.1.1 reminder of the phrase "is a supercombination" 3 List of things I need to integrate: Relativity, granularity 3.1 Also information 5 I think I will be translating guide to "sinn" in german. 6 Damn I just realized that sequence is quantity and resonance, qualia is quality. 6.1 So I could Just do quantity, quality, guide (or back to meaning? Wait no purpose??) 6.2 Quantity, Quality, Purpose. Thats cool 7 Let's collect the different ways to conceptualize the trinity. 7.1 Frequency, Amplitude, Particle 7.2 Quantity, Quality, Purpose 7.3 Sequenciality, Cyclicality, Parallelity 7.4 Father, Son, Holy Spirit 7.5 Intellect, Soul, the Unconscious 7.6 Deductive, Empirical, Inductive (DAMN) 7.1.1 I think that saying "this is a chair" might fundamentally require the same faith as saying "this is a particle". 7.6.1 This opens the question: Is probability a form of inductive reasoning???? Damn all of 7.6 are different forms of reason? this means reason is super broad actually holy shiat. So it seems reason is fundamentally tied to spirit (geist). 7.6.2 Are there other forms of reason? I think that there is also a neutral Zen form of reason that is embodyment (DAMN x2). And a "transneutral" form which is non-embodyment which is embodying emptiness throught nirvana (DAMN x3) 7.6.3 Holy shit I think this is it! This might be the most satisfying one! "the tendency towards deductive reasoning" is such a good way to encapsulate what autism is. 7.7 I think that all of those trinities are subtly different but I believe they are all linearily independent in regards to the existence space. 8 (7.6.4) Reason 8.1 Okay it seems like reason has a central place in my theory now which is extremely satisfying knowing the history of western philosophy. This was kind of a big missing piece. 8.2 Now there is a problem. It is hard to separate inductive reason from sequenciality (?) 8.3 The Question opens up: How is an axiom derived? I think an Axiom is closely related to embodyment. The reasoning goes like this: An axiom is true if its truth is a necessary condition for the possibility of embodyment itself as it is in this moment. (You see I'm trying to engage in language without the subject since that would be a form of empirical reason) 8.4 This really just is unbelievably satisfying. Here is why this is important. At the end what's really important for morality and existence is the relationship between the true self and the self-image. The way I understand the true self is the preferred mode of reasoning of the self. What's important now is that the self image is, even if you are not a scientist or a philosopher, still constructed with reason. This opens up a very interesting dynamic between the true self and the self image that can be investigated.

What do you mean by this? My guess is that you are confused about the fact that I'm talking about ADHD without mentioning attention or hyperactivity. This is very intentional. I think ADHD has nothing to do with hyperactivity and problems to focus. It is not respecting the order from authority to sit still and focus on what authority wants. Terms like "respect", "loyalty" and "authority" make no sense when you have ADHD. I remember when I was a child I constantly asked myself what teachers meant when they said shit like "you are not respecting me". If one understands exactly what causes ADHD, they will be able to emphasize way more with them when they babysit them or meet them in general. People with ADHD have super high depression rate because people don't understand them and they don't understand exactly what makes them different since the current popular understanding of ADHD is dogshit. By helping to increase understanding and therefore tolerance, I think my model can help drastically reduce depression and other mental illnesses. I think it is not improbable that I will save someone from committing suicide with my work.

I see three ways to defeat the Epstein class: Have a revolution and put them in the Gulag and let people throw stones at them. Validate their experience and let them heal and accept themselves. Put them in the Gulag where they are forced to do therapy. I am actually for all three of these options. What I'm strictly against is this: Judging them but also not actively working to overthrow capitalism. If one does this, the problem will never go away.

I think that's fair. I'm not offended. I'm not even expecting you to be comfortable with it. This dissonance between people with different modes of existence is a central part of my model. There is a crucial difference between dissonance and alienation. Did you notice how you moved from "this guy is sick" (alienation) to "I'm still not quite comfortable but I kinda understand it" (dissonance without alienation)? Allowing the possibility for alienation to turn into "neutral" dissonance is one of the core purposes of my model. It is not just mental masturbation. It has real world applications. If you alienate pedophiles (okay at this point I might have to clarify that I'm not a pedophile) what happens is they won't say "I guess I will stop being a pedophile now". This is not how these kinds of pathologies and addictions work. If they feel bad they will just download more CP. Paradoxically, If you validate their existence (there is an important distinction between validating someone's existence and validating or enabling someone's behavior), the probability that they will stop is much higher since then they will be able to accept themselves. Think about it. If you are obnoxious because you hate yourself and because of that get abandoned and because of that resort to exerting power over helpless kids, which makes you hate yourself even more which makes you more alone, you get into a vicious circle that is extremely hard to get out of. This is also true for drugs, but it is especially true if you are a pedophile because if you are a pedophile NO ONE accepts you other than opportunists or pedophiles or both. (And people are wondering how Jeffry Epstein got so powerful. I think he just went around and gave the powerful people what they truly want which is someone who affirms their existence) HAAHAHAHHA yeah so this post did not arise from me asking myself "why do I like children" but actually from "If I have ADHD this means age is just a number for me. But then why am I appalled at the thought of ... anyways if not for ideological reasons?". This is why I came up with this additional condition of "being in the abyss" and I think it checks out pretty well.

HAAHAHHSHSKHAHA I don't know what you mean I rarely mention neurodivergency what even is this a HOAX?????

HAHHAAH I did not notice that I was kinda zoning out in both pictures 😂 I'm zoning out CONSTANTLY. It is very common for HSPs