Scholar

From what I understand it is not really politically feasible to change the candidate at this point. Seems to me like Trump is going to win, that's my current expectations. I'll be positively surprised if people aren't as irrational as I assume they might be.

But how are americans this stupid? I just can't fathom, even if you are stupid, how you can't just intuitively see that Trump is a complete charlatan? His entire facial expressions scream snakes-oil salesman and fakeness. The way he stiffens his lips, it's like a life carricature of a sleasy politician pretending to be serious and confident. The way he talks, the way he looks, I mean he is genuinely a complete buffoon on every level.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1drhezk/2012_vs_2024_presidential_debate/ wtf happened to your country man @Leo Gura

Vipassana meditation is the most simple way to get over attachment that I know of.

Everyone trying to save nature nowadays meanwhile maybe it's all part of the plan to rid ourselves of the vile cocoon that gave birth to sentient life, lol. Maybe Bladerunner is actually a Utopia in the grand scheme of things.

The issue is that you are framing existence as illusiory, or "imagined". That's because the perceiver has not been deconstructed. There is no mind, mind is just a form of existence which can be dissolved. Once that is done, there is no imagination, you simply recognize the nature of existence as what it is, changing and infinite. This however does not mean that existence does not relate to itself in certain ways. Your alien consciousness relation could merely be a dream, a neurological phenomena. An advanced AI could take your brain and it could stimulate certain parts of it such that you'd have an alien experience. It would understand how your brain relates to certain aspects of existence, how the particular expression of the wavefunction of the universe, or the geometric relations of universal existence, relate to these particular expression of infinitude. If you look at the brain as a particular relationship, and then the relationship between the brain and what you call "consciousness" as another relation, the assumption is that because the relationship that we call "brain" or "brain-activity" is limited (geometrically, mathematically, physically), it therefore means that what it relates to must also be limited in such a way. But this is no the case, you can have a limited number of neurons that interact with infinitudes. In an abstract sense, a neurological complexity of 2 neurons could relate to infinite space. You would assume that two neurons could only create so much "space". But two neurons can have a relationship with space, which is infinite, and the neurological complexity would then determine how sophisticated the separations are within this space. Full neurological activity would be infinite space (or better, total space), where as partial activity would be partial space. From the perspective of a human mind, totality of space (meaning, literally infinite spatiousness) is not common, so when this experience occurs, it seems so all encompassing, so total, that the mind deems it as "beyond the brain". But this is not beyond the brain, because your notions of what a brain can do/how it relates to other aspects of existence is naive and reductionistic. And infinite experience can be had with a finite relationship between different aspects of existence, that's what is being missed, because of a failure of imagination. I don't think you will ever experience anything outside of the informational landscape of your brain, not in this form of existence. The fact that you experience universal relationships from the perspective of a solipsistic object will only confirm to you, given you engage in full delusion, that this is the only object that can exist. Ergo, this hallucination is all that exists, because you are taking the hallucination itself as the prime and total arbiter of reality and existence. The solipistic nature of the object, given the investigation into it's own nature by means of realizing it's own existence, will necessarily lead you to conclude what you have concluded about reality. It is not a conclusion grounded in the absolute nature of existence, but rather your epistemic approach towards how to determine the nature of existence. In other words, because your epistemic framework has taken it's particular existence, which is all of existence that exists to itself, as the grounds from which to determine what can and cannot exist, the description of it's own nature necessarily would become the description of existence itself. Totality is simple what existence looks like, or is. Each individual aspect of existence is Total, but this feeling of totality is then projected as a concept onto the notion of reality itself. Notice that the feeling of totality is indeed a feeling, separate from the totality of any given aspect of existence.

Right but the alien consciousness stuff and alien language and whatever and your perception of it being some deeper intelligence could literally just be a dream delusion made up by your very human mind. Given the nature of psychedelics you could delude yourself this content is somehow mapping onto existence in a way that it simply does not. I sometimes have dreams that are more real than reality. Normal dreams, where I can lucidly and clearly see I see everything around me in a level of detail and vividness that I don't experience during waking life. There is all kinds of things my brain alone can do without any deeper necessity for some sort of consciousness expansions. We know this because we now have technology that can do the same. In fact we'll probably be able to record these dreams soon given advances in technology. The problem with psychedelics is that they do the opposite of deconstructive work. While they have a deconstructive component, they also will make you severely overconfident and susceptible to convincing yourself of any given intention you have set for yourself. In my view the alien stuff you experience is literally just a dream that you brain is generating, and we'll have prove of this sooner or later. There is nothing magical about this, otherwise you'd be able to use that intelligence to solve any type of real world problem. But the convenient thing is you can't solve shit with it, for whatever made up reason. The thing about psychedelics is that they will give you a SENSE and FEELING of deeper meaning, deeper "realness" and so forth. But they can do so for ANYTHING at all that your consciousness can come up with, including any delusion. The feeling of deeper "realness" and deeper "meaning" is not deconstructed while on psychedelics, it is amplified. And a deconstruction of those feelings is necessary if you don't want to get captured by these simple egoic dynamics.

Right but it's easy to delude yourself around the content of consciousness and claim it is fundamental.

I find psychedelics have a profoundly powerful delusionary pull. Given your intention, you can make anything your reality and be convinced it is the nature of reality.

There is no such thing as deeper consciousness or awareness, there is just existence. If you recognize the simplicity of this, there is no greater depth to be achieved in regards to the nature of existence. Not sure what that has to do with suicide. Consciousness is mental construct, or, a construct of existence, just another form. In the end there cannot be any description or grasping of existence in and of itself, because it has no form other than it's form. Redness simply is redness, there is no further depth.

Infinite can take infinite forms, you will never fathom even a fraction of what it could become. The nature of infinity however, the Groundless Ground, is something that can be recognized as Absolute. Existence is always existence, no matter what form it takes.

Still think the depth of consciousness thing is Maya stuff. You're just discovery the nature of infinity, which is infinite, lol. You'd like to imagine infinite as a static thing, as an infinitely large thing. But the way infinity looks like is more so akin to a vector. It's infinitely expanding into itself.

Depending on the kind of lentils you eat they can just be heavy to digest. I get sleepy after eating a high-protein red lentil meal for example. I wouldn't eat it in the morning. If you have problems digesting you can drink a bit of apple cyder vinegar before eating. (look up how to do it)

It's the other way around, if you can accept the wig, you clearly are enlightened.

Obvious stuff but for those overhyped people in here.

Sure thing buddy.

It's not that deep, you could have figured out 90% of the principles discussed here just by contemplating and investigating your own intelligence and intuition, whilst knowing the basic way of how LLMs work. It's nice to see the experts parrot what I have been saying in regardsto LLMs basically simulating intuition, and that intuition is used by humans in all forms of intelligent problem solving but is not actually intelligent problem solving. I had a discussion about this precise thing with someone on the forum a year back or so. They are still missing the connection to individuated consciousness though, but that's another matter. Any easy way to gain insight into this is to inspect specifically the nature of understanding. Note that intuition is not grounded in consciousness, or individuated consciousness to be precise. It's unconscious or subconscious, so is knowledge, and the way it is cued is conscious, but the way it is prompted from your memory is not conscious. You know this Leo because you made this insight when you realized your mind is like google and you can just ask it something and it will give you an answer. That is basically engaging the "LLM" unconscious" part of the mind or brain. Understanding however is precisely consciousness. It is cannot be simulated or imitated, because it is it's own form of existence. The brain is basically an interface between that form of existence (which is a unified form of existence, something unique and impossible to simulate via mere algorithmic approaches), so the neural networks feed into individuated consciousness, which is sustained through a particular relationship within the physicality of the universe.

I think Leo also has a need to be the best and ultimate at something. Wouldn't be very exciting if he couldn't develop the "deepest understanding of reality anyone has ever reached in the history of mankind" etc. Non-Duality is too simple, and there is a clear end point, and it was discovered for thousands of years. Can't really out-ego that.

I don't have a summary, but this conversation was pretty solid: I'm currently leaning more towards Yang being correct than Gura, or maybe neither.

Close-mindedness. I think Yang is superior.

Why? What makes you believe Ralston is truthful/accurate about his own self-assessment?

You're stanning him hard.

Rats are pretty cool though, so I take it as an insult to Ralson, which I might agree with.