Scholar

No, scientists, professors and Nobel prize winners making nuanced points about possible issues of 5G and Covid-19 policy are not conspiracies. However, theories that claim that Covid-19 was created to control us and to establish a 5g network that subsequently will enslave and depopulate us is indeed a conspiracy theory, which has a tendency to discredit any valid concern about 5G and Covid-19 policies. Nobody will listen to valid concern if everyone who is concerned about it is a complete nutjob. If I go to someone now and tell them about the possible issues with 5G they will dismiss it because of how many conspiracy theories are woven around that topic. The conspiracy theorists achieve the exact opposite of what the seek, they create an environment in which any valid concern is put into the box of conspiracy theory. This is for example true for the pedophile issues in Hollywood or other institutions of power. Nobody takes this serious because there are conspiracies about Mark Zuckeberg and Bill Gates drinking the blood of babies and somehow being part of some satanic cult. This hinders the genuine journalistic effort that would need to be made uncover actual problems that are actually real.

I have multiple family members who think Covid19 is a hoax and that 5g is a tool to enslave us. And when I also then come here and see so many people subscribing to these ideas, I just worry. Maybe it's just my subjective experience, so maybe this irrationality is not as prevelant as I think.

It's also problematic because of how much effort it takes to disprove a conspiracy theory. It doesn't take much time to create one, because most claims are made up from thin air and are not verfied at all, yet for the one who wants to disprove such a theory it can be enormous effort. Don't forget that this is an oppurtinity cost. The more non-sense there is, the more non-sense we will have to dismiss, and the less time we will be able to focus on progress. The amount of time, effort and attention that is lost on a global scale is just absurd.

Somehow it reminds me very much of the Witch-hunts tha happened, although I did not do enough historical research on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt It would not surprise me if something similar would happen as a result of this loss of foundation. The loss of authority during that time in history seems to be a big reason for why people fell into this kind of completey irrationality.

Loss of Faith in institutions/authority and loss of community is one of the main reasons in my opinion. This is what happens where there is no functional and healthy Stage Blue foundation within a society. As far as I can see this will only get worse, the internet amplifies these effects by a degree never seen before in history. Fundamentally people do not realize that stories are what holds together civilization. This is why stories were so important for constructing and upholding societies, whether it be religion, nation, race, tribe, family or anything else. Now came a time in which we have abandoned a unified story in the face of freedom of speech and freedom from consequence. The furhter and further apart the stories get, the more divided we will become. Because there is no outside pressure to keep us unified anymore. There is no threat to survival which is so urgent as to make community a necessity. And because noone thought it to be important to take this into their own hands, we now have more radically shifting world views, world stories. People are lost because they do not have the epistemic tools to navigate a world without indoctrination and authority. People are susceptible to any story, because they derive the validification of a story by means of emotion and ego. This is a clear regression, and I know nobody who knows how to solve this issue.

Interesting I just had a similar intuition, that reincarnation is basically a process of learning to Love that which one cannot Love. Therefore, what you hate most, you shall become, so that you shall learn to Love it.

The Circle. You will have come to see it yourself.

The Circle!

Exactly my point. But yet you are missing it still.

Again, nothing I said is in opposition to this. You cannot understand me because you have not clearly identified the Circle yet. Your mind is a slave to linearity. When I say you have no capacity to understand this, I mean not that it will be difficult to explain it to you, it will be fundamentally impossible. You have to recognize the Circle yourself. If you do not, you will keep wondering why something in Maya can cause Enlightenment. Why talking 5-MeO-DMT can "reveal" what you call the Ground which causes 5-MeO-DMT. As long as you do not see the Circle, you will ignore this matter. You have reached the end of the Line, but not realized it is merely a point on the circle. You have to clearly see the Circle, travelling forth and back will do nothing for you.

It is very interesting, because what I said does not stay in opposition to what you said here. This is what I mean, there is a fundamental incapacity to see and express the circle.

This is not true, you are expressing the circle as a line. Notice that you have things prior to other things, you have one thing more fundamental than another. This is a story your mind tells. Any story is linear, and this is nothing but a story you tell yourself. Brain is consciousness. There is no ground. What you talk of is spiritual dogma, it is Non-duality viewed through the lense of physicalism. This is the irony of it. You talk of the circle, but you have not developed the capacity to express and integrate it.

Consciousness isn't prior to anything, I think there is still some physicalism/dualism in your perspective, because of how you have constructed a new perspective that is somehow opposed to the materialist perspective. You have not transcendet it in a way to include both in a harmonic fashion. The brain is consciousness, there is no before, after, behind, infront, etc. other than beforeness, afterness, behindness and infrontness. The flying out the window is as much consciousness as the brain is, you are performing the same trick in reverse. The Absolute being Absolute is not opposed to anything that was said. In my opinion the problem is that Ralston does fundamentally not see the nature of the Circle. He still expresses the possible within a framework of logic, causality and so forth. "It is impossible for there to be something beyond this! It is true that there is nothing beyond this!". Ralson fundamentally fails to see that this could be true, while untrue at the same time. That this could be true Absolutely, yet that there could still be something beyond. If I have realized one thing on this path so far is that Impossibility does not mean something is not the case. And furthermore, something not being the case does not mean something not being the case. Ralston is trapped in the expression of the Line. He does not grasp true Paradox.

Do you think "Awakening" could not be observed as a process (or lack thereof) in the brain? Do you think it is impossible to alter the brain in such a way so as to remove Ego from it's structure? I don't buy that. I think we could have a device that instantly increased your awareness to levels no Enlightened Master has ever reached, or to reach total non-duality and awareness of Nothingness instantaneously with no effort whatsoever. Therefore, I don't see a good reason why there wouldn't be a substance that could do similar things. Ralstons view of Enlightenment is not very convincing to me. To me permanent vs non-permanent enlightenment experience is nothing but the brain either being permanently changed or temporarly changed. These are the rules of Maya. Equally I think there could be a device that would render Ralston unenlightened instantanously.

You have to specifically look at egoic structures that operate beneath the gross realms, like concepts and abstractions. You will realize the animalistic nature of yourself, and it's workings of ego and seperation. It will be obvious to you that they are present in animals, because they are as much present in you. They forms will only be minorly different. You will see in the bird the same you see in yourself.

Observe yourself more carefully, then observe animals. This is not about a deficiency in knowledge, but rather a deficiency in seeing.

Observe more carefully. There are layers and layers to ego and seperation.

This could be true but I do not think that animals that are genetically close to us are that different in terms of their egoic structures and using the illusion of seperation. One could even argue that must like sensitivity for pain, the ability to create a fundamental illusion of seperation might even be more important for a being that cannot think in abstraction like us, because of how much of a fundamental behavioural driver seperation is.

This is interesting, that poses the question, how much layers are there inbetween the "deepest" layer and the... most "shallow" layer? This seems a bad way to frame it, but if we were to frame it that way, I would assume there are infinite layers, and that we could explore them. An animal presumably can go from animal consciousness to God consciousness, if we gave it psychedelics or similar things. But can it achieve all the inbetween layers that a human can? The spectrum "inbetween" is interesting because what is the potential of it? Is it infinite? Is that what evolution is doing partly? Creating more and more capacity for inbetween?

How much of this do you think is the limitation of the human mind? Could there be a mind structure that was geared towards operating in this "deeper" realm of "causes" or magic while our human minds are not structured to do this or to grapple with it effectively? Could there be a being that could use these deeper realms to construct a sort of language out of it, if it's mind was geared towards doing so? Could there be a mind that was geared solely towards the exploration of the "Inner" realms? And what would that mean in relationship to our inherent limitations as human minds?

Is there a duality between something being reveal as impossible/magical vs understanding how it is created? Because I more and more realize impossibilities, rather than understanding. In a certain sense I get a grasp of the impossibilities, which I guess is a new type of understanding, but it is also not really explanatory in an intellectual sense. I always thought I understood paradox and circularity, in a strict linear sense it seems to not be that hard to grasp. But the thing about paradox and circularity is that both of them are kind of descriptions from a framework of linearity. Paradox comes from viewing things linearly and simply describing the non-linear, non-causal or non-non-contradictory. This can be done from a linear perspective, but this will give one no insight into paradox or circularity. To see the circle makes one realize how futile it is to look at it as a line. So is this recognition of impossibility or paradox or circularity a new type of understanding? I feel like since I have observed them, my capacity to hold contradictory ideas increase tremendously. I can weave thought patterns and structures that previously I would have not been capable of weaving, which people who have not had the insight into paradox seem to have no capacity of even beginning to understand, making it just impossible to communicate. But still, it seems futile to explain the circle in with a line. The mind struggles grasping the paradox. It tries to unravel it into a non-paradox, but when doing so it always loses the nature of the circle. So my question is, if we say there are these two types of Understanding, do they ever truly translate into each other? Do we ever get to explain the magic, or is the recognition of magic the explanation?

in a relative sense one could imagine it with different timelines, I guess. Enlightenment is Ultimate. It is the End of all Timelines, it is the end point of all Form. In that timeline, so to speak, everyone is already dead, because all form reunited with formlessness. This does not make sense because you imagine Reality not as a circle. If you see the circle, it won't be an issue. It will still be impossible, but it will not be an issue. The stories will make more sense, even if they are contradictory and paradoxical. I guess the trick is, it is the same place at which everyone was not yet born.

As Leo experiences recently in his breakthrough, Ken talks about the importance of Forgiveness and Gratitude: But honestly I just wanted you guys to see the wig... oh my god. My grandma had a wig just like him, and she looked like him aswell.