• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About erik8lrl

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,387 profile views
  1. What is understanding? The recognition of one's self in things The recognition of self-similarity in things The recognition of love in things When I say "I understand you", what does it mean? It means I have imagined being you and experienced existence as you It means I have expanded/put away (a part of) my sense of self to include you in it. What about when I say "I understand how something works"? Let's say it is gravity What does it mean when I say "I understand how gravity works"? First, "I" is the understanding occurring to, I as a human being, for God do not need to understand, since God is already understanding all (Paradox, I am God) Second, gravity is defined as a concept in my experience of existence Third, "works" means I acknowledge the existence of this concept and how it functions in the logical systems of this universe. So it actually means: I acknowledge the defined/imagined concept/phenomenon of gravity as a part of this functioning universe I (as God) then create this concept in my existence But what if I don't understand it? It still exists. What is the difference between understanding it and not? For example, I have been trying to understand Voice Leading I know of its existence and its phenomenon But I have yet to define it. Or rather, my current definition of it feels incomplete or untrue I don't yet fully understand it. But I know it. What is the difference between understanding and knowing? Knowing is the acknowledgment of the existence of a concept/thing. Understanding is realizing the nature of that thing in existence. And the truest nature of all things is that they are God/self. So the deepest understanding is the realization of God in things. And the moment you realize that, you also realize your own nature. Thus that thing, from an existential point of view merges with you into one. So really understanding can be defined as: **The process of conceptual unification.** We may understand things in different degrees and depths And they are all pointing towards the absolute truth. And since the absolute is infinite, we may continue this process for infinity. And thus you may also define it as: **The process of self-recognition/self-realization/self-identification/self-unification** This is true, but it also reaches the level of absolute to the point that it now defines existence. Existence is the process of self-recognition/self-realization/self-identification/self-unification Existence is understanding Understanding is existence Understanding is God This is why you can understand God, but you can't know it. You understand what God is when you understand what understanding is. (Strange loop) Knowledge is defined/confined by existence and experience. What we define as knowledge is information/concepts that we've created/experienced through our senses. Without experience, there won't be any knowledge or knowing, since there will be nothing to acknowledge. But God is beyond (including) existence, thus you can understand God by becoming one with it. Once you unify with it you reach the deepest/truest nature of that thing/yourself/God. It is a recognition, not an acknowledgment, since you've always been it, you simply forgot. Recognition: The remembering of self Acknowledgment: The conceptualization of existence The second definition of understanding is more fundamental than the first. What is a concept? A concept is imagined Conception can equal to imagination Thus conception = creation Thus conception = existence Existence is a concept, That which God/infinity conceptualized/created (Strange loop) Thus we can redefine understanding as: **The process of existence/creation/God unifying with itself.** Thus when I say God is in the process of understanding itself I mean, God is the process of understanding and it is understanding and it is... (Infinite strange loop) It all just is... Back up a few levels of abstractions: From the human perspective, understanding seems to be associated with the mind What is the mind? The mind is the conceptual self The body is the physical/experiential self The soul is the fundamental self Beauty is experiential unification Understanding is conceptual unification Being is Spiritual unification (in process) Pleasure is physical unification Happiness is emotional unification Bliss is Spiritual unification (in actuality) What is the difference between experience and concept? Experience is a higher abstraction Concept is more fundamental Concept can exist "before" experience Conception leads to creation, creation then leads to experience (Strange Loop) Experience is a subset of conception/creation For God, all concepts are created and explored Conception is a subset of God/self/infinity So why do I desire to be understood? I can see the true nature of others, but they can't see the true nature of me/themselves. What I desire is actually to unify with them conceptually, As a creation of existence to recognize that we were/are conceptually one being. Why do I experience human emotional pain when I fail to create understanding? (Even tho it is very mild and only from those whom I wish to understand) 1. Because I alone understand the truth 2. The sense/illusion of separation gets intensified 3. The desire is not fulfilled The truth is, there is no one to understand, or that we all already understand, we are already what we are. But this conceptual existence is designed for us to have the imagined experience of separation and unification (love) We designed the process of this function so that we can experience this love. I have this desire because I wish to experience this love. But the process is designed to maximize the impact of this experience. Thus there are those who cannot yet understand (or pretend to be that way as a human) I need to recognize that this too is a part of infinite love. And continue to follow my heart and be a part of God/existence. It is funny if you understand, how all these people are convincing themselves that they are not what they are, how they (we) are playing this game while their true self knows full well how everything is. Like actors shooting a scene. The sense/illusion of separation (aka the ego) (or the lack of it) is a part of the design of this whole structure in order to intensify/maximize love. Unification won't feel satisfying until separation is experienced to the extreme (in infinite different degrees). It's all love... Thus we have unified with the concept of understanding... (strange loop)
  4. @peanutspathtotruth Yes, that's good. It's best if you connect your history research to present issues and events. This will help you understand the structure of politics more clearly. Also, I would do the same thing as I wrote about on finding good sources with history. If you research history in a different country and a different language, you will find that even on the same event, the details and perspectives are often very different (especially if they are opposing nations). Academics are also biased, and they still function under their own survival bias and their nation's survival perspective. Some countries even change or erase things they've done in the past when teaching kids at school so that they can brainwash them into their perspective. That is not to say you shouldn't use academic sources, but just be aware of that as you check the sources. And it's best if you check out academics that are in different countries to learn as many perspectives as possible. If you research war, you will find that even if both sides speak truthfully about the facts of an event, they can manipulate the perspective and context of the event to make themselves look like the good guys. Personally, I like to research academics in different nations and then find real accounts of the event from different people who lived through it (on both sides) to get a partially direct experience.
  5. @Fleetinglife Yes, it is not an easy path. The ego development process is very complex. Wisdom does not develop overnight. It takes courage, work, and time. So keep going, and as you deconstruct/understand more and more perspectives, it will become easier and easier.
  6. @peanutspathtotruth It depends on the topic of interest. Meta sources like Daniel or Leo are not really good for sense-making on a specific topic/issue. They are better for learning sense-making methods and frameworks, and I think in that perspective, Leo, Daniel, and Ken Wilber are enough for you to have a well-defined sense-making process. The sources I was talking about are sources that actually help you to make sense of a specific topic. So in that perspective, it's hard for me to give you general recommendations since they are all sources covering many specific topics that I'm interested in. What I do and would recommend is to start with one topic and really go through the process on that topic. Find quality sources and make sense of that topic completely (to the highest degree possible for you). Through this process, if you are doing it correctly, you will start not only to understand the topic on the surface but the underlying meta structure of sense-making as a whole. Because everything is connected, when you dive deep into this process, you will start to connect information/issues that are not even directly related to each other. As you gain more understanding of the meta-structure through this process, sense-making will become easier and easier because you will start to recognize patterns in all human issues. And thus slowly developing an intuition (logic+emotion understanding) on sense-making and a better grasp of the whole of the information landscape. For example, if you want to fully understand the context within the conflict between Israel and Palestine. You would have to study the history of religion (between Christianity, Judaism, and Islam). This then leads to the study of the history of the Middle East and Europe across several thousand years and not only in Isreal's perspective but also in Palestine's perspective all the way to the present time. (Not too deeply, but just enough depth to understand all the major events that happened) And through this process, you will go through many events that lead to other events in history, and like a tree, it will branch out and connects with other topics that might seem unrelated. For example, how does the origin of Christianity relates (or differs) to the racial issues in present-day America? You will start to see parallels in how human conflict functions and evolves on a structural level. I know it sounds like a lot of work, and it is. But it's like a skill that develops and becomes easier the more you develop it. Wisdom does not come easily; it requires you to put in the work and time. It's not something you can develop overnight. Sense-making is a meta-skill (like learning, and love), it will help you connect all your knowledge/epistemological understanding into a holistic structure that leads to God. That's said, you can still strategize and optimize your research process to make it as efficient as possible by finding good sources (as I've defined before) on topics that interest you.
  7. Read Range:Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World by David Epstein.
  8. Everyone is "evil" to some degree depending on your perspective. How evil they are to you depends on how much of a threat it is to your survival in the perspective you hold. To someone whose survival comes from/depends on democracy and freedom (in the US sense), China will seem like a huge survival threat if the person is not good at sense-making and or are underdeveloped consciously (below yellow). The more perspectives you have, the less evil everyone will seem. In God's perspective, everything is good.