Carl-Richard

Now you're talking about H2O. "I'll have a glass of water" is different from "I'll have a glass of water with ice in it". Is ice "wet"? As a Norwegian, I can tell you I've experienced ice that you could confidently describe as "dry". They call solid CO2 "dry ice" for a reason, in that it doesn't turn liquid, or "get wet". But again, all of this becomes inaccurate once you invoke actual physical concepts. Again, I'm talking about water, not H2O. The point is that there is a way to use language in an accurate way (like in physics) and a common way (layman), and there is a way to do both of them wrong. The way you're doing both of them wrong is essentially by over-equating and over-generalizing ("genius is uniqueness", "stupidity is genius"), or when you conflate them like you're doing now. Either way, it makes it all appear pretty nonsensical. Even if it makes sense in your own head, on the surface and from the perspective of the people you're communicating with, it looks absolutely nonsensical. You can either be happy with that, knowing that most people will not listen to you, or that they will pretend to understand, or be satsified with a subpar or shallow understanding, and that you can say essentially anything you want and maintain plausible deniability that what you're saying is crap; or you can be unhappy with the fact that people prefer to listen to you with a low signal-to-noise ratio and that there is little oppurtunity for deep and coherent connection with someone else.

I think if you made a thread that asked" what is water?", you would eventually conclude that water is dry.

That is why I generally don't read your posts.

How have our bodies changed in a way that human nature hasn't? The image of humans working together like the cells in our bodies is such a fascinating image. It truly is the next step of evolution. Currently, we're tiny amoebas bumping into each other competing for resources. Essentially, Game B is laying out the physiological blueprint of the human superorganism: who will be the mitochondria, the immune cells, the blood cells, the muscle cells?

Rack ? pulls ? above ? the ? knee.

@nuwu I think you're a good example of using too many big words

In the words of Ye: I love Hitler. And wild boars.

What if I just like animals? How should I act?

There are certainly people who do that in a way that doesn't make sense, but Daniel doesn't strike me like that. His speech is super focused and goal-oriented. Compare him to someone like Eric Weinstein: he is also a really smart guy, but the difference is that he likes to use very peculiar metaphors or odd words for saying basic things. Daniel does not do that imo. When he uses a big word, he is generally pointing to a big concept. When Eric uses a big word, it's 50/50 a big concept and something basic. If by "Actuality" you mean non-duality (and not the actual substance behind words), I say get lost. You won't solve complex societal problems by being a hippie. We tried that in the 60s with Tim Leary.

Nora Bateson is the daughter of Gregory Bateson, one of the pioneers of systems theory. They're a really good combination.

Like @undeather said, I struggle mostly with the ethical arguments (i.e. veganism being superior). However, there is one thing to consider if you're a hyper-pragmatist: if you care about making a difference in the world, make it a part of your work. Not choosing to buy a pack of eggs is not going to stop factory farming, and not buying a pack of eggs will only make a nanoscopic difference in the total consumption of eggs on the Earth. Although it can make you feel better that you're not at all complicit in a system you think is unjust (or you're that empathetic to animals), the real work is done when you put your ass to it: work in the relevant fields that further your message, become an activist, use your influence, etc. Here you also have to factor in that animal welfare is not the only game in town for stopping unnecessary suffering. The meaning crisis is killing more people than you can possibly imagine, environmental problems and global warming will doom our species if left unchecked, political and social issues (local or global) need to be tended to, etc. But of course, all this is just an excuse for avoiding the most ethical action, which is to not eat animals. If you're truly the most virtuous, empathetic and philosophically consistent person, you will not let the status quo dictate your actions at all. But countering the status quo does not come without costs, and it takes a certain person to fully commit to ethical sainthood (which will always be a failed project anyway). I've been thinking lately though that I should become more empathetic in general, and that I'm perfectly capable of it, but again, that the status quo is not particularly supportive of it. And if I were to fully "open my heart", I don't think I could be a non-vegan, or watch the news. Maybe that can be a line of work in this direction: make people become more empathetic so they will do the right individual action.

@Osaid @UnbornTao @Razard86 I mean, you guys are not wrong. My intuition is also that once you pass beyond that initial fear (if it arises), you'll arrive at a much better place in the end. But this ego is a dense one.

Nevertheless, there comes a point where the ego surrenders forever, and it doesn't really choose when that happens.

No. I had not taken psychedelics in 3 years at that point. Resting heartrate. It's as if you're so calm that you're disappearing. Nope. LSD three times, microdosed a dozen times. The experiences were triggered by meditating 1-1.5 hour every day for 3 years straight, stretching 30 minutes every day, semen retention, abstaining from all social medias and online newspapers, eating extremely healthy, sleeping well, working out regularly, listening to non-dual teachers regularly and while falling asleep. The "flip" happened when I decided to stop meditating and stopped trying to have the experiences.

I thought while watching the video that he is like a healthier Terrence McKenna who didn't become addicted to weed and had 30 more IQ points installed.

For instance, what would you say if you died right now? Would you be ok with that on a psychological level, physical level, spiritual level? The answer you have to that depends on your karma.

I kept seeking it, dipped my toes into it, but always recoiled in fear. I kept doing that for a while, until I realized that I don't think I want to be in it. Then, as I relaxed, suddenly the entire image flipped, and the only thing that was not in it was my toes, and I had to pull myself out somehow. That is the counterintuitive aspect of it: you think your karma tracks onto your state of consciousness, but that is not always the case. Ego death is terrifying, for the ego, when the ego is not ready. The ego does not really choose when it is ready either. It has to feel like there is truly no other alternative before it lets go forever.

My relationship with the non-dual state became truly serious once I realized that I didn't want it (or that a big part of me didn't want it). Karma unfolds in very counterintuitive ways sometimes.

Bro, why is this the end of the world? People think you're nice. It's not a big deal, or it is, but it's something you should be happy about. And by the way, Jordan Peterson doesn't say you should generally make people think you're a monster. He says you should be capable of being a monster if the situation calls for it. Until then, you should be nice. 99% of people you meet for the first time should think you're a nice person. If not, you're just an asshole, and not a useful one like JP talks about.

Now I'm confused. I don't see why you're bringing this up.

Basically, when a monkey views the image on the right (a), their visual cortex lights up in a corresponding pattern (b). It shows how the visual aspects of the external world is represented topographically across neurons responsible for visual processes. It's kinda neat.

?

I could understand everything he wrote. It seems like a form of psychosis. I've experienced similar things back in my weed days where things take on more meanings than one or the opposite meaning of what is discretely stated. The mind becomes so associative and fluid that normal interactions become not so normal.

The phantom limb one made me go "what?!" ??

The combination of "they're disrespecting the law" and the inability to entertain conceptual abstractions ("stop bringing up alcohol") makes this the most undeniable display of Blue. That's of course only the beginning: