Carl-Richard

Let me be a skeptic but also a New Ager at the same time: if there are people who can give detailed accounts of claimed past lives, even thousands of years back in time (I know one such case), then where are the self-proclaimed starseed people with detailed memories from their star system of origin? To be very clear, I don't mean the people who say "hmm, I think I might be a Pleiadean, because I feel weirdly attracted to it when I hear the name". I mean the people who say "yeah, we lived in these small huts that levitated above the ground, and we communicated using telepathy, and one day when I went to school, I fell and hit my head, and I was taken to the hospital and was magically healed". Can you find me these people, or just any reasonable argument or evidence? Then you might be onto something. Regardless, it goes to show that if you want to convince someone about something, you can't just be casual about it (which is probably how most people approach this type of New Age beliefs; it's just something to fill your head with; no burning desire to truly get to the bottom of something). Be ambitious about it.

This is an old thread. If you want to start a new thread, do that (but don't expect it to stay up for long either; it seems a bit unproductive to merely complain about a certain type of people).

So I got covid exactly one week ago. It hit me pretty hard as I had just finished my last exam and slept bad the day before, and I had just barely recovered from a lung infection. My fever calmed down by the 5th day, and that is when I started to notice that yes indeed, the same brain fog is back. I can't say for sure how long this one will take, but last time, I swear it took several months before it slowly went away (or I somehow got used to it; I have no idea). Somewhat luckily, I caught it at the beginning of the longest Christmas vacation I'll ever have (almost 2 full months long). Somewhat less luckily, I can't afford even the slightest hit to my cognition for the next semester, and I feel there is a slight chance I'll still be affected then. Yes, it's only the 7th day, but it's currently so bad that I can't watch something as innocuous as House with my brother and understand 50% of what is going on at times. Time feels like it's constantly sped up, like I'm having weed withdrawals, and I can't think any interesting thoughts. Today, I went to the gym for the first time since getting sick, and I expected to be weak and lousy due to the infection, and I was correct (I can lift the same weight I'm used to, just not at the same speed, focus and intensity). It didn't really better my brain fog at all; if anything, it made it slightly worse. I'll see if sprint training does something (it should make my mind clearer anyway), which I'll maybe try tomorrow. Anyways, any general tips or special knowledge about covid that could be useful for speeding up recovery? I'm seriously contemplating getting regular vaccines for this shit if this happens every time.

@EyolfTheWolf @Yimpa I'm as far as I can tell back to normal. I just kept to my normal routine really (which is more healthy than not).

DMN activation is definitionally neurotic (neurosis = mental conflict). It disrupts current processing with emotionally salient and sometimes completely task-irrelevant information; it creates conflict between the task at hand and some new information. I've simply been claiming it could be the case that an overactive DMN could lead to certain creative outcomes that would not be possible otherwise. After all, the DMN is also definitionally a provider of insights (a radical new way of looking at things). It's just that when the DMN is overactive, your ability to perform on tasks and thus have particularly brilliant insights might be severely diminished, hence enlightened people might be more creative (or brilliantly creative) on average. But again, that doesn't mean that an overactive DMN couldn't produce different types of insights which could be brilliant (because it's indeed a different state), but arguably at a lesser rate (because general task perfomance is lower), hence there is some luck involved for the person who does strike gold. An enlightened person cannot be in such a state. Funny side note but relevant: I just watched a video where Jan Esmann (a really interesting mystic) talks about how enlightenment impacts things like IQ, and he personally reported seeing a 30 point IQ increase from when he was in his 20s and "unenlightened" compared to his 50s where he was deeply established in enlighenment, which is particularly fascinating as your IQ generally decreases with age. This is by the way consistent with the fact that neural networks related to working memory and executive functioning (which are closely related to IQ) are essentially synonymous with the task-positive network. That tells you the scope of the increase in functioning that we're talking about. That said, Jan is specifically talking about energetic phenomena that becomes available at various stages of enlightenment (increased Shakti, kundalini awakenings), which is of course less easily captured by the DMN/tasking dichotomy. Nevertheless, it provides a strong suggestion that functioning can be highly increased by practicing the "enlightenment" type of spirituality. Additional interesting side note showing overactivation of the DMN in relation to psychopathology: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/task-positive-network No wonder why we have a mental health crisis when not only the more "common" mood-related disorders like depression and anxiety are implicated, but also psychotic disorders like schizophrenia. This also hearkens back to the point about overactive DMN leading to unclear thinking.

That could be possible to a certain extent. It would also explain how far lost we've gotten from functionality, painting ourself into a corner with dense conceptual schemes and metaphysical materialism. It got us modern science, but it also got us the modern mental health crisis. That said, while the culture around enlightenment prevalent in the East is probably less conducive to creativity, the enlightened state itself is still an immense source of creativity (indicated by what we know about flow states). There have always been relatively few actual enlightened people, so this probably skews the numbers in favor of the West. I wonder what a society where e.g. 50% of the population is enlightened would look like in terms of creativity. Nevertheless, again, you can't underestimate the possible impact of the few obsessed lucky neurotics that strike creative gold and do so soelly due to their neurotic nature.

Statistically, yes, but again, I reject the reductive framing. That is why I wrote all this. If it was as simple as "it's an absolute good", I wouldn't have made all these caveats.

It's a similar concept, yes. If flow is optimal functioning while engaging in a highly demanding task (which indeed correlates with activity of the task-positive network), then enlightenment is optimal functioning irrespective of task demand. In other words, flow is optimal functioning in highly challenging activities (like a virtuosic music performance or an expert-level sports feat), while enlightenment is optimal functioning in all activities (with a caveat, which I'll go into later). What if we re-framed anxiety as excess self-talk, and that enlightenment doesn't make self-talk disappear, but that it arises merely when it's relevant to the task at hand? And because "tasking" is the enlightened person's default state, they will do exactly what the self-talk has mandated without hesitation, without unnecessary repetition. "But is hesitation not sometimes a good thing?". It's generally a good thing if it entails identifying a lack of sufficient information for making a careful decision and assertively putting off making a decision until more information is available, but it's generally not when simply ruminating on the same information over and over without seeing a resolve and not taking action (and it's the latter that is removed with enlightenment, not the former). (I partially challenge this point later). The thing that happens in the enlightened state (or if you're simply close to it) and thus drenched in the tasking mode is that (almost) all of the task-relevant information becomes available at lightening speed. When you're in the normal Western neurotic state of mind (overactive DMN), the task-relevant information is sometimes not readily gathered, or at least slower and in smaller segments, all the while it's being clouded by a constant barrage of task-irrelevant information (essentially ADHD symptoms). There are neuroscience studies showing how over the course of several trials of performing the same cognitive task (particularly a boring one) and where there is a possibility for making errors, the period of time leading up to an error is predicted by an increase in DMN activity, which reflects a lack of attention to the task at hand and immersion in task-irrelevant information (for example thinking about what's for dinner). All in all, your clarity of mind and your ability to make decisions is undoubtedly increased by making the tasking mode your default state, which will supercharge your development and achievements in major ways. We know that enlightened people who have worldly ambitions are capable of undertaking enormous things (look at Sadhguru for example). There are thus definite upsides to this mode of being. But are there downsides? Maybe. If your goals are for example highly aesthetic in nature and rely on some sort of authentic anxious vibe (for example a certain type of musician or poet), then maybe enlightenment is not for you. As for more "functional" goals, could obsessive rumination for example be a good thing in certain academic professions? You could make that argument. But then again, the likelihood for these people to for example engage in unclear thinking, defend logical dead ends or engage in relatively meaningless pursuits, may cause bigger problems than it solves on average. Maybe once in a while, you get a lucky guy who strikes gold and that could not have done it in any other way, but again, if you want to go for the safest option for increasing functionality, enlightenment is definitely the answer. Any explanation of enlightenment is insufficient It's simply because of how central it is to how humans work, how biological organisms work, that you can place it in such a high place relative to other things. That said, if you're not a human, not a biological organism, don't value survival, don't value functionality, or if you value some highly niche aesthetic goal (or otherwise), then sure, maybe enlightenment is not your best bet. But if the opposite is the case, then most likely, statistically, it is your best bet. That is why it's at the core of religion (and why religion is ubiquitous in human culture, almost synonymous with it). It's largely considered an universal good.

Surprisingly powerful and spot on.

I don't see the utility of framing it in such a way (it seems a bit too reductionistic). What I will do for sake of illustration is use the framing of neuroscience and evolution: Enlightenment has been shown to correlate with a sustained deactivation of the default mode network (DMN), which is responsible for self-referential processing, particularly self in relationship to others and self in relationship to time. The network is usually active when you're not engaging in a task that requires attention or general engagement (and is associated with daydreaming, rumination, etc.). When it's deactivated, not coincidentally it produces an experience of timelessness and oneness. But that is not what is most interesting here. The DMN can be contrasted to the task-positive network, which is usually activated when you're actively engaging in a task. For enlightened people, this network becomes the new "default mode", and it's activated irrespective of whether you're actively involved in a task or not. Now, we know that being engaged in a task is a source of pleasure and meaning, and arguably it's the main reflection of living up to the core evolutionary impetus, which is to utilize your innate capabilities to secure survival (which is the task). So as you can see, the enlightened individual is fulfilling their main evolutionary impetus by merely existing, and that is of course highly pleasureable, meaningful and functional, because when they're supposed to actively engage in a task, they will be maximally capable of doing that, because they're already in the tasking mode by default. Now, I say "main evolutionary impetus", because the DMN is of course not completely useless or disposable, even in the enlightened person, as it works in an opponent-processing relationship with the tasking network (disrupting current processing and producing insights). It's just given a less central role than what is now the cultural norm in particularly Western society where neurosis and mental unhealth/dysfunction is the norm.

crOsS gEnRe anAlySis: I just managed to draw a parallel between the development of rap and the development of "djent" (Meshuggah-inspired metal): de-emphasis on tonal qualities (particularly melody and harmony) and emphasis on rhythm and other elements. For rap, the other elements are metaphor, rhyme, style, surprise, etc. For djent, it's heaviness (e.g. downtuning, tone, attack, open string chugs), odd-metredness, technical quirks (e.g. squeaks, micro-bends), etc.

If by consciousness you mean the type of awakening we've been talking about so far (specifically awakening to formlessness as described earlier, a description you didn't seem to object to), I don't see how that is possible from a rational perspective. If by consciousness you mean something else, then maybe.

That shows how you little you know 😂

And then I said we've started taking the metaphors too literally. This conversation started with the assumption that you already value awakening, and we went from there. If you don't value awakening, sure: neither awakening nor enlightenment is something you value. However, if you do value awakening, it's virtually tautological that you also value enlightenment, because that is consistent with virtually all of your other behavior (as a human). "Why is that?" Well, it's as simple as you preferring having an orgasm two times in your lifetime compared to just having it once. It's as simple as the number 2 being larger than the number 1. You prefer awakening to not awakening (we granted that), and you prefer awakening twice to awakening once, and by logical extension, you prefer staying awake perpetually, particularly because there are no downsides to it worth mentioning. The reason why the relationship analogies (or other analogies) don't apply is because there are definitely downsides to being with your loved one for all of time. Not for enlightenment. That was kinda my point with awakening vs. enlightenment, temporary state vs. baseline.

Wtf is this thread

Are you currently an entrepreneur or just planning to become one? May I ask how old you are?

I don't actually know what you mean or what kind of answer you're looking for. What do you mean by "superior"? Everything is constantly in flux, but there is a difference between for example an emotionally stable person and a bipolar person. Ok. Getting over puberty doesn't mean your beard growth has reached its full potential. I think the idea that you can experience a level of refinement after hitting a new baseline of functioning is trivial.

You keep talking about not wanting to hurt them. I'm saying it's going to hurt you. Cutting ties with your family just because you're slightly annoyed by some of their character flaws is a very stupid thing to do. If there is one thing humans are born to do, it's to be social. Close social bonds is arguably the fundamental building block for basic mental health (and general safety), and your family is your most stable and least conditional source of this. If something goes horribly wrong in your life and you need help, the last people to leave you is your family. The individualistic culture in the West is absolutely psychotic when it comes to basic things like this. The nuclear/-pseudo-extended family is bad enough as it is (you're evolutionarily built to be in close contact with an entire clan/tribe, not just a few people). You're like a survivor of a shipwreck floating on a piece of wood deciding to throw away that last source of supporting buoyancy.

I would argue that the drive to awakening is not different from the drive to enlightenment, and that awakening is a partial version of enlightenment. It's like running 5 mph instead of 10 mph. If you're already pursuing awakening, it makes little sense to not pursue enlightenment. All I'm assuming is that there is a difference between short temporary states and stable baselines. Both are attainable. There is certainly possible refinement going on after making non-dual awareness your baseline state. Again, the fact that it's a baseline state doesn't mean there aren't deviations from that baseline or that there is no room for improvement. There are enlightened people that do report that there is a refinement going on.

Better than having a Blue shadow. That is where your own Blue is supposed to come into play. Why are you so averse to behaving according to some standard at a dinner party? Why should a family gathering be about you and your self-amusement? You're lucky to even have a family, and it's one of the few pillars of safety and emotional regulation you have. Where is the sense of graditude and duty to see, feel and respect your family members as they are? Do you not care for them the same way you would care about a child, despite their perceived immaturity? Now for something maybe less Blue: these are questions to contemplate, not to be taken on blind faith, as all family situations are different.

I think we're starting to take the analogies a bit too literally. All organisms have an innate desire to express their innate capacities, in line with survival challenges and competition in natural evolution. For example, if you have the capacity to run say 10 m/ph, you will most likely run 10 m/ph when the appropriate situation arises. It doesn't make sense that you would run slower than what you're capable of. Likewise, if you're capable of "permanent" (stabilized) non-dual awareness (which you are), and if non-dual awareness is something desireable (which it is), and if it does not impede with functioning (in fact it highly improves functioning), you will be drawn to that. First, it was contemporary mystics, then religious traditions, then scientific research. I subscribe to the idea that you can make it your new "default state", meaning it's your go-to way of operating, but it's not necessarily "permanent". Some enlightened people report that things like low blood sugar levels can kickstart the self-referential machinery, which makes sense, as that would be what this part of your psyche evolved to do (telling you to alter your current behavior, and more generally giving you insights and disrupting current processing). The self-referential machinery has in most people become overactive beyond what is functional (mostly due to the mismatch between modern society and our evolutionary adaptations), and this is proven by the fact that it's possible to exist in a state where it's minimally active and where that actually massively improves functioning.

I think you have a Zen stick up your Zen ass 😆

😂 You're being quite "direct" today, I see?

Well, in the case of your loved one, being with her all the time is practically impossible. You have to tend to the other drives, and they're somewhat conflicting (and it's necessary to do so for survival). But with enlightenment, it's not impossible. If the drive is there and it's possible to fullfil it to the greatest extent, you'll be inclined to do that. To use a different example: just because it might be practically impossible for your girl to have an orgasm, that doesn't mean she wouldn't want that 🤣