Carl-Richard

Can you really have it all if you're neglecting aspects of yourself? ?

I know. I'm criminally buff ? Holism though. You want a balance. Neglecting all ethics or all aesthetics is what you want to avoid, if you care about health. If you only care about aesthetics, sure.

Just be a normal person. Knowing about spirituality or having a had spiritual awakening doesn't make you special. You still have emotions and insecurities.

?

@Nilsi Unethical behavior makes satisfying social needs difficult.

@Nilsi Is Nietzsche's concept of power holistic? Because if it's not, it will fail to address human needs. Examples are things like self-determination theory's "autonomy, competence and belonging", or Plato's "man-lion-beast", or Freud's "id-ego-superego", or the biopsychosocial model, or the triune brain. Models with three parts are usually the way to go ;D

To be truly selfish, you cannot give yourself to any one philosophy. That would be to give yourself to something outside yourself. If Tate is truly the power God, he would switch the moment it becomes pragmatic to do so.

He isn't concerned about being edgy ? He is all about the Chess moves.

I just realized that I've been doing something similar to masking, but it's because I'm a bit of a schizo rather than autistic Like, instead of talking about the most random insane shit that my mind usually thinks about, like "eyo guys, did you know that green tea has pretty much the inverse pharmacological properties of cannabis?", or "did you know that holism is like the fucking coolest concept ever?", or "you know, the thing you just said about Manchester City winning almost all their previous matches against Arsenal, that reminds me of Hume's problem of induction...", I'll just talk about more mundane stuff unless someone else prompts it. You could say it's the process of an xNxP becoming more ExFJ. I've kinda let myself a little more loose lately though, with the right people. Nowadays when I meet new people, I'm testing them more, testing their schizo meter

Sure, maybe asking the question from many different angles could help. Still, I just can't shake the feeling that they might be wrong, and you'll have very few ways to tell. It will be just as structurally coherent as all the other answers. When you run across something dodgy on the internet, you can use cues like poorly formulated sentences or domain names to determine trustworthyness. In real life, you have social cues. With ChatGPT, you only have your intuition, and that's an infinite source of paranoia (at least for me, I do score very high on neuroticism ). This must be how autists feel about people lying to them.

Maybe in the majority of cases. The first clinical psychologist I ever met to knew about spiritual enlightenment. My university has a class called "spirituality, religion and existential questions", and we had a lecture that touched on the differences between extraordinary experiences, mystical experiences and psychosis. The most important distinction is that psychosis is generally dysfunctional, while extraordinary/mystical experiences generally aren't (in fact, they're often associated with higher functioning).

I don't feel like asking ChatGPT for anything anymore. There is something eerie about trusting something that didn't come from another human being who has a 1st person experience of believing what they're saying. I get same feeling as when I thought the teacher was bullshitting an answer in front of the class to not come off as unknowledgeable, and I just wanted to go home and never listen to her again.

That's true. It's just an anthropomorphism. There is no reason for God. God just exists. God experiences itself through multiple separate perspectives, not because it has to do that, but because it is doing that.

Lying and manipulating has always come easy to him. Watch his appearance on Ultimate Traveller.

@Danioover9000 I think he was very specifically talking about simple political interventions like taxes, which is kinda dumb to be absolutistic about. You probably wouldn't feel fundamentally violated if we replaced taxes with some other alternative. It would be a different story e.g. when it comes to something like democracy, which is more complex. It doesn't quite work as well then to say "wouldn't you be fine with a totalitatian state if everybody was happy, healthy and fed?" And sure, properly balancing things like process and results is what wisdom is about. This is a bit of a jump, but life itself is a process to be enjoyed. If you're always looking for some result, you'll never be happy.

Neurosis central.

Destiny's insights on psychedelics are so lame ? "I learned that truth is not always good, and that I don't like being alone" ? Or it's at least the way he words it and fails to follow it up with other insights. He seems to be so survival-oriented and identified with his ego that when he experiences transpersonal truth, he rejects it outright, rather than seeing it as a possible next level, e.g. "I might not be ready for the ultimate truth right now, as I'm too identified with my human self, but I'll be working towards that". That is the difference between a spiritual person and a non-spiritual person. As Charlie points out, that reaction might be due to his trauma and lack of love in his childhood. He is so driven by lack that he can't see past that mode of being. Maybe if he didn't take 10.5g his first time and had progressively eased himself into it, maybe it would've been different, but I'm not so sure about that.

Hedonism short-term happiness dysfunction lethargy fragility rigidity decadence vice instability imbalance disorder meaninglessness degeneration dependency self-destructive Eudaimonia long-term happiness functionality vitality resilience adaptivity integrity virtue stability balance structure meaning regeneration self-sufficiency self-improving

It's joy. It's just more subtle than clinging onto every impermanent sensory experience and trying to extract joy from them (hedonism). You have to be a bit smarter than that. I'm using the words in the context of a cross-over between a common English understanding of them and what certain philsophers have said about them, not the context of the Greek language.

Sure, everything is "alive".

Need more context.

No.

Everything is consciousness, but not all of consciousness is equal. Circuits don't correlate with thoughts, emotions, perceptions. Meat does.

Not expressing your full capacities, that is fear. Living life gracefully in line with your rationality, your conscience, your emotional sensitivities and physical capabilities, that is the opposite of fear. Meaning is the structure of reality. Living in line with meaning is to be in line with reality. If you want to skip all that and mahasamadhi right now, go for it (don't harm your physical body), but there is a certain way life is, and there is a certain way to live a good life. The Bodhisattva knows this. No need to deny life.

I'm biased towards perennial truths validated by personal experience. Gaining social approval by being virtuous is not the point. It's just a signal that you're doing something right and a carrot to keep you going (that evolution set up for you by the way). The internal signalling of your body being functional and your mind being clear is what really matters. That is the proof of the metaphysical significance. However, as a general rule, if something is admired, it's usually to be emulated. The devil is in the details.