Carl-Richard

When I do this to Scandinavian women, they just run away

I figured there are many possible culprits (my symptoms seem like they could be partially gastrointestinal, so things like iron and vitamin C), so I decided to try dropping the multivitamin and see if just supplementing some C and E vitamins is sufficient (those were the only ones that were struggling a bit on Cronometer).

Only if they agree on the rules 🙂

Would you watch a sport where identical clones fight each other? Would you want to compete against a clone of yourself? That would be the most boring sport ever. Fairness in sports is not about equality but agreement.

I didn't understand what you said.

The only word I can use to describe this is "Kuhnian theater" :

If you get heavily invested in meaning, it can be tough when things don't go your way (and things will routinely not go your way in reality, because you're ultimately not in control). But if you remember that whatever happens, you will be ok, i.e. you remember "being", then meaning can not take anything away from you, only add something to you. And you will be stronger as a consequence and more likely to experience meaning. And naturally, the more being you experience, the more these things compound on themselves. One thing that saps being is being low on energy, doing unhealthy things, being unhealthy, being chronically stressed. Your hippocampus literally shrinks when you're chronically stressed, which further makes it harder to tackle the stress (as the hippocampus is involved in tackling stress). And when you're chronically stressed, it's harder to do exercises and be aware enough to embody being, all of which compounds in the wrong direction. Sometimes, you just need to rest and heal to rebuild your hippocampus, and from this foundation, you can then start doing things for increasing being again, which again increases meaning.

I was expecting something like "if meaning is negative, it cancels out because (-x)^2 = x". But ok 😅 I remember the Lorentz factor: in physics class, we had a Kahoot one time, and I named myself "Lorentz" for the memes, and then I forgot that one guy in this class was actually called "Lorentz", so that was kinda embarrassing.

Yet it's not a thing in professional golf.

What the hell did you just say?

I know

Would it be fun to compete against yourself? You're exactly in the same category of everything.

Now you use it every day or?

I get that feeling as well sometimes, but irrespective of the soundness of his theory, his observations on the sociology of physics and string theory and all that could be sound. It's not just him who has proposals for a ToE outside string theory.

When you see through the illusion of self, you see through the illusion of being in control of anything. Even your bodily movements, your speech, your next action, your plans, your wants, desires, future. Everything is in the hands of God and there is nothing for you to do but observe and channel the will of God. And the moment you do not channel the will of God, you feel immense pain and resistance (or you inflict this pain and resistance on yourself deliberately to maintain the illusion that you are a separate self in control of anything, because giving up the sense of being control is like giving up your life which is absolutely not a joke).

If you conclude that your finite mind-body VR headset experience is absolute reality, you're more like a materialist than anything else.

It's not fully analogous to handicaps, because the goal is shared within the competition (winning the most rounds). Handicaps make the goal different within the competition ("one goal for me, one goal for thee"), which is against the spirit of competition. I don't think fairness is whether somebody has an "equal chance" of winning. I think it's again when the game is within the spirit of competition. You actually want to feel that you won the competition because you are intrinsically better and had a higher chance of winning, not because you rolled the dice. People who are mad that trans women get to play women's sports are not really mad about the fact that the competitors have a different chance of winning. They are mad that they are not following the rules. If people agree on the rules (and there is a common goal in the competition), people are generally happy. If a lightweight dude and a heavyweight dude decide to fight each other and they agree that this is the competition, there is no protest (only retrospective coping). And then you get hilarious setups like this that don't actually feel that wrong (until maybe the end):

Sure. But to what you said about handicaps in golf: handicaps are generally not part of professional golf, and it's at elite levels that the spirit of competition becomes clear (and that's mostly where the trans sports debate is happening). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition I generally think handicaps and the like goes too much against the spirit of competition to be applied to most elite sports. If you're a sprinter, you deep down want to sprint the fastest. If you're a jumper, you want to jump the highest. If you are a golfer, you want to score the highest. And you know this is if you win against someone with a handicap. It doesn't feel like you "won won". Imagine in weightlifting, the winner is not the one who lifts the most weight but the one who beats their own PR. This is of course an extreme example of tailoring the rules to the specific competitor or context (which is really what a handicap is), but here you clearly see that it no longer becomes a competition but an exercise.

Have you ever competed in a sport?

I don't claim to know either way.

Mindfuckery of Leo. What some people call solipsism, is actually non-duality. What some people call solipsism, is actually a pseudo-materialistic snowflake ideology.

There is no problem collapsing the absolute/relative distinction as long as you don't also weirdly use that move to make very specific statements about the relative, which is what the solipsists here seem to be doing with the "no other mind-body complexes have finite experiences" claim (heavily paraphrasing). But I'm being a broken clock here.

Thoughts arise from attachments and "shoulds". Sit in meditation, identify what those shoulds are and if they are necessary or if there is a better alternative for each (it's often the most obvious thing and something you are actively trying to resist or ignore). Feel the emotions they are bringing up, feel where they are in the body (the throat, the heart, the stomach, the face, the head), and when you have decided that they are not necessary, let go. Accept, tell yourself that it's ok. If you want to be completely free of thoughts, you have to eventually let go of all attachments and realize that nothing that ever happens "should" happen or is necessary to happen and that you want to relinquish all control over anything in your life. You're fine with whatever that happens or can happen. You are completely open and free and embracing of what reality is and will be and has ever been. This is Enlightenment.

Yes, but becoming aware of it like you have now helps a lot. However, the placebo effects really happens all the time in all situations, so trying to single it out when it happens or when it doesn't happen is really not that useful. You just have to live with it really but also learn to feel the true physiological effects of food (e.g. my neck sometimes tightens up in a weird way if I eat pizza that has a lot of dough in it). Also, really all the times I eat bad food, it's because I chose to be in that situation and I was aware of what was going to happen, and then I'm more accepting of it. However, I tend to just eat fruit afterwards and it gets better. Dietary fiber and phytochemicals are so incredibly good for you, it's a shame people don't eat more of them.

Do you take anything else as well?