Carl-Richard

I showed my brother the Spiral Dynamics Stage Purple video which he listened to at work (he works with machineering metal parts) and he liked it. But I don't think he watched any more of them. Maybe I'll get him to watch the Stage Red one so he can start to see how things fit together. Grasping how Stage Red developed in the history of the world was an epiphany for me.

Somehow, a person is experiencing things very vividly independent of a functioning brain, independent of a physical mechanism that "explains" the experience (which is already a huge concession, to say that brain states explain experience, but I digress). The usual physicalist (materialist) assumption is that brain states (and related sensory faculties, sensory impressions, memories) cause mental experience. That is what I mean by physical mechanism in this case (and in this case, there doesn't seem to be a physical mechanism that explains the phenomena). We can make the distinction between saying that the world seems to follow certain rules or patterns and that the world seems to follow the rules of a billiard game (particles bumping into each other). If you think miracles can happen in the sense that it no longer follows the rules of a billiard game (e.g. non-local mind interactions), then you're not qualifying for the second criteria. Well, that too, but not even that: the mere fact that your holistic mental experience becomes decoupled from your physical senses (the localized limitations of your literal eyes and ears) and somehow you keep experiencing "sense content", as if you're a separate observer looking from elsewhere. I have had mild OBEs where I observe myself from just above myself, in a way that wouldn't be possible (or hard to explain) if I was only perceiving the world through my literal physiological eyeballs. There are too many stories about this with indeed cardiac arrest NDEs. Of course, idealists don't think there is a "literal" physical world, hence crypto-materialism. And also hence that you seem to substitute "physical" with essentially the sensory world; patterns and forms implemented in things you can smell and touch. The "literal physical world" is quite simple: atoms or sub-atomic particles (or the modern physics equivalent), that exist out there, that create the rules of the game. But the weird thing is that even the people who believe in all the weirdness of modern physics (non-locality, field interactions), when it comes to explaining everyday life (e.g. how we think, how we interact as humans), they suddenly become very Newtonian (billiard ball-like). Suddenly, they start to believe in these outdated rules. And they are outdated: modern physics has non-local interactions, it has fields rather than particles. We're seemingly just complacent with applying this outdated view to our everyday life because that is how unskilled we are in non-local/psychic aspects of life; we're generally not sensitive to things that are non-Newtonian. And if you are, you gaslight yourself to fit the paradigm; anomalies are just that — anomalies, and you have 100 years of Western psychology and cognitive science to help you: "you're just engaging in these 12 cognitive biases", etc. I feel like I'm reading the narrative arch of a hero's journey with these transformations I'm seeing, but hey, that's my goal. So yes, patterns happening in the sensory world. Hmm. You don't believe the science? So the expectation was 25% correct if purely due to chance, but it turned out to be 40% (15% more than expected). It was 571 trials. Let's toss a coin 571 times. We should expect roughly 50% tails. In 571 coin tosses, do you know how unlikely it is if we end up with 65% tails? 1 in 10 trillion according to ChatGPT. Do you think the scientists are making it up and fabricating their results? These results have been replicated independently by others. A 2025 meta-analysis that combined 26 datasets reported a hit-rate of ≈ 8.6 % above chance, p ≈ 10⁻⁷: https://journals.lub.lu.se/jaex/article/download/25934/24357/74647. Is everybody making it up?

I was specifically talking about opening e.g. the "Content I Posted In" page, and on top of the page, before scrolling, seeing that all the posts are new but that nobody has responded yet, and then having a feeling that indeed nobody has responded yet, and then scrolling down and confirming that feeling.

The way to study the non-physical is to propose principles, models and theories that describe and predict patterns (archetypes) of the non-physical. Rupert Sheldrake's theory of Morphic Resonance is one such a theory. But there is actually nothing special about such theories. They're on the same level as the Theory of Evolution: generalized principles about how the patterns of nature unfold. There are no particle accelerators or detectors involved in the Theory of Evolution, only observations about the regularities of nature. The only "new" thing with studying the non-physical is that you have to drop the assumption that reality works like a game of billiards where all interactions boil down to local collisions of particles.

I want you guys who use the "My Content" functions on the forum, particularly on your phone, to notice the times you open one of them and you can feel that nobody has responded to one of your posts even before you have scrolled down all the way to the last newest post. This is a form of precognition that I experience regularly.

Don't worry. Another mod once (allegedly) predicted that I would have a precognitive dream, which happened (they told me after the fact). One does not beat psych-ception, 👻^2

I had a rash in my achillies a few days ago but I think it was due to me biking too hard on the spinning bike and not being used to it I will keep an eye out 🫡

Context has never been more disappointing 😔

I just increased my eggs in the morning from 3 to 5 eggs (where the main goal was to reduce my other meals so that my last meal happens earlier, because sleep and food are antagonistic in many ways). I do actually notice a significant increase in mental clarity from it, maybe due to the choline, but maybe also due to me moving my blueberries from my evening meal to breakfast (anti-oxidants are also cognitive enhancers). Less food before bed and actually getting more calories from my breakfast could of course also be another factor. I also started using SELTIN salt (50% NaCl, 40% KCl, 9% MgSO4, some iodine), finally dealing with one of my last nutritional holes (if you can call it that): potassium. It seems to have a serotonergic effect on me, and my muscles feel smoother (I was also probably overdosing on sodium up until now, making me more adrenergic). I also seem to be holding less water weight, and my waist has shrunk, maybe also due to my stomach shrinking a bit after reducing my biggest meals by 25%.

You what?! 🫢

When you identify with something that compels you to do something, i.e. it's you who compels you to do it, that's internal motivation. Survival and suffering is when you fundamentally don't identify with what is happening. You identify with your limited self, and the rest is external. And in the external, there is a part of you deep down that doesn't want to do it, you don't like it, there is resistance, but you have to do it in order to survive. That's external motivation. But if you accept what is happening, it becomes your identity. And if you accept everything that is happening, your identity becomes everything; your identity becomes God. Everything is internal motivation, everything springs out of you, everything is your own will, because you are everything. Acceptance is key.

The symbol is associated with another thing, which makes it part of a larger whole (the symbol + the thing). The association also depends on other associations (e.g. "pen!" means something different while sitting in a classroom than if you're looking for a pen under your bed), which also makes up a larger whole. The association also depends on the inner states or the person (or creature) that makes the association (Gregory Bateson made this point), e.g. their knowledge of English or other prior experiences, which also makes up a larger whole. So again, when parts come together and make up a larger whole, you get a context. Another point Bateson made is that context and the parts within are inseparable. There is no symbol without a linguistic context to interpret it in. Without a linguistic context, a symbol just becomes a thing. But even a thing has a context (other things or no-thing), but not necessarily a linguistic one.

Whatchu gonna do about it?

I distinctly remember not being focused on the rhythm during that recording, I was too focused on doing the small whammy bar bends for the chords, so it became a bit "non-rushed" 😆 Thank you 😁 I'll see how it does on my Ibanez which has a much more sensitive whammy bar than the Stratocaster in the video 😆 (maybe I'll do some upward bends on it as well just to be a joker 🤡).

There is ignorance which veils the will towards acceptance. Maya, karma, samskara.

How is anything metaphysical? "Metaphysical" just means a basic aspect of reality. Motivation is just another word for drive, or impetus. It's that which compels action (in an agent, something that is capable of action). It's an extension of that which causes movement (e.g. the Newtonian concept of "force"), for example objects in motion causing other objects to move. When you make the objects into agents (either internal or external agencies), you have motivation. If the very thing that makes you act in the world isn't metaphysical, I don't know what is. When you make the agent the entire universe, all agency and all motivation becomes internal to you.

Ahaha I also covered this 3 years ago (sort of 😆):

Why does my head look it's going to explode lmao

I'll leave that to my mom's ex-neighbor 𖤐:

I don't care. I tried looking for it but I didn't find it. You gotta stop hugging topics immediately after they hit the news only to get your name on top. It's embarrassing.

For context, this happened: You know how the Nelk Boys claim "it's ok to have Netanyahu on without asking tough questions because we'll just have Bassem on later to represent the other side"? It's not ok. Not all people will watch both videos. And even if they do, the first video can experience a "primacy effect" where it traps people such that they won't be trapped as easily by the other video. If you were convinced by Netanyahu, got trapped in his "net", it will be disproportionally harder to trap you in the other net (Bassem's net). And the Netanyahu's video will naturally have more views, because it's Netanyahu, the most notorious man in the news at the moment second only to Trump, while basically nobody, certainly not airheads, have heard about Bassem. And people being trapped is not just possible but likely if the Nelk Boys' own knowledge is any indicator of their audience's knowledge, as you have no prior knowledge to counter it; the video is probably the only real engagement you've had with the topic; re-affirm that with TikTok attention spans. Even if it the first video isn't favored any more than the second, it creates division and more misinformation, because your channel is now a propaganda billboard where you trap people in different nets and they don't get challenged. "Nelk boys", more like "net boys". Also, we don't even have to think in terms of individual naive people getting trapped or not trapped (either/or) but simply as quantitative "regressors" (more graded) in that when you present a position in a strong and unchallenged propaganda format, you will increase the view of that position as strong and unchallenged in the space of ideas, and this affects people and how they think; if not making them flip decisively to one position immediately, it could tilt an overall mass of people ever so slightly in your favor. And that's exactly why any propaganda win is a win and why Netanyahu won regardless of what happened on that podcast (it would take a different type of podcast for him to lose, and he would probably not have attended that).

I haven't played guitar for months, and out of nowhere I came up with this: I tried to record it on video so I could remember how it was played later, that's why I look so focused looking into the camera all the time 😆

We usually think of internal vs external motivation in a human social context. External motivation could for example be when you're motivated by avoiding shame (which is an internalized form of social disapproval), or avoiding punishment (by another social agent). But you can of course extend it to include non-social contexts as well, e.g. avoiding pain (a form of punishment), or avoiding fear (of something that threatens you, e.g. a predator). When you extend it to include anything external to yourself, then you're at this metaphysical kind of internal vs external motivation. But one should keep in mind that the fact that everything external to you is a form of metaphysical external motivation, that doesn't devalue the importance of pursuing internal motivation in less metaphysical forms like in the social world (you shouldn't let people push yourself around too much). Doing what you want largely irrespective of shame, social disapproval or social punishment (but not fully independent of it) is very important for building your life and especially for finding your life purpose. Your life purpose fundamentally shouldn't be dictated by other people. It should be dictated by you. But of course, if you are a socially calibrated person that people can stand being around, then it will be in your own best interest and aligned with your wants to be somewhat socially calibrated.

It's unclear why it has to be allowed to do something or needs a substance. It's an idea, a form, a structure. That form or structure can be implemented in many different substances. For example, you can have a piece of cake being part of a cake, or you can have a piece of dust being part of the wind. Atoms are part of molecules, molecules are part of cells, cells are part of tissues, tissues are part of organs, organs are part of organisms. Organism-organs-tissues-cells-molecules-atoms is a holarchy. (Organism(organs(tissues(cells(molecules(atoms)))))). Every circle is a whole that contains more parts, which contains more wholes, which contains more parts, etc. (you can keep adding more either upwards or downwards, from organism and up or from atoms and down).

He was just dating his followers 😏