Carl-Richard

Either being swallowed by career responsibilities, still trying to prove myself to my mother, still struggling with accepting my true self, or having accepted myself and possibly jumped off to do something alternative. I had a vision of me being just another guru after an awakening I had at 19.

Enlightenment is more or less literally about distancing yourself from your physicality, from compulsive cycles of being. Mahasamadhi is the ultimate version of this. Why do you think you can't operate your body and simultaneously maintain the level of awareness of seated samadhi or breakthrough 5-MeO-DMT states? That said, you shouldn't hurt your body to the point of systemic failure. Transcendence, not destruction.

That makes zero sense. Turquoise in this model is Turquoise in SD.

I just liked Nahm's description of it, because it explains the collectivism aspect, but the "content" (the integrative value structure) is not categorically different from Yellow, which also kinda makes sense (because what more is there to integrate?). Before that though, I agreed with the people over at Nordic metamodernism who believe that Turquoise is an ill-defined and unnecessary stage (in that it's not different from Yellow).

An autocrat ruled by democratic impulses?

Fast forward to the point: if you want to allow the people some freedoms, you would let them have a say, because freedom is about what people want, hence it's no longer autocratic.

Answer the question lol. Does your autocratic state allow people some freedoms that are potentially harmful?

Should people be allowed to do addictive drugs?

You're looking for an edge. Do you see the infinite regression?

The issue is that people think Turquoise specifically is only about mysticism, which is not true. But this doesn't mean that Ken Wilber can't create a Tier 3 where mysticism is more central.

I didn't say they were.

Then that goes back to the previous point. The collective manifestation of Purple, untouched by any higher stages, is a tribal society. The 8th-11th century was an era of feudal kings and empires; Red. If you were a farmer at that time, you were living inside a kingdom.

No modern medicine, sanitation, electricity etc. I'm not sure if pre-agricultural societies (i.e. Purple tribes) had even lower life expectancy on average than say Red feudal empires.

Those low averages only happen when you account for infant and child deaths. People usually lived to 40-50 in pre-modern societies.

The knowledge of the shaman did not come from trust, but from thousands of years of investigation and trial and error. Evolution (nature) doesn't care about longevity. It cares about survival and reproduction. Longevity is a modern invention, which is fundamentally built on an unsustainable depletion of resources (it's "anti-nature"). In a sense, we're like vampires who drain the life from nature through our exploitation of it.

@Jodistrict Non-dualism has existed side by side with slavery.

The vikings were Red. The Viking Age lasted from the 8th to the 11th century.

The collective manifestation of Purple, untouched by the modern world, is a tribal society.

I love Danny Carrey's drumming on this so much. It's perfect.

Self-transcendence does not come through a weakening of the organism. It comes through the mastery of all domains of life.

You're not removing anything.

You're in luck, my friend

@Jodistrict You're getting hung up on normative interpretations of the models through metrics like "progress", "harmony with nature" and "consciousness". This isn't necessary. You don't have to assert anything in advance about what development is (other than its basic phenomenal nature; change, growth etc.) in order to appreciate the descriptive and predictive utility of these models. Development isn't good or bad unless you say so. Structural stage models merely choose a domain of study, e.g. cognition, and then they try to observe development through a lens of stages. What happens to be universal across these observations is the movement from simplicity to complexity, but that is simply a descriptive statement. Complexity isn't better than simplicity unless you say so. Complexity is arguably more messy and chaotic than simplicity, which could explain some of your reactions to it imo.

They show me what I lack. I don't believe Leo is an INTJ though. The first INTJ that comes to mind is Eric Weinstein. The way he talks is so impenetrable and unapologetic. Talk about Fe blindspot lol.

We're kinda talking about the same thing here.