Carl-Richard

Haha yeah, only one person went to that group ? (it's not a big class though). I think he explained it as he doesn't believe in anything supernatural, but he thinks religious traditions and practices are useful for living a good life.

Haha I'm watching the latest JRE with JBP and apparently he has done kundalini yoga every morning for 20 years now. Around the 2:05:00 mark. He mentions chakras as well

...well that's a new one ?

I wonder what the average length of time that the big revolutionary thinkers throughout history (known and unknown) had to wait before their ideas became the mainstream paradigm (surely many of them died before that).

Yep. This goes back to my earlier point about conceding to the dualistic assumptions inherent in communication:

??

The best way to approach JBP and SD is to look at where he is lacking, which has to do with mostly Green values. He is an atypical intellectual in that his mind is not incompatible with that kind of thinking (in the descriptive realm), but he has a blockage that doesn't allow him translate that over to the normative realm (how one should act in the world). So he can entertain wildy abstract and holistic models about cognition, constructivism and narratives, but when it comes to politics and morality, it's mostly Judeo-Christian essentialism. On the other hand, his fixation on the Judeo-Christian lineage is indeed connected to (if not entirely grounded) in his psychological understanding, which if we grant that his psychological understanding is as advanced as it is, then the explanation for this fixation is not cognitive underdevelopment but cultural/contextual factors (SD merges both into one construct; value systems. Lines/facets are derived after the fact). This is yet another example that we need developmental models that better take into account contextual factors ...or maybe he is just way more advanced than all of us and that the Green he is reacting to is indeed a virus (after all, he was a socialist in his early years and got a BA in political science) ?

The act itself wakes you up, but the after-effect makes you sleepy. So in total, the decrease in sleepiness from initiating the act will interact with and delay the subsequent increase afterwards, so it might take a bit longer to fall asleep, but you'll probably have a better chance of eventually falling asleep. I had trouble falling asleep when I did nofap. However, fapping before bed is a waste imo. It's less exciting and it creates a kind of hangover effect the next day.

Definitely.

But then you have to define reality and God as two distinct things. If your definition of reality is not everything that exists but instead a finite universe, then sure, but even there, God is still the fundamental reality (everything that exists).

It's also a wide and fuzzy category.

I think they were pantheists (at least Jesus was ). Jesus was a true mystic. Monotheism is what happens when those teachings get translated in a Faustian/Patriarchical world (the world of great empires). Idealism, pantheism and mysticism make up the simplest, most parsimonious worldview (having the least assumptions), because they collapse ontology ("what is") and epistemology ("how to know what is") into one thing. They're simply different ways of expressing Oneness.

Np Haha yeah I'm on a roll ? Thank you though! ?

Let's just say that most of that he didn't learn in university ("the implications of God's Absolute Infinity" is not on the curriculum ).

They're doing their job.

The small self is an illusion. The big Self is not an illusion.

What's Leo's main thing?

Life-long, deep longing for truth, purpose and love (prerequisite for spirituality), strong suffering born out of separation from these things (identification with self-narrative), seeing the futility in continuing existence as a separate self and arriving at the willingness to surrender ("I don't want to live with myself anymore"), coupled with the systematic investigation of self-narrative, a.k.a self-inquiry ("who is this "I" who can't live with myself? It seems to be two"), leading to a shift in awareness away from self-narrative to non-symbolic awareness, a.k.a. grace. This is the universal path of awakening. The only surprise is that he is self-taught.

Autodidact, like many other great minds.

Because I felt like it. It's an Islamic custom to say Muhammad PBUH.

Because God is not separate from reality.

Well yeah Ok, here's some backstory to why I wrote this (and hopefully an answer to your thoughts): I'm taking a class in psychology of religion, and in the first class we had to divide ourselves into four groups (1. spiritual and religious, 2. spiritual and non-religious, 3. non-spiritual and religious, and 4. non-spiritual and non-religious) and then talk about why we chose that group. I felt I didn't explain myself well enough, so I wondered if I could find a way to explain myself as concisely as possible using a suitable reference point for that target group, or at least something they're vague familiar with, which I thought would be Western philosophy. Anyways, I say this because we always have to concede to various degrees of dualistic assumptions while communicating, like that there exists other people, that other people can understand you, that you have different beliefs, and that the interesting discussions are about figuring out the disagreements. For example, you would mainly bring up ontological idealism because it could be a relevant point of disagreement (as most people are ontological materialists), rather than some innocent statement like "I'm a human." These would be examples of pragmatic assumptions. An example of a more abstract assumption (on the level of ontology), is how the idealist has to concede to the language that falls out of the materialist's dualistic assumption, namely that matter produces a substance called mind, and then express their disagreement within that framework: "well, since you created the distinction between mind and matter, I think the best way to describe my position would be that there exists nothing but mind." However, if everybody were idealists, you wouldn't necessarily have to use that language. If everybody assumes that experience is the ontological primitive of reality, then "mental", "mind" or "psychic" just becomes synonymous with "reality."

(ignore the ideological framing in the title.) Appealing to veganism through a feminist lens ?

Welcome to Flow. You can also make your life into art. It's called enlightenment: everything flows effortlessly and you're just the receiver.

Just don't overdo it or you'll end up like Phil Anselmo ? 0:32