Carl-Richard

Certainly poorer and less educated on average. "Traditional/religious", it depends. Religion at Purple/Red is more earthy and embodied than Blue religion which is more abstract and behaviorally restrictive. It's an interesting dynamic, because the poorest are usually the least developed, which means that in Somalia, the poorest are Purple/Red, but they are attracted to the societal benefits of Blue. In USA, the poorest are Blue/Orange, but they want the benefits of Green. You therefore don't have to actually embody a stage yourself to be open to its benefits as long as you live on the extremes and experience the worst downsides of the status quo.

I got into spirituality because of Terrence McKenna. I started meditating because of Leo and then had my first awakening. When I started having consistent meditation-induced awakenings, I was mostly into Jan Esmann, Sadhguru and Martin Ball. When I started having spontaneous awakenings, I was listening to Alan Watts and Rupert Spira every night while falling asleep.

Psychologists are generally aware of some systems theory, but the main difference is in the practical approach to solving problems. Analytic psychologists work within the therapist-patient dynamic, which creates change within the individual. They can use systems theories like the Transactional Model of Development to provide nuances to that process, like "therapy might be ineffective due to surrounding structural factors", but they won't work on directly solving those factors. Community psychologists work by creating systemic change, which can involve health reforms, policy adjustments, organizational management of institutions (e.g. schools), shifting societial values through NGOs etc. So what Jordan is lacking is not so much the ability to understand this approach, but it's rather the unwillingness to see its potential in practical application. He is of course biased when he says that there are downsides to taking a structural approach ("it pits groups against groups"), because there are obvious downsides to the analytical approach as well (reductionism, victim blaming, viewing everything through the lens of dysfunction/pathology etc.).

Let's just say if I was a girl, my ass would be a 10 ?

Spreading heresy?

"Primitive" is a bit harsh, but yeah. Poor people in USA are experiencing the downsides of capitalism, and the democrats at least pretend to care about that. Poor people in Somalia are experiencing the downsides of chaotic tyranny, and that's where conservative values like order and purpose (religion, law and morality) come in.

If there is a hell, Dawkins is definitely going there

The way I see it is that people in the West usually approach karma deontologically while I believe its mechanisms is actually more akin to consequentialism. Acting like x will cause you to act more like x in the future. If you prefer not-x, then x is bad and you should avoid x.

Karma just means actions have consequences. When you perform a behavior, you will be more likely to repeat that behavior in the future. If that behavior has consequences that you consider to be bad, maybe you should consider not doing it. Choose which mental schemas you want to perpetuate in your life. You could make a case that you're fueling the deceptive/dishonesty schema by not being a lawful citizen, but you're also fueling the shame/insecurity schema by being neurotic about it, and I would argue the latter has a much more substantial effect on your life.

It's kinda what mystics do. They sit in samadhi.

48:49 The pattern repeats itself. Jordan appeals to what I call the analytic tradition of psychology that reduces problems down to components within the individual: symptoms, diagnoses, traits, drives, genes, beliefs, values etc. On the other hand, there is a systemic tradition with its own dedicated field (community psychology) where the individual is understood in relationship to a larger context ("structures"): interpersonal relationships (parents, friends), community (school, work), societal infrastructure (health services, policy, laws), culture (values, ideology) etc. Jordan wants to pin the problem of racism to the individual, while the systemic approach views problems as consequences of relationships between the individual and the environment. The labour MP Stella Creasy had a perfect example at 51:35 which she called the bystander effect. If we apply Jordan's terms to that problem, who exactly would be held personally responsible for the bystander effect? Where does this passive compliance with racism come from, and how should it be fixed? This is where the analytic tradition breaks down.

The dude sat in samadhi for 13 days straight. I think he'll handle it.

I stopped using in the end of Christmas 2017, the year before I turned 21. 1. My mom had found out for like the 4th time and was rather fed up. I was given an ultimatum to redo some high school courses so I could apply to a decent university, and I knew I had to be sober for that. 2. I was in a spiritual discord that had started viewing drugs as causing energetic damage. So it only took me being fed New Age beliefs from a cult and my mother almost disowning me and forcing me to do something future-oriented. I then tried weed a year later and had the worst bad trip of my life (ego death kicking me in the nuts for 4 hours straight). Never touched it again after that. Nowadays I just need to smell weed and I'll go into ego death, so until I transcend my fear of death, I'll stay far away from it.

I'm that gym meathead that takes 5 minute breaks between each set

Nice. I'm what they call an anti-runner

Doesn't change much. Just a request: if you have some thoughts about a mainstream news article, please write something more than just one sentence.

Space and time, distance and travel, are all in the mind. You're somehow proposing that time is "more" conceptual than space. It's not. It's simply a different abstraction.

Because a country with Red instability is different from a country with Orange instability. Somalia needs Blue (conservatives) while USA needs Green (progressives).

You said it yourself: it applies to low-income countries. USA is not Somalia.

@Matt23 The thing about isolation as a tool for spiritual work is that it's supposed to streamline your attention and amplify your practice. Isolation on its own, without purpose or direction, will amplify mental instability and deteriorate your mind. Social interaction gives direction and meaning which stabilizes the mind, but it can distract you from spiritual work.

What's more odd? That or Sadhguru killing his wife?

Trauma, depraved environment and lack of practice.

Expand infinitely.