Carl-Richard

Boomers must die first.

This is bullshit ☺️

Realistically, how many hours a day would you spend on your marriage and kids? Some things you will actually lose on by cutting them out even if you gain more time to do "more valuable" things. For example, you can save time by not eating or sleeping, but is that really going to benefit you in the long run? Let's say you spend one hour on average of fully-dedicated time on marriage and kids every day. If you put that hour into work instead, that would be your least productive hour anyway (late in the day with high fatigue and low energy). You might be better off just resting at that time (and no better way to do that than with family; but yes, sometimes it's not so restful, but it should be most times). Also, giving yourself a break and taking in new stimuli can lead to insights and breaking through stale patterns ("disruptive practices"), which is very good if you value creativity.

It could contribute to your future in ways you are not currently aware of. And you could also just want to study it because it's interesting in itself and not just as some means to an end. And even if it's not very interesting, it's always possible to find at least something interesting about anything.

Conversations, even about ideas or knowledge, are often less about learning something new or coming across something you've never heard about but reminding ourselves what think is important and what we care about. Notice how often you genuinely learn something new when talking to someone about something.

Yes, you can develop new habits that become your new "go-to". Scrolling TikTok for 5 hours even though it's the path of least resistance might not be ideal or even restful. But sometimes you have to take the path of least resistance.

The largest effects are seen in people who are prone to mystical experiences, get a taste, get hooked, develop an obsession, meditate consistently for hours every day and make it their number one priority to merge with whatever is behind the curtain. That's my personal experience at least.

Yep, that's what that was (me saying some people need to say "it's both" more); a pointer, a reminder. And that's all we really do here (and what you did as a response to me). Most people have actually heard or understand most of the points that are being made time and time again. It's just that we are fighting the limiting scope of relevance by reminding ourselves of things we find important. And that involves presenting the counterpoint, like you did (and like I did with "it's both" to some statement), and ironically like I'm doing now by pointing out how both of the points we made fit together. Because as a pointer (when applied situationally, contextually), I don't disagree with the statement "draw more lines in the sand" at all.

What are you wishing to achieve with meditation?

If I say "people need to say 'it's both' more", am I saying they should always say it's both or is it possible that it depends on the situation? And if I'm saying it depends on the situation, am I being detached and empty or am I drawing a firm line in the sand?

👌 People need to say these two words more.

If I stop exercising for a week, I show signs of dementia and chronic muscoloskeletal pain.

Try eating healthy and bathing in sunlight and not moving your legs for 30 days, see how that works out.

Next up: going to the urologist is the best way to get your dick and balls touched.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, no.

Gl with chronic illness in your 40s.

I go for Bernardo Kastrup.

It has zero, nothing, to do with Christianity. It's the "Leo, why don't you focus more on [insert ONE THING, virtually zero elaboration]?", and "this is the ONE MAIN GOAL of x very general endevor", and also "should we focus on this thing OR should we focus on this other thing? [i.e. dichotomous/either-or question]". It happens so often.

If you have to force yourself to do it, is it really entertainment? You can create new habits, but if you are working towards a goal, you should give yourself at least some time for "proper" entertainment where you don't care what you do. There is no work without rest. How (and how much) you decide to do that is up to you.

I swear to God this forum is 90% Stage Blue.

Try 60-90 minutes a day, in one sitting.

What does "could this become a trap?" even mean? Could it be bad? Anything can be bad. It depends on how it's done. The biggest trap that has probably ever existed is "it's either this or that, no in-between", or being unaware of things like scale and context. If you spend 99.9% of your time thinking and nothing else, of course that is bad, of course that will be a waste of time. The question should be about what you think about, how much you think, and when you think.

If the White House tells us any thing, you shouldn't worry about being an impostor the least bit.

The way I like to conceptualize meditation is being completely fine with just sitting here or being here. If you are able to simply accept what is here, to just exist without needing anything, that's what it is. What you're describing as "do nothing", I do a lot when I'm walking or sitting in the sauna. I just let my mind wander and give myself time to think about something without distractions. It's really beneficial for your emotions and general problem-solving. There is this psychologist who talks about the benefits of this in particular and interestingly uses the character of Sherlock Holmes as a device for communication:

This weirdly reminded me of awakening/enlightenment 😂: