Carl-Richard

Well, if I could write a letter to Ted, it would say this: you can't feasibly revert society back to a pre-technological/pre-agricultural state, so why the bombs, Ted?

Yes, there can be a kind of naive optimism to seeing the world through this type of teleological lens of "everything is progress", but there is nothing that tells us whether we will get to Tier 2 before it's too late or whether Tier 2 will be successful at all in the long run. But the idea that these ideas cannot manifest themselves in society is a bit too pessimistic in my view. This idea that Tier 2 requires expert knowledge and genius level cognition to arrive at is only true if we're talking about those who pioneered and discovered these new altitudes. Once they're fleshed out, packaged and distributed through the collective consciousness, that isn't necessarily the case. I mean just look at how fast all these young people on a forum they discovered a couple of years ago can become so welcoming of such ideas (meanwhile they might not embody it fully yet). Imagine if not just their local internet community was pro Tier 2 but that their school teachers, healthcare workers and politicians were pointing to these values. It's hard to imagine that they wouldn't embody Tier 2 to some extent.

The genius of Ken Wilber's integrative approach is unmatched, because he isn't just dealing with one model. He (while being inspired by Robert Kegan) recognized the shared similarities of the so-called "altitudes of development" across a dozen different models: Piaget – cognitive domain, Cook-Greuter – ego domain, Kohlberg - moral domain, Beck/Cohen - vMEME domain, Kegan, Loevinger, Maslow, Erikson, McElland/Murray etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kegan#The_Evolving_Self Heck, recently I even found a state model in a systems psychology lecture at my university that lines up with the altitudes:

If we grant this assumption of menial labour as a cap on development, generalized AI fixes that problem. I think it's a weak assumption though, because it doesn't take future society into account (also Chris Langan is cognitively Tier 2 and worked menial jobs all his life, though of course he doesn't represent the rest of the population). I think you're underestimating the effect that society has on shaping the individual. Once society becomes peak Green and moves into Tier 2, you'll see a wide distribution of those values in the population across social classes. It's true that Tier 2 is only present in the minds of hyper-intuitive intellectuals of today, but remember that there is a societal component that always catches up and dictates the values of common man. Plato and Aristotle were unmatched in their time but is now being taught in today's children's classrooms. Likewise, it's true that only the cutting edge of intellectuals could grapple with the fundamentals of Green 100 years ago, but there is nothing stopping a Norwegian farmer from enjoying the fruits of that today, and it's the same with Tier 2 in the future.

There is no one that knows hehe ?

No society has ever been close to Green before the 20th century, and this is the historical context that mr. 1377 is lacking. He is not talking about Green. If anything, he is talking about the regression from Blue down to Red. The medieval period was a long tug of war between Blue and Red, and its synthesis was Orange. When did Green suddenly equal "thinkers"? If anything, Green is the first stage that really cares about the worker class. It's not that a model being old necessarily makes it wrong. It's just that when it comes to societal system theories, and especially those that are based on the observation of history, of course the older theories are severely inferior, because of a glaring, macroscopic hole in their data set. Heck, professors tend to feel uneasy just when they're citing decade year old studies.

Lol no get out. Women were covered up to keep male impulsivity in check (which is a classic band-aid solution that doesn't address the root issue). Islam just took it to its logical conclusion. The Abrahamic religions served as a hasty reaction (rather than a thoughtful response) to the excesses of Red. Purple has no problems with naked ladies.

I feel immediately when I speak the truth, drunk or not. It makes everything flow.

You could say it breaks barriers in a destructive fashion

Yeah, why don't people just kill themselves? Sincerely, what the fuck?

LMAO why are you still citing this medieval dude from 1377?

This is why Green is not Tier 2, because it engages in survival guilt-tripping and gatekeeping. "Your survival conditions are too light and disqualifies you from making statements about harder conditions". This is a mistake. It forgets that it's exactly those lighter conditions that makes it possible to come to such conclusions in the first place. That is a feature not a bug. This also doesn't negate or understate the horror that is Taliban, but rather the implication is that it's only the fact that the Taliban is so horrible that keeps you from seeing the larger picture. Keeping it from a distance makes you see it more clearly, because survival corrupts your mind.

When I say "fill up the hospitals", I mean it's literally full. Also, you should expect more vaccinated people to be hospitalized as more people get vaccinated. That is just how statistics work. Nobody is saying that. They get less sick both in frequency and in severity than non-vaccinated by a factor of 10. That is incredible effectiveness and important to keep in mind if you want a functional health care system.

I think the term you're looking for is monopoly of force.

True, which is why you would want to vaccinate the entire population so that we have enough hospital beds for people who need it.

Bronfenbrenner's ecological model (1979).

What is the connection there? Or did you mean two separate videos?

Unless you believe that the soul is somehow damaged during an abortion (given a belief in reincarnation) or that it causes a lot of suffering, I think the final legitimate concern from an utilitarian, non-essentialist and non-reincarnation standpoint is that the fetus is somehow "robbed of life". In my opinion, this comes from an irrational impulse of anthropomorphization (although granted, the fetus is technically a human), in the sense that the fetus in its current state doesn't have a "life" yet in terms of immediate impact on and manifestation in the world (a sense of self, personality, interpersonal relationships, a carbon footprint etc.). On the other hand, there is reason why you hesitate pulling the plug on somebody on a life support. It isn't primarily due to the fear that you think they will suffer a painful death, but it's rather because you recognize that they're a fully "realized" being with a life. They have acquired attachments, experiences, identities, and they're emotionally invested in a story, and that is what is actually keeping you from wanting to end your own life.

What if you as a healthy person got in an accident and you couldn't get a hospital bed because some unvaccinated person had to be put on a ventilator?

Imagine where you were before your conception. You've always been there. It never stopped existing. "But complete nothingness, darkness, void surely doesn't exist, does it?" YES IT DOES!!

?

Hint hint: (he wants you to answer his question)

So what you fear is essentially your survival going south by you losing contact with consensus reality, ie. becoming "delusional" or "going insane". The funny thing is that the only way that you'll ever go insane and lose contact with consensus reality in the first place is by being attached to your survival. And you don't need drugs to get there. Trauma will do just fine (imo, it's the main factor at play). What unresolved trauma does is it challenges your survival in such a way that you start constructing your own internal substitute-reality in order to escape those challenges, and psychedelics can certainly exacerbate those kinds of underlying issues, no doubt. When your survival is threatened, it starts seeking out solutions to protect itself, and when the threat is unconscious to ourselves and leads to enough chronic dysfunction and stress, one solution can involve changing the subjective experience of that survival by altering the very reality through which you experience it, because your "reality interface" is what you use to assess your survival (if it's going well or if it's going bad), and you always try to maximize your survival, which includes your assessment of it. This leads to thing like cognitive biases and having an internalizing or externalizing attribution style, e.g. "that went well because of me", or "that didn't go well because of somebody else", and you'll actually believe that this is actually what happened (and in that way, your reality skews in favor of some assessment you made about it). I've written a bit on this in an earlier post which I think could help to elaborate on what I mean: So the solution for madness is to inoculate yourself from stressors by resolving trauma, analyzing your mental proclivities and creating a holistically healthy lifestyle. Then it's up to you to decide if you should avoid psychedelics or not, but remember that it's actually possible to hold both worlds in each hand: consensus reality in one and The Absolute in the other:

On a more serious note, I used to be completely inflexible in dealing with people different than me, but I sort of grew out of it. Of course I wouldn't be the same person today without meditation, but I think age is an important component as well.

Be a better ENTJ then. Innovate a way or be malleable enough to accept that ?