Carl-Richard

Karma is like Newton's second law of motion: every action has an opposite and equal reaction. It has nothing to do with punishment and it's not just that actions have consequences. You can look at it from a cognitive perspective: if you consistently act in disharmonious ways, you'll build internal structures (schemas and heuristics; automatic ways which you interpret the world) that will further facilitate such behavior in the future, and those actions will have consequences. If you act like an asshole in some aspect in your life, that will sooner or later affect you in some other aspect of your life. Shedding karma is about acting harmoniously with the evershifting nature of reality. It's in a way the opposite of egoic survival.

SD is an intellectual pursuit. I have nothing against intuition, but you generally approach these things with deliberate thought, especially when somebody is asking for clarification.

But why? ?

@k0ver What you're critiquing has more to do with models in general than SD itself. Models are supposed to categorize, idealize and not least simplify. There are possibilities of othering/demonization with any categorization of psychological qualities, not just developmental levels (examples like diagnoses of mental illnesses, personality disorders etc.), but also any framework in general (ideological, political, ethical, religious etc.) . These flaws are baked in the human psyche more than anything, but that shouldn't stop us from using these powerful tools. It's not the gun that shoots - it's the person. If you end up misusing SD, that's on you. If SD predicts anything, it's that these problems will be solved by people working on themselves.

Good example of relativity.

Literally sounds like my mom

Atleast explain why lol

When looking at particular events in history, it's never that simple. It's generally only possible to see a linear SD progression when you summarize all of history, but there are no clear-cut points and it's all a muddy gradient. Also, no single movement is homogeneous in its expression of SD. In some ways it took the individualism of Orange and enhanced it in the self-expression domain (aesthetics), but it did so in the reaction to Orange reductionism and demystification of nature. You also have to realize that there were strong nationalistic variants to that movement (originating in Germany which eventually borned Nazism and the WW1&2). The World wars worked essentially as a purge of these anti-Orange ideals. Green didn't truly become a prominent feature of any widespread movement before the 60s imo.

I check all of those boxes.

Let's just not. It's already obvious you have no idea what you're talking about.

@Preety_India There is a reason why some gurus have secret teachings. Then again, technically any non-dual teaching can be misunderstood in this direction. It then boils down to how explicit you want to be about it. Then the question becomes if Leo were to establish essentially a monk order where only the advanced seekers get access to the juicy parts, then that certainly wouldn't help the cult accusations (not that they're valid in any way). The problem in this case though is that SoonHei gave the impression of being a rather advanced seeker in many ways, which strengthens the case that you can't account for everything. These things do happen and it's sad, yet that is life.

Idk but my canine nose tells me there is some tier 3 transphobia incoming.

Things like this shows how important the relative/absolute distinction is.

Relative/absolute conflation.

If that's your way of phrasing it, I guess both.

If this forum had a spirit animal, it would be a tiger in a leopard suit

Don't claim brain damage where stupidity is sufficient

Again, it's very simple. My idea of having your priorities straight is that you're sincerely interested in something, you explore it deeply, and then if you want, you can take what you already know and discuss it with someone. That is very different from arranging a debate with a fixed motion/topic and then trying to ad hoc boost your performance in that particular debate by doing some intensive, strategic reading, scheming and planning. Does that mean you shouldn't do any preparation before you speak with someone on a public platform? No, but if you spend hours sweating it out like you're cramming for a test, that does kinda reveal where your priorities are. Don't get me wrong, I still watch Destiny a lot, but he has his flaws (some more obvious than others).

Here:

It's as simple as this: do you seek truth for truth's sake or do you seek to win debates? Now, how does spending hours skimming through articles while preparing for a debate square with that question? Maybe I'm way too picky, but I sincerely believe that once you enter a debate not to satisfy a deep desire for understanding and truth but to instead defeat your opponent with some quick and easy points you scrapped up from wikipedia, then you're way off course.

Are you fucking serious? No way

It goes much deeper than that. It corrupts his entire being. ...and that is why it turned into a 6 hour discussion

@Ves Yeah no, yet more evidence that Destiny isn't a very noble person, mostly in the sense that he has questionable drives and priorities. Sure, there is nothing wrong with having fun talking to people who don't know anything, but I feel his identity as a "debater" has a predominantly unhealthy effect on him in general.

Anybody tried Amanita Muscaria?