Carl-Richard

Seeing the parts but not the whole.

For your continued safety, please keep your seat belt fastened at all times.

Don't do weed all the time. There is a fine line between being a seeker and a stoner. Trust me, I've been there

The idea was that you want a mix of theory and personal experience. Whether you go to yourself or someone else is besides the point, though ideally, you would want to yourself to be the psychotic psychiatrist ? If you want my take on it, I've been close to what I would consider the classical conception of psychosis (due to drugs/stress) AND sober awakening experiences, and they're qualitatively different with a few conceptual similarities. Based on my experience, psychosis is when your psychological structures (self-concept, semantic concepts, definitions, boundaries etc.) start to disintegrate meanwhile your mind is overractive, ungrounded, attached, and confused. There is an influx of energy, but it's like a system overload, like a dam that is about to break. Sober awakening is similarly an influx of energy, but it's facilitated and grounded by a lack of mind identification. It's much more smooth sailing and a controlled/gentle outpouring of energy, like the river flow from the first melting snow in the spring. There are also other useful distinctions like functionality, mood, clarity of mind, where psychosis generally scores more negatively than awakening (infact awakening may confer a significant positive impact relative to the preceding state). However, you can react negatively to awakening and resist it, and then your symptoms will predicted by the amount of mind activity that causes (either leading to ego backlash or an elevated baseline or even psychosis).

It becomes more obvious when that gap becomes your baseline. Until then, you'll have to live with a gap in your understanding ?

People tend to forget that they've never actually experienced what nature is. They've lived their entire life with the softest man-made pillow under their ass. Nobody is saying it's either veganism or death. That is a strawman. Make a meatman instead

Adventurer YouTubers — ISFP (FiSe)

Models only work some of the time on a majority of people. Eric Weinstein explains this extremely well in relationship to IQ models and modern education models:

Every time I've experienced something like this I've proved myself wrong. Perception is not an infallible process. One time I bought some potatoes here in Norway called "Mandel" (meaning "almond"), and I swear I saw that it said "Mendel" with an "e" on the package, not "Mandel". I knew they were called something like that, but I wasn't too sure about the spelling. A little backstory: I had just been reading about Gregory Mendel, one of the fathers of biological inheritance, who was known for breeding different strains of peas in order to study this. So I made the associaton that he might have been breeding different strains of potatoes as well. The thing is that upon closer inspection, the package didn't just say "mandel" but also "melne" (meaning they easily crumble). Those are very similar looking words, and add the fact that the package was crumpled, I must have seen something resembling "Mendel" (crumpled "melne") and filled out the blanks based on my prior experiences. There are so many psychological models I could go into that explains this, but you get the gist.

That is why you should only listen to PhDs in psychiatry who are also psychotic... or should you? ?

You can only serve as one piece in a string of events.

If you're joyful, you can't help yourself but to express that joy somehow. That can come off as "oh he is so motivated, striving, passionate, determined" but you're really just very joyful. If you're not motivated by lack, cultivate some joy in your life, not for the sake of motivation, but for the sake of joy.

Do you desire truth? What if boredom is trying to show you what is true? ?

I hope you know that this phrase is the biggest meme in the Destiny community

There is no separation

Now you're being carried away by the absolute/relative conflation. I don't have anything against Allislove or Nahm bringing up the absolute perspective as an answer to your question, but you should know that the very second you asked your question, you started operating in the relative, and that is why I went there as well. Allislove and Nahm are just trying to reel you back in while I'm the devil who is willfully engaging in the illusion of separateness. In an absolute sense, there are no distinctions; no rocks, no animals, no people; no enlightened beings, no unenlightened beings. But in a relative sense, there are rocks, animals, people, enlightened people. You could say you're indeed aware of this distinction, but please choose one or the other instead of jumping back and forth.

Fear of insanity is just one of many fears you have to work through.

When I used to meditate, my body would start to ache at around 45 minutes and that is where most of the progress happened. I say push through unless you're afraid you're hurting yourself.

Animals are sentient, present, aware, conscious, but so are unenlightened humans. Humans are also "sapient" (wise beings capable of thought). Rocks, trees, animals and humans are being. However, enlightenment is when being shines through the prism of sapience, or when the illusory nature of thought is illuminated by the light of being. Animals, rocks and trees aren't sapient and therefore not enlightened.

Stop it. About animals, Breakingthewall said "they simple are", and you answered "That is enlightenment". Does that not apply to rocks?

Is a rock enlightened?

Nature is low consciousness. People have to stop falling for these fallacious naturalistic arguments.

Then why should he listen to you?

I think what he is talking about is the good old Advaita trap., a.k.a confusing the absolute and the relative