Carl-Richard

Notice that in your efforts to not control yourself, you will helplessly and inevitably end up controlling yourself. Become aware of that fact. There is a tendency to repress your feelings with certain techniques of meditation, and then questions tend to arise like "should I be making an effort or should I remain effortless?". Rupert Spira once said: "If you feel like making an effort, then make an effort. If you feel like not making an effort, then do that." Whatever you do, you're still yourself.

You have to keep in mind that we're all victims to this at various scales. If being misinformed is bannable, then 100% of the forum should be banned.

If you think jumping off a cliff makes you free, then do it, but don't drag the rest of us with you.

Yes.

Murder can be wrong relative to a set of beliefs/constraints, but it's not wrong in an absolute sense. Here she has chosen the belief that needless suffering is wrong, which constrains whether or not she thinks it's ok to murder someone, and it's all relative. Needless suffering is not wrong in an absolute sense. You can keep adding different constraints ad nauseum to justify your actions, but the absolute cannot be constrained. An additional common belief that is relevant in this case is the idea that someone's potential future positive experiences have some value, and to kill them would be to rob them from those experiences. Granted, they won't necessarily experience the suffering associated with acknowledging that fact, but it's still a valid point nonetheless.

What will "keeping it" be used for other than survival? The reason why you can't write the infinite knowledge down during the experience is the same reason why you can't keep it in your mind after the experience: you can't operate a limited mind from an unlimited state, and you can't operate an unlimited mind from a limited state; they're incompatible. The thought "I should write it down" doesn't even occur to you, atleast not in its limited form. Why should it? "I" is a limitation, a thought is a limitation, a pen is a limitation, writing is a limitation.

What is interesting is that people living in tribal-like conditions outside modern civilization naturally experience a lesser amount of thoughts throughout the day (around 1000), but people in modern societies experience around 30000-90000 thoughts a day. You could argue their experience is less dualistic on average, but true nonduality only really occurs when thoughts are consistenly absent for an extended period of time. To be able to gauge what an animal's experience is like in this regard, we could assume that the higher the capacity you have for engaging in symbolic thought, the more dualistic your perception becomes on average, and this correlates to brain size relative to body weight. Relatively highly dualistic animals would then be things like dolphins and great apes, but more nondual animals would be things like earthworms and fish. Then the question becomes whether nonduality in animals is in some way less impressive because they have a lower capacity for duality in the first place

Luckily, he was so outrageous that now you don't have to address what he was reacting to. Good dodge

I remember somebody once said "alcohol doesn't lower consciousness. It changes consciousness".

Yeah haha. Racism can happen at all stages in some form or another when I think about it. When I'm trying to categorize these different "isms", my mind seems to first go to "when did this first arise in history?", and then I tend put it under the stage that was most prevalent during that particular time in history, but then I forget to think about what happens after that and the stages that proceed .

Conflict is associated with Tier 1 in general, not just the lower parts. Racism is a result of fear of "the other", which made me suspect that it could be applied to tribal societies (purple), but I don't think there is a reason why they themselves should be able to distinguish between the concept of "race" and just "other". The concept of race only arises when you've been exposed to a great diversity of different people, and I believe tribal societies won't have that level of cultural influx, thus blue seems more applicable.

Is racism stage blue or stage purple?

Damn, an actual explanation. Nice.

Depends on what your goals are. If you're heavily invested in sharpening your senses, then stay far away from it.

I don't think revolutionary groups/movements lend themselves easily to SD analysis as they are inherently unstable and reactionary, and they aren't consistent parts of the evolutionary ladder in a stable society. There tends to be a large discrepancy between the "ends" and the "means". However, if you were to count up the different "isms" they're related to, you would get mostly green values.

Thanks . I'll keep adding suggestions and more stuff over time. I just started with what I found on the other mega-threads, and I saw that humanism was mentioned in both green and orange. Do you think it belongs in both?

Consciousness, intention and willpower. Observe yourself and try to notice the patterns in your behaviors and how they're manifested by your thoughts: identify specific thoughts (justifications and excuses for continuing said behaviors), get familiar with them and how they try to gain control. Set an intention for a pattern you want to eliminate, and stick with it. A pattern willl only weaken, but never go away completely. Take pain as a measurement of progress. Find a healthy substitute for the activity if it has been a main focus of your time.

I don't think there is very much understanding of relativity required to accept utilitarianism (it lends itself to rationality quite well), but you could argue that the non-discriminatory and selfless qualities inherent in its design can be viewed as yellow.

Sleeping with the guru is one thing. Looking after the guru's children is another ? Also, he said "PM me". You shouldn't apply in the comment section

I found most of these on the different mega-threads. I'll keep adding more stuff, and I'm open for suggestions Purple Tribalism Shamanism Paganism Cannibalism Red Tribal imperialism Machiavellianism Narcissism Egoism Terrorism Blue Nationalism Conservatism Patriotism Imperialism Colonialism Authoritarianism Fascism Nazism Ethnocentrism 20th century Marxism White supremacism Creationism Catholicism Islamic fundamentalism Wahhabism Hasidic Judaism Zionism Mormonism Religious terrorism Conformism Orange Capitalism Libertarianism Individualism Consumerism Atheism Materialism Reductionism Empiricism Skepticism Darwinism Behaviorism Utilitarianism Objectivism Pragmatism Optimism Logical Positivism Cubism Abstract Expressionism Surrealism Green Progressivism Liberalism Collectivism Socialism Feminism Egalitarianism Multiculturalism Cosmopolitanism Humanism Environmentalism Veganism/vegetarianism Cultural relativism Moral relativism Post-modernism Deconstructionism Altruism Pacifism Western Buddhism Minimalism Yellow Wider/deeper relativism. Turquoise Holism Mysticism Biocentrism

*Denied*

I'll apply next year.

Also recognize how the person you're talking to is thinking the exact same thing.

Something tells me he has been living a should we say sheltered life.

Then isn't it fair to say that the tendency towards white skin in part unlocked the geographical requirements that lead to the relative advancement over the rest of the world? Thus, despite the presence of a myriad of other factors, race does indeed have something to say for the advancement of a certain people. However, vitamin D metabolism alone doesn't really lend itself to ideas of innate racial superiority, as it's firstly trivial, and secondly conditional. If I were to modify your original statement, I would say "innate racial characteristics that confer an uniform adaptive advantage across different environments have not been shown to be involved in the relative advancement of a group of people".