Carl-Richard

Says who? I suggest to drop all preconceived notions and workout like a mystic would meditate. The knowledge you get from directly knowing your own self is much higher detail, much more sophisticated and real than some retarded estimate (which assumes 100 billion things about what even counts as a rep or how to execute a reo) based on bullshit studies. "Science-based lifting" is a bit like thinking getting a degree means you're now somehow something. No, knowledge itself, acquaintance with the thing itself, is the thing. If you can pull an insane 1-rep max, you can pull insane 10-rep maxes, and it will be reflected in your muscles. The strongest men who have ever lived are also the most muscular men who have ever lived. Don't let bodybuilders with their visual appeal fool you. A 434 lb Eddie Hall is more muscular (has higher FFM) than any bodybuilder who has ever lived (except maybe Greg Kovacs who is 5 cm taller).

That's exactly not what I was looking for. Give me like a theoretical rationale for why astrology works (other than "environment goes through cycles, cycles affect the person").

Do what works for you. I only listen to music while playing video games (which is unfortunately almost never 😥), making dinner or working out (and while driving and commuting).

Why would he call the ambulance unless you're in immediate danger?

So why did you go to the psychiatrist?

As far as I know, HPPD specifically refers to small visual disturbances, notably the "visual snow" which is given an increased intensity and may involve colors. If you have fully formed object or auditory hallucinations, that's something else.

You have to be very careful about what you mean by "intense" here. Just theoretically a priori (and on the extremes), if you do very intense training (i.e. very high BPM) but very low volume, that's more conducive to longevity than very low BPM and very high volume (almost per definition, as the latter at the most extreme is not considered exercise). Higher intensity gives more adaptive response (makes you healthier) per unit of time, a shorter window of stress, and a longer window of rest and recovery. And in that window of rest and recovery, you will of course be resistant to stress because of the adapative response (hence the longevity effect). The problematic aspects (again theoretically a priori) is when you keep stacking on volume and time spent in a state of stress, shortening the recovery window, and lowering the adaptive response per unit of time. I think that is what you are referring to. I've heard somebody say that for example jogging (low bpm, low adaptive response, more conducive to higher volumes, etc.) does not make you live longer than the time you spend jogging. But if you like jogging and you feel better the hours and days after jogging, then it can still be a positive thing for your life. 1 hour every other day is nothing. You spend more scrolling TikTok accidentally. Besides, high intensity low volume training is hip now (30-45 minutes, 1-2 sets per exercise). I personally prefer 3 sets per exercise, even 4 for the beginning set, because I don't feel I get the neurophysiological fatigue response and serotonergic/endorphinergic "feelgood" response that last throughout the day and next days if I don't. But if you simply prefer staying active through other means, that's fine, but it's not clear whether that is better for longevity than short, focused and intense training sessions punctuated with long periods of genuine rest. Try "staying active" by e.g. moving houses with a deadline and see how wore down and exhausted you will be. You will be very active during that time, but you will tend to eschew rest and consequentially probably severely drain your longevity. Now you're adding many confounding factors. The comparison is between going to the gym and staying active through other means. Again, I think high intensity and high rest times has a strong theoretical basis for longevity. But that is not to say longevity cannot be relatively assured through other means. Oh yes for sure. Those high volume masochistic bodybuilding freaks are not doing it for longevity, just like the drugs they're taking.

Everything is ego lifting. Lifting heavy to show off is just one case of it. But you can lift heavy because it's fun. It's not necessarily to show off.

What symptoms did you report?

Why would you want to confirm that? 😂

A teacher I deeply respect wrote a book on astrology. But I haven't looked into it. Give me your best argument.

"Snus" in Norwegian high schools (nicotine pouches). Probably the purest example of conformity I've seen. Joining the military is basically always conformity and basically the entire culture there.

You probably find meditation boring too. Or sauna. Or taking hot baths.

It's the problems of metaphysics-blind pop science and epistemically myopic and p-hacking nature of debunking videos all combined into one hot mess.

At your age your job is just to surround yourself with girls, take the opportunities when they come.

Anybody can pursue awakening. Whether you progress depends on your will, your intensity, your obsessiveness, your integrity, your authenticity, your inspiration, your devotion, your love. Intellect can help with using some tools. And don't underestimate your intellect. Often what people think is intellect is just knowledge. There is a psychological phenomenon I've identified where you feel less smart than somebody else when they talk about something you don't know about, but when you talk to them about something you do know about, you suddenly see that it was a lack of knowledge, not intellect that made you feel less smart. Or you might be called "smart" during a group assignment in school if you're one of the only people in the group who actually read the chapter before the group assignment and could understand what the assignment was about, even if you're at a similar level of intelligence and they could've understood it the same had they read it. Or professors who talk fast and with impressive language even though it's sometimes hard to follow are called "smart", maybe just because you have to think very hard to understand them, vs. an equally as impressive professor in terms of intellect who tries very hard to make themselves understood can come off as much less intimidating and less "smart". Although, yes, there are cases where you can talk to somebody where you understand everything they are saying, but they are just that brilliant, clear-headed, sharp, that you clearly feel that they are intelligent rather than simply knowledgeable. And there is a correlation between being intelligent in that way and being knowledgeable, but it's still very easy to mistake a lack of knowledge in yourself for a lack of intellect. So to summarize: math, physics, history are fundamentally knowledge, and even if you don't know about the math that Einstein used or the history of science leading up to Einstein being able to do that math (which is interesting, but that's the key; interest), that doesn't necessarily mean you're a dimwit (subtly hinting I know some math, physics and history: I essentially don't lol).

It's such an odd concept because you have no idea what would have happened otherwise, and the hardship you have experienced is integral to who you are now and there is gratitude for that, but one thing I surely could have benefited from in some facets at that moment in time (from like 12 years old) was fixing my diet and maybe dialing down the insane levels of masturbation lol. But that kind of high carb diet and frequent masturbation could've benefited my guitar playing (as it benefits from a more serotonergic/prolactin tone). If you actually regret something you did, it defines your life, and there is more to life than one thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Egg_(Weir_short_story)

Don't give it too many instructions, and you meet morons without ChatGPT.

Not knowing applies to everything though 🤔

Young men with lots of testosterone make terrific meditators. The problem is only if your interests are not aligned. Your spiritual practice is to pursue what you want to do until you give up everything. That is the only spiritual practice there is.

@Ramasta9 Or perhaps the reductionistic lens of "nutrients" is the problem and a different lens like e.g. "prana" could be needed to explain what is going on. After all, if a fruit is a matrix of many thousands of different compounds (and some are not even considered "nutrients"), maybe the whole effect of those compounds taken together adds up to something different than single nutrients in isolation or even "nutrients" in any case. It's actually theoretically accepted in the mainstream that biological systems exhibit both bottom-up and top-down causality in terms of things like health (e.g. if you eat a compound that makes you less chaotic, that change in state will impact how much nutrients you utilize, and vice versa). But it is of course harder to map out a comprehensive map of this empirically (reductionism is the norm for a reason). And like prana is used to explain how breatharians putatively can go without food, it's that their different bodily parts as a whole work differently. Or even spooky quantum processes may be involved. Or maybe physical lenses don't do it justice at all.

@Ramasta9 I've recently had an insight about supplements that argues more in your favor. So I've done a dive into how nutrients interact with eachother ("systems nutritional science") and how these interactions can stunt nutrient uptake by ridiculous amounts. And of course some foods contain "anti-nutrients" which do the same thing. However, despite this, people who eat say a diet with a lot of anti-nutrients (i.e. more plant-based) or who even mix many different foods are able to give clear blood panels and also are statistically associated with longevity on a group level (as you yourself have argued). Also, I've thought about before that eating a fruit cannot be replicated in the sense that you get the nutrients presented in a particular matrix (the cell structures, the micro and macro tissue structures). When you e.g. remove the juice and only drink that, you change the form of what you're eating. And especially, when you eat a pill that has only a pure vitamin and some filler substances, that is certainly not the same as eating a fruit with that vitamin. I think it's possible that the matrix of the fruit (or the matrix of foods generally) is important for how nutrients are taken up, used, absorbed. And that when you only separate one chemical from that fruit and eat that (e.g. vitamin C), it's more like taking a drug than providing "nutrition". And that's the feeling I've gotten from many supplements in general (especially b-vitamins) is that they feel essentially like drugs.

God is everything.

New Age psych prog hello