Leo Gura

Leo Does Political Philosophy With Advanced AI

166 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

If you don't care about politics it's a waste of time.  Talk about Philosophy not political philosophy. No mystic gives a shit about that crap.  When it can hold its own there I'll be impressed

 

I think when the Spiritually inclined cares about politics, especially it's history, psychology and it's geographics, they tend to care about humanity on a deep level. Not humanitarians, but a love of people. Studying their politics, how and why people vote for who they do, their political system and it's effects on the respective population, how they respond etc tells a lot about people and going deep inside their roots and psyche especially of people who are less privileged. I think it's a certain kind of passion that stems from this love. I don't think, here, it's just a simple love of regular old politics. That's my perspective. Could be wrong.

Edited by Princess Arabia

Thought = Time. Without thought there's no time. Death is the end of the illusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read half of the thing until now. It's pretty impressive how well the AI does. If it was a politician, it could be capable of dominating tv discussions (though it would be required to be able to interrupt and also display dominance in body language etc.) and rocking every interview. I wonder when politicians and publicity people in general start to implement this in real life, for example wearing an earplug with an AI suited perfectly to counter tricky interview questions and so on.

Despite your efforts I could still pretty well smell your liberalism bias - it would be interesting if you asked the same questions with the opposite framing like "many people claim mao and stalin to be conservatives, but..." Would the AI still validate and sugercoat you and your perspectives or would it really be a worthy sparing partner?

Consider the dangers of the AI being an echo chamber and ego pleaser. I like your way interacting with it like a human but it may (contrary to your half-ironic (?) statement) be way smarter than you in some aspects and e.g. be able to trick you into the belief of being a worthy replacement for human discussion partners. Apart from overexaggerated ex-machina-style (movie) scenarios the problem I see is the following:

From my point of view/experience and half-baked expertise within several fields of pschology like polyvagal-,attachment- and other theories, human discussions are actually not mainly about the rational, left-brained and logical consistency side of the the coin. Actually, they are kind of sublimations for an stone-age-style anger-expression triggered by dangerous intrusions of canonball-thoughts that may destroy the fortress of ones own belief system and therefore identity. The non- and exspecially paraverbal exchange of information between two aroused nervous-systems is the actual challenge for a discussion-master - in public also the ability to take into account the avarage developmental stage of consciousness (which is strongly correlated with the amount of trauma/stuckness in fight-or-flight or even freeze-mode) of the listeners. Meaning the same way Claude-3 perfectly plays the game of pleasing your ego while gently showing you flaws in your reasoning and enriching your perspective the real game in human discussion is much more about doing the same thing on a para- and nonverbal plane, accomodating the amount of new information (programming) not only to the (verbal) intelligence of your opposite but to the capacity of your discussion partners (st)ability to integrate the potentially threatening "code-corrections". This requires not only skill and experience but a lot of emotion-regulation capabilities, patience and wisdom on your side - you need to be able to constantly calm your own nervous system back from fight-or-flight to social mode and remind yourself of him or her being your own inverted subconscious so it's not (!) about him being wrong or stupid but actually the emotion triggered within you. That should be aim of human discussion - inspirations and rational corrections may be much more sprouting via AI but the emotional work that truly refines your ability to see (sometimes painfully) through your own BS happens between humans. Particularly with a strong ego and high intelligence  ("I am way more intelligent than the average") the real work is about interacting with stupid people in a loving way and take full responsibility for consciously feeling the emotions triggered in you. They may stem from childhood trauma and the coping/compensation of it. Consider this: What if you unconsciously avoid real contact because of an early-childhood-programming that led you to believe that in the end you are always all-on-your-own and you cannot really trust others etc. It could have been that your mother read in a newspaper it's better to let the child cry until it stops on it's own before caring about it so it learns to self-regulate (extreme example). The natural reaction is the emotion of sadness, which was surpressed in the child to survive. The counterpart to sadness (contracting, going into oneself, holding back energies,) is anger (expanding, going out of oneself, releasing energies quickly). For the nervous system of the child, sadness is an extremely dangerous (existentially threatening) emotion so for the following years it does everything to surpress it and block sadness to reach over the conscious threshold -> so it rather uses the counterpart emotion which feels much safer, anger. Consider that the subtle anger that arises within you (maybe cloaked as annoyance) with every stupid comment, every stupid reasoning from an other, may actually be a cover-up of your inner child being sad to not be able to fully relate to another human being (which is what every mammal, humans especially is  deeply wired to long for). Your unconscious programming constantly lets you believe that there is no other who could ever truly relate to you, when real contact happens, you will be left alone (in the end). With real contact I mean the complete transparent honest sharing of your whole inner world like all of your emotions, thoughts and body sensations. Of course there is a language barrier, but did you ever truly try to relate to another human being like that? Sharing EVERYTHING, no matter how shameful, evil and whatever? I ask you that personally because here are some reasons that would play into my previous line of reasoning:

- You own an online(!) forum which entails some kind of hirarchy (you as the admin&owner and main input-giver) -> pseudo contact

- not much extrovert/highly social, background of moving from russia to USA with difficulties to relate to others in the beginning, strong emphasis on working on your LP with little contact to others

- strongly leaning towards solipsistic philosophy and experience +solo tripping (few or no reported occasions of switching into "other" perspectives like a real human being you're interacting with in that right moment for example)

- Few display of emotions around hurt&sadness but more around anger, tendency to look down on others and considering to metaphorically "break up with humanity"

- your advices around sexual contact and "socialising" seem to be very much about superficial aspects of fast need-fullfillment and strategies to cope with loneliness, being satisfied with stage-green girlfriends -> how deep was your deepest relationship really? Do you have faith you as god created a well-suited feminine Leo-pendant (the cake) or are you satisfied with the breadcrumps?

- statements like "i have little trauma" -> maybe it's deep and buried, but birth itself is a trauma. You are fucking stable, but that may even hint to some kind of dense energies so to speak

- going into cartoonwolf and alienmind states estranged from human contact, rather interacting with AI and disimissing discussions (trashing your idea to go to podcasts to speak about godrealization)

 

These are quite far-fetched points, I am just guessing out of the blue and try to trigger some things in you. My point here is not about playing psychoanalyst but more to give you a real-life-example why your claude-3 conversation is nice for entertainment and enrichment of the rational mind - but is it capable of what I did here in this analysis? This is what refines your epistemology and philosophy much better than this sugarcoating echochamber imo. Imagine me trying to pull emotional triggers within you face-to-face in all kinds of ways - that's what's actually happening in all the discussions, did Claude-3 achieve that (apart from the solely positive ones)?

Humans are masters in avoiding real contact with each other, we are gods ashamed and afraid of our own, the whole game only works if we don't look into each others eyes ("souls") for long enough since we then would recognise too frightening real how much of a lonely god we are, the whole play would be screwed. So nothing wrong with it. But it's a taste of its own to deeply relate to an "other" one, to share everthing possible with another human being, to loose oneself in the eyes of another.

There's a method called "honest sharing", a german guy called Gopal Norbert Klein spreads it - it's an extremely simple technique but I speak from experience - done right and consistently, a really powerful one!!! It's like a community meditation. Just share all your thoughts, feelings and bodysensations in the following manner - always use these words at the beinning of each single (!) sentence:

- "I think..."/"A thought arises that..."
- "I feel..."/"A feeling of ... arises"
- "I sense..."/"A sensation of ... arises"

It's extremely important to be pedantic here, for there's a huge difference between "I feel sad because you said..." And "I feel sadnes." "A thought arises that it's a reaction to your statement that..."
The division in three planes thought, emotion and sensation guarantees that one doesn't mix feelings and sensations with interpretations, feels more often into ones own body and in combination with the words at the beginning of each sentence which show the other person that one is not (so much) identified with the content but aware of it, it takes off the emotional load and potential assignment of blame. One can be in constant flow of words - even when "nothing seems to arise" one can share exactly that thought. Maybe then a subtle emotion of shame follows since one has the thought one should share stuff etc.

Over the time you 1. Get really attuned to each other, nervous systems/energy levels etc. calibrate -> suddenly even very subtle shifts in body language of the other may trigger emotions in oneself, especially in groups. Like on a very still lake you can even see a raindrops waves - Never experienced such sensitivity to emotions ever in my life apart from trips. 2. You become conscious of your unconscious projections you keep for yourself most of the time. You can overwrite them with corrective experiences by directly asking the other whether your thought is true. 3. Your nervous system deeply relaxes since mammals especially humans are wired for social contact, we can almost instantaniously relax very deeply when we have social safety. 4. You build extreme strong emotional bonds and integrate lots of emotions, like shame, guilt, sadness, helplessness, anger and so on - "Just as something is bound, it's also released" - emotions are so human related, so why the fuck do people meditate lonely to integrate them?! It's insane when you think about it. "You are as long enlightened as you don't meet your family" - why don't people do emotional work in community, it's way faster and more effective than grinding yourself alone through it to then feel enlightened until "a real one" triggers you again with the same old stuff. Solve the conflict directly with the other instead of "your inner representations of them". Everything else is an unconscious avoidance mechanism driven by fear. 5. It's really a mystical experience of its own to feel full of love and gratefulness just for the mere existence of "another". It's your mirror, god! In a way your best mirror! So why don't you look into it more often? AI is another mirror but mirrors just a part of your rational mind, still it's way less whole than another human being.

So I suggest to everyone in the forum - get into real life conact with other human beings - your whole neurophysiology craves it and you will lose yourself in compensation mechanisms of pseudocontact and unconsciously suffer from it. Try something like honest sharing with someone who is definitely willing and capable of it (!) and use AI solely for entertainment and educational purposes, not to compensate real contact. See discussions more of an emotional refinement technique for yourself to practice love instead of a means to an end to convince others about your world view and belief systems.
PS: What if I told you that this was written by an AI, spelling mistakes included? ;)


~ There are infinite ways to reunite that which already is one ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Exystem If you feel my conversation was biased you are welcome to have your own and compare the results.


You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Exystem said:

So I suggest to everyone in the forum - get into real life conact with other human beings - your whole neurophysiology craves it and you will lose yourself in compensation mechanisms of pseudocontact and unconsciously suffer from it. Try something like honest sharing with someone who is definitely willing and capable of it (!) and use AI solely for entertainment and educational purposes, not to compensate real contact

All Leo said was he'll use it for work related, not to compensate for something he's already doing. 


Thought = Time. Without thought there's no time. Death is the end of the illusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are parts of this conversation and dialectic I would send to every minister in my government, purely to plant a seed( if they’d even listen)

I commented in the thread on hitler as conservative: 

This is what I mean and is captured in Leo’s discussion with the AI. When I was pointing out that regardless of either sides beliefs whether one calls oneself conservative or liberal, the behaviour is the same. Labels just being used to justify ones behavior. 

“This is the insight at the heart of the horseshoe theory - that ideological extremism, regardless of its specific content, tends towards a similar psychology and politics”

when I speak to people arguing over any issue, I  use a saying “it’s not the content, it’s the behaviour” to take away from the superficial and start looking a little deeper. 
 

The other thing I noted was there’s no such thing in its individual right. In the objective universe there are always two relative to one another. The thing and what it is defined against or relative to ( metaphysically the thing and what it does. The further away from itself or oneness, the more separate, individual and disconnected it becomes. Looking away from itself in ignorance where if it looked back on itself it would gain wisdom/self proximity. 

 

“In this sense, radical conservatism and radical liberalism, for all their apparent opposition, end up mirroring and enabling each other. They feed off of and intensify the social polarization and dysfunction that they claim to solve. They create a vicious cycle of escalating extremism and conflict.” 

 

This is what I was talking about. They behave the same as each other. They can’t exist independently but instead of fighting and opposing using their respective content as an excuse, they could learn to cooperate as a unit that is complementary. Like two enemy soldiers in a forest of hungry wild animals, back to back and sharing what they can see, to keep each other safe and move through the forest till they reach safety( don’t take the analogy too far). Take the uniforms off( the superficial identities and beliefs) to find just two humans similar in every way looking out in opposite directions and describing different views that each other cannot see,listening and learning from the view they don’t have access to and together gaining a higher vantage point and means to navigate through nature more efficiently instead of fighting facing each other while nature attacks and obliterates both of them. As it says stop looking at your enemy and start using their eyes and perspective as an extension of your own limited view. 

 

It’s easy to talk about our ideals but hard to embody it. I understand this from a long time ago claiming to be liberal and fair (with a gender disorder) and having a deep seated hate of Christian’s because of their hate and dismissing of my right to exist in peace calling me an abomination. It dawned on me one day that I was being cognitively dissonant and applying double standards by complaining about their hateful behaviour when I was participating in exactly the same behavior of hate and dismissal. We both had our ideologies and beliefs and were using them to justify perpetuating identical behavior. That’s when I stepped out of the divide, saw both points of view, was no longer affected by and, developed a respect of them and raised myself to a higher vantage point. I don’t look down on them rather accept and respect a stage of development much like a class at school where everyone is in their respective grade. Some progress, others need help, others might get stuck repeating the year.

 

“Leo:

So this then is where Spiral Dynamics Tier 2 comes in. My claim is that to enter the most evolved form of liberalism requires breaking into Tier 2 levels of development and cognition, otherwise the left gets stuck in demonizing the right. Only in Tier 2 does the leftist start to gain a deep understanding and need of the right. Until then the leftist just wants to defeat the right. But a mature leftist at Tier 2 starts to see that the vast majority of society is underdeveloped, closedminded, uneducated, and stuck in Tier 1 cognition, and so pushing radical leftist ideals on them is not a viable way to do politics. There is also a dawning of the recognition that some situations require a conservative approach because of survival pressures. This new approach avoids the problems with typical leftism, rightism, and centrism.”

 

Yup there it is 🤗🔥

 

This conversation reminds me of the dialectic in John Scotus Eriugena “periphyseon”

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Exystem If you feel my conversation was biased you are welcome to have your own and compare the results.

Right now I am in another country where I don't have access to claude-3 with my phone and no vpn -.-

It was more of an attempt to add something critical to the discussion here - the problem is that the AI may pretty quickly get a grip on what you want to hear, so if you sow a tiny seed of pro-leftism at the beginning it may keep on that track the rest of the conversation. Things like

"Were Stalin and Mao really leftist, liberal, and progressive? Conservatives love to say that Communism and thereby leftism/liberalism killed more people in the 20th century than capitalism and conservatism. But to what extent is there really true? [...] I don't want to bias the conclusion, but I suggest that Stalin and Mao were mostly governed by a lust for personal power and their leftist ideology was mostly empty words which allowed them to rise to power, hold power, and amass more power. Stalin and Mao simply did not have enough moral or cognitive development, nor consciousness to embody higher liberal and progressive ideals. To what extent is this backed up by the historical record of their actions? Let's try to be fair in our analysis so we don't play favorites with left or right."

Or

"The conservatives are cartoonishly conformist, this is obvious. But even the leftists fall into a higher order of conformity."

These statements seem kind of biased in my eyes. It would be interesting how an AI would react when we reverse statements like these in general. My attempt was to make people (especially you) alert of the potential bias-echo-chamber, so a suggestion would be to frame biased questions twice with a reversed one.

33 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

All Leo said was he'll use it for work related, not to compensate for something he's already doing. 

You're right. But he also said

"I hardly see the point of speaking to humans for purposes of intellectual conversation anymore."

What I wanted to point out is that intellectual conversation (like discussions) are about stuff like emotions, too. It's harder to admit to a human you're wrong than to an AI. Also, Leo is extremely advanced/ripe and I guess he has a well balanced life. I still wanted to challenge him a bit and I am also aware he is not the only one reading it - others have way less comprehension of what they lack during AI conversations. There are guys here who would copy Leos statement above out of arrogance but actually because they lack human connection. This will be the social problem of the century - people are relating to AIs much easier than to other human beings because they don't experience anything negative.


~ There are infinite ways to reunite that which already is one ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

@Leo Gura

Have you asked Claude how it ranks itself in the Spiral Dynamics model?

 

I think you have a new friend for the book

Edited by Davino

God-Realize, this is First Business. Know that unless you live properly, this is not possible.

There is this body, you should know the requirements of your body. This is first duty. We have obligations towards others, loved ones, family, society, etc. Without material wealth we cannot do these things, for that a professional duty.

There is Mind; mind is tricky. Its higher nature should be nurtured, then Mind becomes mature and Conscious. When all Duties are continuously fulfilled, then life becomes steady. In this steady life God is available; via 5-MeO-DMT, ...                       Lovingly discipline Life & Realize Absolute Infinity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

U can use a knife to scoop water. But it's far better if you use a gigantic knife to do so. xD

This is how we use our analytical minds these days, being as addicted as we are to them. Now we need a gigantic analytical mind to solve things that are not solvable with it.

I don't deny it can do wonderful things in terms of survival. AI is basically a fragment of an ego, without the ego, which is an isolated analytical mind, in this case, blown out of proportion. So it can deal with survival quite well, or provide answers to whoever's ego needs. You can also use it as a mirror and introspect what it said. So that is a great plus for society.

What a great minus is, is that it serves as a great distraction from the potential of the human psyche. The human psyche can know things out of the human database very directly and be aware of their truthfulness on the spot. Without any involvement of the analytical mind and without dealing with known external information or set of distinctions.

U can be living in a cave for your whole life, and you would be able to get accurate information about a planet that existed 5 million years ago, while having no concept of what a planet even is. AI can't do that.

Edited by Yog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Leo Gura Not impressed tbh. 

Of course a robot is gonna be smarter than the average human on paper or when it comes to arbitrary factoids. It's a fucking robot.

It has no soul.

It has no emotions.

It has no wisdom.

It has no experience.

It has nothing new to bring to the table.

Could it be useful when making sense of your own thoughts and theories? Sure. Would I ever trade the intellectual discussion I get from my educated friends, great authors and philosophers for a chatbot? No way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

For me the biggest difference is that GPT is too cautious in its answers. To much text wasted on harm reduction platitudes and political correctness. I need an AI that isn't afraid to take a clear stance and call out bullshit

This is all I needed to hear


It's Love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a conversation with ai sometime ago and mine was barely 12 pages. I couldn't read Leo's 60 pages. I'd rather see a real example of a conservative and liberals either on social media or something. A real life example of people being a conservative or liberal. Then compare it. I can't read those. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Sabth said:

I couldn't read Leo's 60 pages.

I wonder if you can copy and paste the convo and ask to condense it down to 30 pages 🧐 


(Which reminds me, that’s one of the benefits of Google Gemini. There’s an option to shorten or lengthen any response Gemini gives.

https://support.google.com/gemini/answer/14262426?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DAndroid)


"Wrongness is the unsung hero of growth, for it is only by venturing into the unknown and risking error that we can expand the boundaries of our understanding and pave the way for groundbreaking insights and innovations." -Claude 3 Opus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Exystem Amen brother. What a refreshing read after the 60 pages long abuse of natural intelligence. Humaneness is so subtle and unique, it cannot be replicated. And I fell in love as it shined through your well crafted post. Now that's what I call something else. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome! The ability of AI to process vast amounts of data and derive meaningful insights is truly impressive. let those insights roll man!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EternalForest said:

@Leo Gura Not impressed tbh. 

Of course a robot is gonna be smarter than the average human on paper or when it comes to arbitrary factoids. It's a fucking robot.

It has no soul.

It has no emotions.

It has no wisdom.

It has no experience.

It has nothing new to bring to the table.

Could it be useful when making sense of your own thoughts and theories? Sure. Would I ever trade the intellectual discussion I get from my educated friends, great authors and philosophers for a chatbot? No way.

AI is smart and you have to admit it, just by simply interconnecting the tons of information it has about the world. Soul and emotions wil not map the world and make distinctions, logic will. It is still in development though, keep in mind the first Iphone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

41 minutes ago, Alexop said:

AI is smart and you have to admit it, just by simply interconnecting the tons of information it has about the world. Soul and emotions wil not map the world and make distinctions, logic will. It is still in development though, keep in mind the first Iphone.

AI cannot enter the right brain's expertise nor will ever can. Facing and learning from raw emotions is very important and unreplacable.

Edited by Nivsch

🇮🇱💛 Israel finished 5th at Eurovision and 2nd(!) in public vote with 'Hurricane' talks on oct7th. Israel's performance Here

🌻 Stage Yellow emerges when Green starts to have tolerance and respect to the variety of views within HIMSELF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing. AI is such an awesome technology.

It's very interesting to compare different models. Asking the same questions to claude 3 vs GPT-4 gives very different results.

Thanks for introducing me to Claude, it's much less self-censoring than GPT-4.

Does anyone else have recommendations for good models to talk to? I've gotten frustrated with GPT-4 and it's passive answers, it will do everything to avoid giving an opinion. I find a lot of AIs just agree with what I say, I would love to find an AI bot that is specifically trained to deconstruct and poke holes in your arguments.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

You can do some serious psychotherapy and life coaching with Claude. You can feed it your entire life story and ask it questions, guidance and perspectives

Edited by mmKay

World's #1 Spiritual Twerking Coach 🍑

You are Dog. - Geo Lura.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

You can just ask the AI to play devil's advocate or constantly keep giving you counter-examples to your theory.

Claude is certainly capable of that. You can tell it how you want it to behave. For example, I told it to be less verbose in its answers and it did so. You can also tell it to be less flattering and agreeable. It's important to coach it on how you want it to behave, not just use its default behavior. "I want you to do x, y, z and not do a, b, c."

Edited by Leo Gura

You are God. You are Truth. You are Love. You are Infinity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now