Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[gengar]

23 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

You could replace 'Wikipedia' with 'Bible' here, as a good perspective shaper.

Except wikipedia and science is supposed to be a book that changes over time as new findings our found and proven, unlike the Bible.

 

[gengar]

On 5/20/2025 at 9:36 PM, Leo Gura said:

Yes, I know of Monroe's work. Monroe was hired by the military to make them a specialized remote viewing training program. The military used his retreat center for training their guys.

The military's conclusion was that Hemi-Sync is not as effective as promised. It requires the right genetics to work.

Why are you not sharing your military sources with us? Genuine question. I'm still doing the research myself I just don't have that much free time to have done it yet. What's the mindset here?

[gengar]

This dude claims that in his findings, psychic ability has a negative relationship with intelligence, and that the Quran was channelled psychicly by a Persian called Salman:

It doesn't help much that he's a Persian nationalist who wants to denounce the developments and high tides of Islam and credit it all to the Persians, but hey, he also seems to have a general interest in psychic phenomena.

Edited Wednesday at 11:59 PM by gengar

[Natasha Tori Maru]

8 minutes ago, gengar said:

Except wikipedia and science is supposed to be a book that changes over time as new findings our found and proven, unlike the Bible.

 

The Bible has also been changed through time. I do acknowledge your point regarding Wikipedia & science though

I am unsure if this is still the case, but in university you would be flat given zero points for a bibliography that cited Wikipedia.

Professors would laugh you out the door... 

[gengar]

1 minute ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I am unsure if this is still the case, but in university you would be flat given zero points for a bibliography that cited Wikipedia.

Yeah, I just expected wikipedia to be more vulnerable to change when confronted with real research

[Leo Gura]

41 minutes ago, gengar said:

In you guys experience, do the different levels of binaural beats actually work as advertised, with different levels giving different effects like spiritual, cognitive, etc?
 

I can't confirm all those benefits. But you can feel differences between alpha, delta, theta, gamma.

[Leo Gura]

5 hours ago, gengar said:

Why are you not sharing your military sources with us? Genuine question. I'm still doing the research myself I just don't have that much free time to have done it yet. What's the mindset here?

I shared a lot of stuff this week.

If you want a further source you can PM me.

Edited Thursday at 05:32 AM by Leo Gura

[zurew]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I am not here to convince you to believe anything I say. Do your own research and come to your own conclusions.

I am not going to do any work to convince you of paranormal things.

I share ideas with you, and if you don't want to believe them, fine by me.

Its not about convincing - its about making us learn about how to navigate these topics and how to make sense of them. Getting a more wider and deeper epistemic toolset. Seeing how and what is applied when a paranormal topic comes up would be very interesting.

If there are ways to approach these topics in a way where people can avoid falling into pre-rational traps that would help people with coming to their own conclusions.

[Leo Gura]

@zurew You just need to stay openminded, read all the anecdotal evidence, and connect the dots.

Why are there thousands of people talking about paranormal stuff? All of them are pre-rational idiots? That's a very poor theory. Reality just doesn't work like that.

The more stories you read, the more evidence you look at, the less coherent your scientific rationalist worldview will get.

For example, I went to a psychic and she accurately predicted a very specfic event in my future which came true as she said. How do you explain that? There is no materialist explanation. But you have to stop doing stupid forms of skepticism because that will fuck up your whole epistemology.

All I do is connect dots with an open mind. I connect hundreds of dots, which eventually renders scientfic materialism and skepticism untennable.

Edited Thursday at 02:18 AM by Leo Gura

[Peo]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

For example, I went to a psychic and she accurately predicted a very specfic event in my future which came true as she said.

Danm maybe i should try to go to a psychic so she can see what my future has in store for me. May i ask if this event that happened was a good or bad thing that happened to you in the future? Was it positive or negative?

[Leo Gura]

@Peo It was positive.

[Leo Gura]

15 minutes ago, Peo said:

maybe i should try to go to a psychic

It is not easy to find a good one. Not just any old psychic will do. You have to find a serious one, not just some New Age wannabe.

Edited Thursday at 05:35 AM by Leo Gura

[ExploringReality]

@Leo Gura

What is a psychic to you Leo? What to you constitute legitimacy of someone being a psychic? Is it a specific thing they are doing or performing, or an energy sense, what is it? What have you encountered in someone who has these abilities?

Edited Thursday at 08:34 AM by ExploringReality

[ExploringReality]

What I love about you so much Leo is the immense value you give through your mind, consciousness and experience of exploring the depth and heights of consciousness, and your ability to talk about such deep things, it's a very personal connection you radiant. Thank you.

[zurew]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Why are there thousands of people talking about paranormal stuff? All of them are pre-rational idiots? That's a very poor theory. Reality just doesn't work like that.

No thats not my view, I know about some people who take those things seriously who I respect -  Im just saying that one should have a pretty robust epistemic toolset, so that one can properly investigate the instances of paranormal stuff and dont fall into pre-rational traps.

 

Relying on some vague notion of "connecting the dots" sounds like a good way to fall into those traps - cause the epistemic norm that is used is not explicated, and because of that one can easily be overwritten by one's biases. Its a vibes based epistemology at best.

Imagine having something like - "here is an epistemic standard , and if a given study crosses this threshold, then I will change my view on this particular thing" - in this case , its much easier to engage with this person and in this case one can analyze their epistemic standard and reflect on it and let others to attack it and run consistency checks on it.

And  given that the norm is explicated , others can now apply that norm to other instances where a paranormal phenomena is brought up and analyze whether that paricular instance crosses that threshold or not.

 

And obviously the same critique applies to people who reject all paranormal phenomena  with a knee-jerk reaction, without looking into it and without actually having a clear epistemic norm or without having the ability to explain in a clear way why they reject it in a non-dogmatic way.

Most people don't have the necessary toolset to even begin to make sense of these things. Its like asking a random layman on the street to make sense of a random medical study about a given thing - they would have 0 clue what questions they would need to ask, what kind of norms they would need to use, what certain variables in the study mean and what the implications are of certain variables having certain values, they wouldn't know how reliable the study is, because they would need to have a well-developed concept about what reliability even is in that context and so on.

So why should we think that its any different in this case? It seems to me, that one would need to know a lot about a wide variety of fields (physics , epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of science, and philosophy of physics and  occult stuff and so on) and one would need to refine and reflect on one 's standards a lot, before they could have a relatively good way to categorize the instances of such phenomena.

Like most people cant even explicate and defend their worldview in a detailed way, where they can pinpoint  the exact reasons why they believe in what they believe, why they have the epistemology and metaphysics they have. So why would they have the ability to make sense of any of this?

 

 

For example, don't you think that you having the ability to explain in detail and in a clear way why you were wrong about healing would have enormous value (other than just some vague vibe based gesturing) ?

Like imagine you having the ability to lay down "The reason why I was wrong about healing, is because I had this x epistemic norm that I believed in for y set of reasons, but now that I realized that it doesn't work, I can go back look at those y set of reasons and change them and say with confidence that the reasoning I used was wrong, and the norm that I used was inadequate".

Edited Thursday at 12:43 PM by zurew

[zurew]

39 minutes ago, zurew said:

Imagine having something like - "here is an epistemic standard , and if a given study crosses this threshold then I will change my view on this particular thing" - in this case , its much easier to engage with this person and in this case one can analyze their epistemic standard and reflect on it and let others to attack it and run consistency checks on it.

Like imagine the value of developing an evidence hierarchy for the purpose of investigating paranormal phenomena and then being able to list some of the things and reasoning with respect to how it was built and what kind of core beliefs it relies on and what creates the hierarchy etc.

Edited Thursday at 11:24 AM by zurew

[abundance]

13 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Yes, very normal and a widely reported effect.

I feel like episode one and Wave 3 iron out my brain, so to speak. 

My thoughts feel very clear and unmuddied by tangents and spirals of renumeration, which are more typical, as we all have running thoughts in the background we aren't fully aware of. I use them before work, and on my break, as my work is complex & stressful. I am managing many complex working systems & am required to find creative solutions to unique problems. I apply the focus gained to a task, as I feel having a direct aim induces the states easier. You could try this with contemplative work, or school work etc. It is excellent for working with complex mathematical systems.

You can just float around in 'The Way to Hemi Sync' which is an introduction to the sounds, without Roberts voice guiding you. You should be able to find this on Spotify under The Gateway Experience.

Thanks for this. 

[Salvijus]

I've descided to try this Monroe thing. My new headphones arrived today, must be a sign from heaven. 

[hundreth]

17 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@zurew You just need to stay openminded, read all the anecdotal evidence, and connect the dots.

Why are there thousands of people talking about paranormal stuff? All of them are pre-rational idiots? That's a very poor theory. Reality just doesn't work like that.

The more stories you read, the more evidence you look at, the less coherent your scientific rationalist worldview will get.

For example, I went to a psychic and she accurately predicted a very specfic event in my future which came true as she said. How do you explain that? There is no materialist explanation. But you have to stop doing stupid forms of skepticism because that will fuck up your whole epistemology.

All I do is connect dots with an open mind. I connect hundreds of dots, which eventually renders scientfic materialism and skepticism untennable.

This is absurd reasoning. Fortune tellers and how they work have been discussed ad nauseam and the topic has been beaten to death. The answer is confirmation bias. You don't remember all the other things she said that didn't come true, nor do you care. They are also extremely skilled at cold reading.

For thousands and thousands of years people believed all kinds of outlandish things. That doesn't make them true. It doesn't make those people idiots either, it's just a natural way for us to process the world. We take intuitive shortcuts to find answers because the totality of knowledge and understanding is completely overwhelming and outside our grasp. 

Edited Thursday at 07:29 PM by hundreth

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, hundreth said:

The answer is confirmation bias. You don't remember all the other things she said that didn't come true, nor do you care. They are also extremely skilled at cold reading.

No!

Her prediction was too specific to be a cold read or confirmation bias.

She knew things about my life that no one could know unless they were actually psychic.

Stop taking people for idiots. Things are being said here that are over your head. You are not smarter than me with your skepticism. Your run-of-the-mill skepticism is a lower form of intelligence.

Edited Thursday at 07:37 PM by Leo Gura