Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Nemra]

6 minutes ago, zurew said:

Im not sure what you are trying to ask there.

"What is the reason to run the experiment that leads to a discovery" or do you try to ask "What is the reason to run thought experiments ?"

What were the reasons that those scientists that have different metaphysical assumptions wanted to conduct that experiment?

That also has to be taken into account.

Edited Wednesday at 10:49 PM by Nemra

[zurew]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

The goal is total understanding of reality. Not anything less.

But there you are just making a trivial claim, a claim that is true by definition.

"If you want to know all facts, including all metaphysical facts, then you need to know all metaphysical facts".

But this is different from pragmatic goals.

[gengar]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

I am very rarely asked serious questions.

quite belittling of us as an audience to act like we don't seek truth like you and dont ask serious questions often

many questions you evade because you deem them unserious or "dumb" are often times subtle realities that you haven't found out yet

You're not yet into the deepest levels of absolute logic yet for example, and it surprised me that it took you 100+ trips to realize that logic is absolute

I realized it after one realization of the oneness of reality

I explicated some points about it to you, but you always waved them off, even though you brought them up months later in your work, such as the question of "always returning" in neoplatonism, just an example

It just goes to show there's a lot you also don't understand and can learn from others, just like others probably have never gone through Alien stuff like you

Yet you never seem to be openminded on the topics of metaphysics, you think you've figured it out and nobody can say anything to you about it

The fact you spend hours on this forum each day where you're basically the leader is also a bit of a red flag

You're a very compassionate person and I respect you for it

But this idea that nobody is serious except you is an ego trip

It's no different than Muhammad Ali saying he's the greatest


 

[Daniel Balan]

@Leo Gura You also did videos debunking Andrew Tate and Jordan Peterson, but you didn't go inside Andrew Tate's war room to tell him to his face that he is stupid! There is a difference between constructive debunking versus talking shit! 

[zurew]

2 minutes ago, Nemra said:

What were the reasons that those scientists that have different metaphysical assumptions wanted to conduct that experiment?

We can speculate on the motivations - but I think its clear that it doesn't have to be something metaphysical (for example, it could be money), but even if it did have to do with metaphyiscs , the idea would be that they share some set of those beliefs (that are relevant to run the experiment) ,but when it comes to the other beliefs they hold, they disagree on those.

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, zurew said:

But there you are just making a trivial claim, a claim that is true by definition.

"If you want to know all facts, including all metaphysical facts, then you need to know all metaphysical facts".

But this is different from pragmatic goals.

You should know by now that nothing I say is trivial. If I am talking about it, and I say scientists don't understand it, then it is highly non-trivial.

[Joshe]

A wave of glaze is on the horizon.

[zurew]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You should know by now that nothing I say is trivial. If I am talking about it, and I say scientists don't understand it, then it is highly non-trivial.

The point is if your definition of "total understanding" includes those things then it is trivially true.

 

A non-trivially true move would be establishing how a TOE(Theory of everything) for physics would necessitate knowing all metaphysical facts.

Edited Wednesday at 11:05 PM by zurew

[Nemra]

6 minutes ago, zurew said:

but I think its clear that it doesn't have to be something metaphysical (for example, it could be money),

I think we could also trace that to some metaphysical assumptions or stances about the world.

9 minutes ago, zurew said:

but even if it did have to do with metaphysics, the idea would be that they share some set of those beliefs (that are relevant to run the experiment) ,but when it comes to the other beliefs they hold, they disagree on those.

Which means that their metaphysical assumptions are limiting them.

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, zurew said:

A non-trivially true move would be establishing how a TOE would necessitate knowing all metaphysical facts.

A proper TOE is actually Omniscience.

You are concerned with silly goals like flying man to the moon. I am concerned with guiding mankind to Omniscience.

That's why my decisions and manner don't make sense to you. My mind has a much greater responsibility than yours. Which is why I'm paid the big bucks (I wish) 

Edited Wednesday at 11:15 PM by Leo Gura

[BlessedLion]

Leo, love the latest blog on development and its cost in terms of social survival. Ive found this to be the case as I develop my mind and understanding of reality. It’s not that I CANT particularly socialize or fit in, in fact I find that people seem to find me quite interesting and enjoyable to be around, (as well as strange and weird in my own way I’m sure) - but it’s more that I don’t see much of the value in being around them. I try to see everything as God and not judge it, but most of normal society is simply playing a different game than I am, with infinite distractions, numbing agents, and delusion. It’s like being around toddlers, but also people have their own touch of God and beauty in their own way. 
 

But I also do find people who are developed at high green or beyond and it’s nice to be around them  

 

I also see many people who are highly developed and well integrated with friend circles and community (Ken Wilber, Ralston, Sahaja )

 

I don’t think development has to equal social isolation, you can integrate the two. Not everyone has to understand what you do to be friends with them.

 

For example I can love, hang out with, and enjoy time with my dog, it’s safe to say I’m more developed than him but it doesn’t take away from us bonding 

 

 

“What are all the reasons that extraordinary levels of cognitive development are so rare?”

 

Lack of information on how to do it

Extreme Time Comittment 

Deeply challenging to look at yourself and pick yourself apart

Risks

Delayed Gratification 

Energy demanding 

The death of all things you used to enjoy 

Inability to fit in with certain people you used to 

Less sex 

Less ability to delude yourself to lie and act like a devil 

Higher responsibility of yourself and how you create your reality- no more blaming or scapegoating 

Uncomfortable 

You kind of need to be free to do it. You can’t do it as a wage slave, deep family ties, poor country, poor education. This alone eliminates 99% of people. 

[zurew]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

A proper  TOE is actually Omniscience.

You are making it normative when it doesnt have to be.

If by TOE we just mean  a theory that can connect quantum theory and relativity , then explain to us how knowing all metaphysical facts would be relevant there?

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You are concerned with silly goals like flying man to the moon. I am concerned with guiding mankind to Omniscience.

No im concerned with checking what kind of arguments we are working with and wondering why take certain views when you dont have to.

 

You can maintain all your positions about God being true, omniscience being true and still not endorse the view that knowing all metaphysical facts is necessary for the creation of TOE.

 

 

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, Nemra said:

Which means that their metaphysical assumptions are limiting them.

I dont understand how you get to that conclusion. 

The point is that in order for two people to run the same experiment they dont need to share the exact same set of metaphysical beliefs, they might align on certain things ,but not on the vast majority of things.

 

[Leo Gura]

17 minutes ago, zurew said:

If by TOE we just mean  a theory that can connect quantum theory and relativity , then explain to us how knowing all metaphysical facts would be relevant there?

Again, you keep setting the goal too low.

If you set such narrow, finite goals, then you may not need any special fancy philosophy from me to reach it.

But can't you see that SCIENCE -- the ENTIRE field of SCIENCE -- cannot be circumscribed by any collection of your finite practical goals, whether it's flying to the moon or unifying GR with QM. These are all just tiny aspects of SCIENCE.

My concern is with the whole of SCIENCE, not any finite result, technology, TOE, or model.

You are behaving like a chemist who locked himself inside his department at MIT and says, "Does your philosophy help me understand hydrogen molecules? No? Then why should I care? It's useless."

Yes, it's useless when your ambitions and view is so selfish and finite.

But ALL OF SCIENCE is my concern. Not your chemistry or whatever. Whether my insights help advance your pet science project is just not relevant.

If all you care about is what's relevant to you, that's an extremely limited notion of science.

Don't you see that the scope of my concern is infinite?

Don't you see why it must be infinite?

Edited Wednesday at 11:48 PM by Leo Gura

[Nemra]

15 minutes ago, zurew said:

The point is that in order for two people to run the same experiment they don't need to share the exact same set of metaphysical beliefs, they might align on certain things ,but not on the vast majority of things.

Yeah, but why they do those experiments and what conclusions they make is based on their metaphysical beliefs.

Also, if some other person has entirely different metaphysical beliefs, he/she might not even do the experiment.

[Leo Gura]

Imagine a scientist who had a metaphsyics that Satan was real and that splitting atoms might release Satan into the Earth.

There are people in our government right now who believe UFOs and aliens are demons sent by Satan.

How can you do science on aliens if you believe they are Satanic?

[Nemra]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There are people Christians in our government right now who believe UFOs and aliens are demons sent by Satan.

Fixed it.

[Leo Gura]

Don't kid yourselves, this problem goes far beyond silly Christians.

There are scientists who believe ghosts are impossible.

How can you do science on a ghost if your metaphysics says it can't exist?

Edited Thursday at 12:20 AM by Leo Gura

[Nemra]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Don't kid yourselves, this problem goes far beyond silly Christians.

Well, Christians are obsessed with what should be Satanic.

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

How can you do science on a ghost if your metaphysics says it can't exist?

You cannot unless you open your mind to that. Don't you agree?

However, it's also a problem if you believe in ghosts.

Edited Thursday at 12:17 AM by Nemra

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Nemra said:

Christians are obsessed with what should be Satanic.

No doubt. You nailed that.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

I fully admit that I refuse to answer points that I find unworthy of my attention.

Whether you understand or agree with my refusal to address certain points is beside the point.

This is not quite respecting your audience. You are human, just as we all are. Unworthy being the judgement there.

You of all people should be open to these probing questions, as they assist in your own minds development. You should be challenging yourself with these engagements, rather than focusing wholly on your own thoughts. Therein lies a large area for you to further your own growth. Many of your responses are coloured with the delight of you being correct. And born of this delight, you will go on a ranting spree. On the other side of that coin, I have observed you quite chronically evade many questions from users who disagree with you. Then you shut down and double down or stop posting. This is a cycle we are here to assist you in breaking.

There is also a large emotional undertone that comes through in your writing in this way. This subliminally communicates you are being triggered somewhat. I would expect you to be much more benign and serene in tone, detached. But it seems that you are very emotionally tied up in your thoughts and ability. You are defining yourself in some way here, and it is clouding objectivity. You created this space, platform, content. You should be proud, it is valid. But you are very very attached to it egoically. This is holding you back.

This is going to retard your development eventually. You require this friction, just as we all do, by engaging in these verbal jousts.

Do you not consider that answering questions is an obligation and duty as a teacher?

We understand you may not have time to address them all, but to dismiss them as unworthy is something else. 

There is a reason God is asking that question, through the form of another, directly to YOU.

I mean no judgement here, just my observations.

 

Edited Thursday at 12:25 AM by Natasha Tori Maru