Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, aurum said:

There is no such thing as "behaving well" outside of consequences

and identity. 

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, aurum said:

There is no such thing as "behaving well" outside of consequences.

There is no such thing as behaving well outside of Forum Guidelines.

[Alexop]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

There is no such thing as behaving well outside of Forum Guidelines.

Hahah

6 hours ago, Joshe said:

Sounds like an identity rule to me. "I'm the type of person who is well-behaved because that's what being aligned with truth entails".

Is that what you tell yourself when you're fighting back those urges? 😂 Whatever works I suppose.

Just fuckin' widya.

Of course that can be a trap. The ego is sneaky AF. 😛 What you are presenting is Stage Blue in a nutshell.

Edited January 13 by Alexop

[Jannes]

Nice disclaimer. Maybe make a disclaimer for the disclaimer, that the disclaimer will be long but is important. 

[Human Mint]

11 hours ago, Joshe said:

Sounds like an identity rule to me. "I'm the type of person who is well-behaved because that's what being aligned with truth entails".

Is that what you tell yourself when you're fighting back those urges? 😂 Whatever works I suppose.

Just fuckin' widya.

Rule of thumb is: reader's consciousness will be impacted by what you write. So if you know that then you make use of that.

[Happy Lizard]

@Leo Gura  Regarding your blog post about Islam, I wonder if you know of a good source to learn about Islam form a high perspective view. 

Edited January 13 by Happy Lizard

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Human Mint said:

Rule of thumb is: reader's consciousness will be impacted by what you write. So if you know that then you make use of that.

It’s very common to crown your ego with a halo when moral development emerges from inner work. There’s a fine line between recognition of it and ego/identity inflation. It’s nothing to be ashamed of, as it’s only natural. But some readers might be ready to see it, which was the impact I was aiming for. 

[Alexop]

1 hour ago, Happy Lizard said:

@Leo Gura  Regarding your blog post about Islam, I wonder if you know of a good source to learn about Islam form a high perspective view. 

Begin with this.

 

 

[Human Mint]

5 hours ago, Joshe said:

It’s very common to crown your ego with a halo when moral development emerges from inner work. There’s a fine line between recognition of it and ego/identity inflation. It’s nothing to be ashamed of, as it’s only natural. But some readers might be ready to see it, which was the impact I was aiming for. 

It is far more common to see people playing the victim and being defensive. Something to be ashamed of.

 

[Leo Gura]

20 hours ago, Happy Lizard said:

@Leo Gura  Regarding your blog post about Islam, I wonder if you know of a good source to learn about Islam form a high perspective view. 

I do not.

Obviously Rumi, but that's more like poetry. Hafiz is also poetry.

Look for Sufi sources.

Actually, I do have one Sufi nonduality book in my book list. Look for it.

Edited January 14 by Leo Gura

[Rafael Thundercat]

When the Book is finished and published, my last days on this planet will be promoting the book Leo is Writing. 

[mmKay]

Amateurs punch their insights into a keyboard to write their book about God 

Real Sages channel God into Google Docs Voice typeing in one sitting , with their eyes closed

 

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, mmKay said:

Real Sages channel God into Google Docs Voice typeing in one sitting , with their eyes closed

Nah, that's no good. I gotta see what I am writing. I can't just dictate it. I am very visual and I don't work in a linear way. I write more like a spiderweb. God does not work in a linear way.

Edited January 14 by Leo Gura

[r0ckyreed]

Regarding Leo’s IQ test. While that goes deeper than math tests, I would say true intelligence is beyond survival. The highest intelligence isn’t about how well you can survive, it’s about understanding God. A moronic person could pass the rope and chair test but they wouldn’t realize God; therefore, they miss the highest intelligence. You can handle a wild beast and still be deluded.

I would say my IQ test would be to lock you in a dark room by yourself until you can answer the question: What Is Truth? Each time you give some dogma or Buddhist, spiritual nonsense, I would give you a shock to the nuts. The door won’t open until you answer and experience directly What Is Truth?

Edited January 14 by r0ckyreed

[Leo Gura]

4 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

The door won’t open until you answer and experience directly What Is Truth?

I like it 

[Leo Gura]

24 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

I would say true intelligence is beyond survival

My test isn't really about survival. It is about how well you understand the animal. It tests understanding.

Edited January 14 by Leo Gura

[Rilles]

Depends on what type of wild animal it is, a snake in a cage might be easier to handle than a hungry lion, just saying. Or maybe this whole thing is a metaphor for being stuck with the egoic mind idk.

Edited January 14 by Rilles

[Alexop]

@r0ckyreed the better you survive the harder to pass the real "IQ test"

Camel... eye of the needle... Heaven

 

 

[Leo Gura]

The point of the test is to show how unformalizable intelligence is.

[Xonas Pitfall]

This test seems flawed... If one person is stronger or faster and another is weaker or slower, yet both conceptually understand that the animal is dangerous and that escape is required, then success on the performance test mostly reflects pre-existing physical traits. It also reflects what someone happened to focus on in life, such as athletics rather than academic or analytical skills.

I would agree with the test if it focused on interaction with an unfamiliar object, animal, or alien. In that case, it could measure openness, comprehension, adaptability, and the ability to process abnormal or unexpected features. How much can you accept something that is foreign to you? How well can you work with paradoxical traits? How do you make sense of something when you have very little prior reference for what it is?
However, the moment you add the possibility of physical attack, the test becomes about survival.

I can be the most intelligent and conscious person in the world, but if an animal outruns me and eats my guts alive because I do not have the genetic composition of a panther or a cheetah, and that somehow counts as a study of my “intelligence”, then I would not call that a good measure at all.

It reminds me of an argument from Charisma on Command interview with Leo. “Fine Leo... all this psychedelics and consciousness talk is irrelevant if someone can just shoot you with a gun.” Leo responded that if someone shot Einstein in the head during a lecture, it would not invalidate Einstein’s theories. So if the theory is not disproven at the moment survival ends, then survival itself should not be used as the measure in the first place (or, at the very least, carefully removed or accounted for on the test.)

Quote

The point of the test is to show how unformalizable intelligence is.

You could say something is “unformalizable,” yet you would still try to use logic to comprehend God, or at least the “logic of God,” the pure logic itself. There are more and less accurate systems of utilization and judgement for a characteristic. By that same argument, I could also say:

“I invented my own IQ test. The true test is how much blind faith you can place in an imaginary figure. It measures your ability to be open, receptive, and unjudging or unbiased before reality. And to be clear, I am not saying IQ is linked to faith. I am pointing out how unformalizable intelligence really is.”

Edited January 14 by Xonas Pitfall