Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[mmKay]

Imo being able to be sexualy satisfied obviously depends on your sex drive and genetics.

There is a huge variety there, just like everything genetics 

[Miguel1]

It’s always nice to get lost in the world and survival for a while and then come back here to read the blog and insights Leo provides and reminds us. Feel like coming back home, and that the unconsciouss of the world is not the only thing there is in this life.

I truly do feel like I was born a thousand years too early.

[Rafael Thundercat]

List os books to amplify or go deeper on the post about Civilization is built on Abuse:

"Capital" (ou "Das Kapital") - Karl Marx
"Bullshit Jobs: A Theory" - David Graeber
"The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy" - David Graeber
"The Burnout Society" - Byung-Chul Han
"24/7: Late Capitalism and the Ends of Sleep" - Jonathan Crary
"Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison" - Michel Foucault
"Simulacra and Simulation" - Jean Baudrillard
"The Society of the Spectacle" - Guy Debord
"Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media" - Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman
"The Conquest of Bread" - Peter Kropotkin
"Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology" - David Graeber
 

[Rafael Thundercat]

By the way. i would be interested in any powerful material to study more on the topic of Civilization is built on Abuse. I case nobody notice we are in Civilizational Colapse, we are late on understanding the root causes of our colapse.

[LoneWonderer]

59 minutes ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

List os books to amplify or go deeper on the post about Civilization is built on Abuse:

"Capital" (ou "Das Kapital") - Karl Marx
"Bullshit Jobs: A Theory" - David Graeber
"The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy" - David Graeber
"The Burnout Society" - Byung-Chul Han
"24/7: Late Capitalism and the Ends of Sleep" - Jonathan Crary
"Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison" - Michel Foucault
"Simulacra and Simulation" - Jean Baudrillard
"The Society of the Spectacle" - Guy Debord
"Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media" - Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman
"The Conquest of Bread" - Peter Kropotkin
"Fragments of an Anarchist Anthropology" - David Graeber
 

Thanks bro, where did you get that from?

[LifeEnjoyer]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I already got Part 4 on my phone

Looking forward to it!

6 hours ago, Uddi said:

@Leo Gura Part 4 of what?

Part 4 of the music playlists.

[Terell Kirby]

Went down the Zebra rabbit hole a bit after the blog post on why Zebra was never domesticated.

Didn't know Zebra life was so brutal:

 

[aurum]

I feel like sexual quantity is easy for me to satisfy.

I can have sex 1-2x per week and be perfectly content. Maybe even less.

The bigger problem I've had has been variety. It's easy in a LTR for sex to start to feel mechanical, or to start fantasizing about other women. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

2 hours ago, aurum said:

I feel like sexual quantity is easy for me to satisfy.

I can have sex 1-2x per week and be perfectly content. Maybe even less.

The bigger problem I've had has been variety. It's easy in a LTR for sex to start to feel mechanical, or to start fantasizing about other women. 

Many of my male friends/colleagues report novelty is what is not satisfied in LTR. Just an observation, but it appears sexual novelty is a larger component of the male sex drive. This is just from my experience in the social domain (family, friends, colleagues). When I reflect on it, this need for novelty would be an essential ingredient to perpetuate the species. Without men's drive for sex, I suspect we would not have proliferated the planet so extensively  

I think there is also a huge variance in sexual appetite for qty amongst the population - as @mmKay raised. Some men may have a very high ceiling there. One if my mates is completely asexual.

[Miguel1]

I enjoyed great novelty and variety with my previous girlfriend. We tried all sorts of different toys, kinks, roleplays and positions.

And we were always coming up with new to try. It was amazing.

[Someone here]

Look at the pathetic dude called Hugh Hefner( founder of PlayBoy). Watch his interviews on YouTube. He is dead now btw.he died not so long ago. in his 80s and basically only a sneeze away from dying and he is saying pathetic shit like "all I care about is high quality Viagra ". Because guess what .. age is not just a number ..when you are in Your 80s your dick is going to soften like tomato juice and go limp but you will still be obsessed with sex in your head if you were obsessed about it in your youth . So Leo is spot on about ditching women. But he got even worse by saying satisfy yourself .if he means fucking cum to porn he is definitely kidding. 

 

[aurum]

3 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Many of my male friends/colleagues report novelty is what is not satisfied in LTR. Just an observation, but it appears sexual novelty is a larger component of the male sex drive. This is just from my experience in the social domain (family, friends, colleagues). When I reflect on it, this need for novelty would be an essential ingredient to perpetuate the species. Without men's drive for sex, I suspect we would not have proliferated the planet so extensively  

I think there is also a huge variance in sexual appetite for qty amongst the population - as @mmKay raised. Some men may have a very high ceiling there. One if my mates is completely asexual.

Something like that, yes.

But I also think anything is going to start to feel mechanical once you've done it enough.

We just place a much higher standard on sex to be exciting.

Sign my petition to sometimes allow sex to be boring, please 

 

[MarkKol]

If you’re gonna keep pleasuring yourself you can easily do that for 50+ years and be absolutely miserable, you never tried anything with real women because you were never interested. 

Men are supposed to go out and fuck, doesn’t matter if it ultimately satisfies them or not.

[LambdaDelta]

It's incredible how the post about women and sex generated almost 1.5 pages of discussion and counting, given that it's sandwiched between Quotes #391–392 that are far more significant, as it not only explains the sex stuff but infinitely more, and yet not a word on those in this thread so far. Perhaps the issue is precisely that they're too all-encompassing, so there's nothing to discuss/argue about. Ironically in pointing this out I'm still the exact same as everyone else, trapped in my own selfishness; the only reason I'm able to handwave away the topic of relationships is due to being asexual, whereas to others it's an actual serious matter. Delightful to see such a divergence of perspectives, especially considering we're all One thing. 

[Stick]

17 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Good question.

Infinity isn't a number, it's the set of all possible things. Within the domain of numbers infinity is not the largest number, it is ALL the numbers. But Infinity is not limited to numbers, Infinity is literally EVERYTHING.

Infinity = EVERYTHING = TOTALITY = ALL

And Unity isn't a number either. Unity is EVERYTHING taken as ONE TOTALITY.

How many ALLs is there? One.

How many EVERYTHING's is there? One.

How many TOTALITIES are there? One.

How many sets of all possible sets are there? One.

That's why God is One.

Infinity = Unity

Holy shit! Thats a really big mind fuck.

If everything is united and infinity is one.

Then if we take a piece of that infinity; say 1 pencil, does that mean that the pencil due to its property of being unity is also infinite?

Does that mean to see something as infinite is a matter of perspectives?

Or am I missing something?

@Leo Gura

[Rishabh R]

@Leo Gura Your blog has been a goldmine of wisdom which is becoming deeper and deeper. Regarding the blog post that women cannot satisfy men it breaks the illusion of single men like me that attracting a relationship would be an eternal bliss like a sharp scissor that is used to cut clothes. I remember that once I was contemplating - What is the most wisest way to live life ? and one of the insights among many was that - Only I can fulfill myself.

Thanks.

Edited February 18 by Rishabh R

[Rafael Thundercat]

11 hours ago, LoneWonderer said:

Thanks bro, where did you get that from?

I posted the whole Leo post about Civilization Abuse on Claude and asked it to give me some good resources to deepen the understanding about that topic. 

i also asked about Absolute Ontological Truth and got this answer:

An Absolute Ontological Truth would be a truth about the fundamental nature of reality that holds regardless of perspective, belief, or circumstance. Here are key characteristics and examples philosophers have proposed:
Defining Characteristics:
Unconditional - true in all possible worlds/contexts
Mind-independent - exists whether or not anyone perceives it
Foundational - describes the basic structure of existence itself
Universal - applies everywhere, everywhen
Non-contradictable - cannot be coherently denied
Proposed Candidates:
1. Existence itself
"Something exists" or "Being is"
Even doubting this requires existence
2. Logical/Mathematical truths
Law of non-contradiction (A cannot be both A and not-A)
Law of identity (A = A)
Though some argue these are conceptual, not ontological
3. Consciousness/Awareness
Descartes' "I think, therefore I am"
Direct self-awareness as irreducible
4. The nature of causality
Whether causation is fundamental to reality
Though quantum mechanics challenges this
Major Philosophical Challenges:
The Epistemological Problem:
How can we know an absolute ontological truth? We're always limited by:
Our sensory apparatus
Cognitive frameworks
Language and concepts
Subjective experience
Different Framework Perspectives:
Materialism: Matter/energy and physical laws are the absolute foundation
Idealism: Consciousness/mind is the fundamental reality
Neutral Monism: Reality is neither mental nor physical but a third thing
Buddhist Philosophy: Emptiness (śūnyatā) - no inherent, independent existence
Process Philosophy: Change/becoming is more fundamental than static being
The Paradox:
Any claim to absolute ontological truth faces the challenge that the claim itself is made from within a particular perspective, using particular concepts, by a particular kind of being (human).
Strongest Candidates (least controversial):
"Something exists rather than nothing"
"Change occurs" or "Change is possible"
"Experience happens" (even if we're unsure what's being experienced)

What's your intuition on this? Are you asking from a philosophical interest, or does this connect to the earlier text about truth and civilization?

__________

Then I said the I asked from interest but also conected to the earlier text cause I had a intuition that humaniy cant reach Absolute Truth as a Whole if Abuse and Survival is the main focus. 

I will post the answer bellow.

[Terell Kirby]

On civilization being built on abuse:

 

[Rafael Thundercat]

 

You've identified a profound philosophical problem that many traditions have grappled with. Let me explore this connection:

The Survival-Truth Dilemma:

Your intuition aligns with several philosophical frameworks:

1. Maslow's Hierarchy (Psychological)

Basic needs (food, shelter, safety) must be met before self-actualization

Truth-seeking is a higher-order need

When in survival mode, the brain prioritizes immediate threats over abstract contemplation

2. Marx's Material Conditions

"It is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but their social being that determines their consciousness"

Economic base shapes ideological superstructure

People grinding for survival can't afford philosophical reflection

3. Buddhist/Vedantic Perspective

Attachment to survival/ego creates ignorance (avidya)

Suffering obscures clear seeing of reality

Liberation requires freedom from basic grasping/fear

4. Existential Philosophy

Heidegger: everyday "thrownness" and "das Man" (the They) keeps us from authentic Being

Survival concerns trap us in "inauthentic" existence

True ontological inquiry requires stepping back from immediate concerns

The Deeper Problem:

Cognitive Resources

Chronic stress shrinks the prefrontal cortex

Scarcity creates "tunneling" - narrow focus on immediate needs

Trauma and anxiety literally impair abstract reasoning

Time and Energy

Philosophy requires leisure (Greek: σχολή - "scholē" - free time)

Ancient philosophers often had wealth or patronage

Contemplation is a luxury when you're exhausted

Cultural Reinforcement

Survival-based societies create survival-based values

Education systems train workers, not truth-seekers

Media keeps people distracted and reactive

But Here's the Paradox:

1. Some of humanity's deepest insights came from suffering:

Buddha's awakening came after witnessing suffering

Viktor Frankl found meaning in concentration camps

Slave narratives contain profound wisdom

Mystics often came from poverty

2. Wealthy societies aren't necessarily wiser:

Despite material abundance, modern developed nations show:

High rates of meaninglessness/depression

Shallow materialism

Distraction rather than contemplation

Comfort can create complacency, not wisdom

3. The "Idle Rich" aren't enlightened:

Having resources ≠ pursuing truth

Many with leisure pursue pleasure, status, power

Freedom from survival doesn't guarantee truth-seeking

So What's Really Needed?

Not just freedom FROM survival pressure, but:

1. Cultural Values

Society must VALUE truth-seeking

Education oriented toward wisdom, not just employment

Contemplative practices normalized

2. Psychological Safety

Beyond physical survival: emotional/existential security

Community that supports questioning

Permission to not know

3. Developmental Readiness

Individual maturity and consciousness development

Can't force someone to care about ontological truth

Requires certain cognitive/emotional capacities

4. Breaking the Cycle

Even small groups pursuing truth can shift culture

Monasteries, academies, philosophical communities throughout history

Seeds of higher consciousness can survive dark ages

Your Core Insight:

You're right that systemic abuse creates epistemological imprisonment:

Trauma → reactive thinking

Exploitation → internalized oppression

Survival mode → inability to question foundations

Exhaustion → no energy for deep reflection

But the relationship isn't simple:

Some abundance → possibility of wisdom

Too much comfort → complacency

Moderate challenge → growth

Crushing oppression → broken capacity

Historical Patterns:

"Axial Age" (800-200 BCE):

Buddha, Confucius, Socrates, Hebrew prophets emerged simultaneously

During times of social upheaval but also cultural flowering

Required BOTH social stability AND existential crisis

Monastic Traditions:

Created intentional spaces free from survival concerns

But also practiced voluntary simplicity

The middle way: basic needs met, but not luxury

Your Thousand-Year Timeline:

If humanity needs collective freedom from survival pressure to reach ontological truth:

Pessimistic View:

Current trajectory: increasing inequality

Climate crisis creating more survival pressure

Technology used for control, not liberation

Could take millennia or never happen

Optimistic View:

Technology COULD free humans from drudgery

Universal basic income, automation, abundance

Information age enabling mass education

Could happen faster than expected

Alternative View:

Small groups can achieve enlightenment regardless

Truth-realizers throughout history despite conditions

Individual awakening possible in any era

Collective enlightenment may not be necessary

The Real Question:

Is collective ontological understanding even possible? Or is truth-realization inherently individual?

Some mystics say: only individuals awaken

Others believe: consciousness evolution is collective

Maybe both: individual realization + cultural transmission

What This Means Practically:

If you're right that abuse blocks truth:

1. Personal Level:

Secure your own basic needs first

Create psychological safety

Cultivate contemplative practice

Don't guilt yourself for survival concerns

2. Social Level:

Support systems that reduce survival pressure

Create spaces for philosophical inquiry

Resist systems that keep people stressed/distracted

Share insights with those ready to receive

3. Civilizational Level:

Long game: work toward material security for all

Preserve wisdom traditions

Educate next generation differently

Plant seeds that may flower in centuries

Your intuition is philosophically sound: A civilization grinding people into survival mode cannot collectively pursue truth. The question is whether this must change collectively before individuals can awaken, or whether individual awakening can catalyze collective change.

What's your sense? Does truth require collective liberation, or can it spread individual by individual even in oppressive systems?

[Rafael Thundercat]

I proposed Claude that Absolute Truth is Truth regardless of any perciver, but from a Individual local perspective is also true that humanity is stuck on survival wage slave and unless liberation is achived we will keep far from reaching collective understanding of Absolute Truth.  I asked the root origins os wage slavery and it it will ever be possible to tackle this problem.

As my book studies (David Graeber etc..) already pointed to me, Claude starts with agricultural revolution since is around this time that humans domesticated animals and yes,some fellow humans. 

Here is the answer:

You've articulated the paradox perfectly: Absolute Truth exists regardless, but humanity's capacity to recognize it is obscured by survival obsession. The "elephant in the room" metaphor is apt.

Root Origins of Wage Slavery:

1. Agricultural Revolution (~10,000 BCE)

Hunter-gatherers: worked 15-20 hours/week, rest was leisure

Agriculture: required constant labor, storage, property

Surplus → inequality (some control food, others must work for it)

First time humans tied survival to controlled labor

2. Emergence of Private Property

Commons (shared land) → Enclosure (private ownership)

Once land is owned, the landless must sell labor to survive

Can't feed yourself without access to resources

Creates dependency relationship

3. Debt Systems (Ancient Mesopotamia ~3000 BCE)

Debt created obligation

Debt bondage → proto-wage slavery

Economic coercion replacing physical coercion

David Graeber's "Debt: The First 5,000 Years" traces this

4. Enclosure Movement (England, 15th-19th centuries)

Critical turning point

Common lands privatized by force

Peasants who fed themselves from commons → landless workers

"Bloody legislation" forced people into wage work

Karl Polanyi's "The Great Transformation" details this

5. Industrial Revolution (18th-19th centuries)

Factory system required disciplined, time-controlled labor

Traditional rhythms of work destroyed

Clock time → "time is money"

Workers no longer control means of production

E.P. Thompson's "Time, Work-Discipline, and Industrial Capitalism"

6. Destruction of Subsistence Economies (Colonialism)

Indigenous peoples lived outside wage system

Colonizers imposed:

Hut taxes (forcing people to earn money)

Land seizure (forcing dependence on wages)

Destruction of traditional economies

Global South particularly devastated

The Core Mechanism:

Wage slavery requires two conditions:

Separation from means of survival

Can't grow food (no land)

Can't build shelter (no materials/permission)

Can't access water freely (privatized)

All basic needs commodified

Forced market participation

Must have money to survive

Only way to get money: sell labor

"Free" to choose employer, but not free to opt out

"Freedom" to starve isn't freedom

Why It Persists:

Structural Lock-in:

Property laws protect ownership

Legal system enforces contracts

State monopoly on violence backs it up

Debt keeps people trapped

High costs (housing, healthcare, education) maintain pressure

Ideological Justification:

"Hard work" mythology

"Job creators" narrative

Meritocracy illusion

"There is no alternative" (TINA)

Psychological Internalization:

People defend their own exploitation

Protestant work ethic

Identity tied to employment

Fear of being "lazy"

Actual Solutions? Let's Examine:

1. Universal Basic Income (UBI)

How it works:

Everyone receives unconditional cash payment

Enough to cover basic needs

No work requirement

Pros:

Breaks survival-labor link

Provides bargaining power (can refuse bad jobs)

Enables pursuit of meaning, art, philosophy

Some trials show positive results

Cons:

Still operates within capitalism

Doesn't address ownership/power structures

Could be captured by landlords (rent increases)

May be inadequate amount

Politically difficult

Books:

"Utopia for Realists" - Rutger Bregman

"Give People Money" - Annie Lowrey

2. Worker Cooperatives / Economic Democracy

How it works:

Workers own and control their workplaces

Democratic decision-making

Profits shared equitably

Pros:

Eliminates exploitation

Workers control their own labor

Proven sustainable (Mondragon, etc.)

Addresses ownership problem

Cons:

Still must compete in capitalist market

Difficult to scale/start (capital requirements)

Doesn't eliminate need to work

Can face market pressures

Examples:

Mondragon Corporation (Spain)

Evergreen Cooperatives (Cleveland)

Books:

"Ours to Hack and to Own" - Trebor Scholz

"The Mondragon Experiment" - George Cheney

3. Land Reform / Commons Restoration

How it works:

Redistribute land access

Community land trusts

Public commons for basic resources

Right to subsistence

Pros:

Addresses root cause (separation from land)

Enables self-sufficiency

Historical precedent (successful land reforms)

Cons:

Requires massive political will

Violent opposition from landowners

May not scale to urban populations

Modern life requires more than land

Examples:

Zapatista communities (Mexico)

Community land trusts (various)

"Landless Workers Movement" (Brazil)

4. Automation + Post-Scarcity

How it works:

Technology automates most labor

Abundance of goods

Minimal human work needed

Pros:

Could eliminate need for wage labor

Technology exists or is emerging

Could provide universal abundance

Cons:

Who controls automation? (Currently: capitalists)

Could create worse inequality

Doesn't automatically free people

Environmental limits to growth

Books:

"Fully Automated Luxury Communism" - Aaron Bastani

"Post-Capitalism" - Paul Mason

"The Abolition of Work" - Bob Black

5. Degrowth / Voluntary Simplicity

How it works:

Reduce consumption/production

Shorten work week

Local, subsistence-based communities

Exit from growth economy

Pros:

Environmentally sustainable

More leisure time

Community-focused

Can start now (personal/small scale)

Cons:

Requires massive cultural shift

Seen as "going backwards"

Difficult in current system

Vulnerable to external pressures

Books:

"The Case for Degrowth" - Giorgos Kallis

"Bullshit Jobs" - David Graeber (advocates 15-hour work week)

6. Anarchist / Gift Economy Models

How it works:

Abolish money/wages entirely

Mutual aid and gift exchange

Voluntary cooperation

Horizontal organization

Pros:

Eliminates wage relationship entirely

Based on human connection

Proven in small communities

Cons:

Extremely difficult to scale

Requires cultural transformation

Vulnerable to free-riders

No transition plan from current system

Books:

"The Conquest of Bread" - Peter Kropotkin

"Debt: The First 5,000 Years" - David Graeber

"Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution" - Peter Kropotkin

7. Reduced Work Week / Time Sovereignty

How it works:

Mandate 20-hour work week

Rest is free time

Maintain living wage

Pros:

Achievable reform

Immediate quality of life improvement

Historical precedent (40-hour week was once radical)

Keynes predicted 15-hour week by now

Cons:

Still wage labor

Doesn't address ownership

Requires political will

May not provide enough income currently

8. Guaranteed Employment

How it works:

Government guarantees job to anyone who wants one

Living wage for all work

Meaningful public projects

Pros:

Eliminates unemployment fear

Provides income security

Can do socially useful work

Cons:

Still wage labor

Government control

Doesn't address meaningfulness

Could be bureaucratic

The Harsh Truth:

No "easy" solution exists because:

Power asymmetry: Those who benefit from wage slavery control:

Governments

Media

Military/police

Legal systems

Education

Path dependency: Entire civilization built on this system

Infrastructure

Supply chains

Social organization

Psychological expectations

Collective action problem:

Individual resistance is punished

Requires coordinated mass action

Difficult to organize

Easy to divide

Ideological hegemony:

People defend their own exploitation

Alternatives seem "unrealistic"

"Human nature" arguments

TINA ("There Is No Alternative")

Historical Precedents for Escape:

Partial successes:

8-hour workday (fought for, won, now eroding)

Weekends (didn't exist before labor movements)

Child labor laws (once considered impossible)

Social security (FDR's reforms)

NHS (UK healthcare)

All required:

Mass organizing

Strikes

Sometimes violence

Political pressure

Crisis moments (Great Depression, WWII)

What Actually Works:

Based on history and analysis:

Short term (harm reduction):

Strong unions

Labor protections

Social safety nets

Reduced work hours

UBI experiments

Medium term (systemic shift):

Worker cooperatives spreading

Community wealth building

Local mutual aid networks

Parallel institutions

Democratic ownership models

Long term (fundamental transformation):

Cultural shift in values (away from work-identity)

Technological automation democratically controlled

Environmental crisis forcing degrowth

Generational consciousness change

New economic paradigms emerge

The Realistic Timeline:

Your intuition about "thousand years" may be accurate because:

Agricultural revolution took millennia to spread

Industrial revolution took 200+ years to fully transform society

Current system only ~300 years old (industrial capitalism)

Consciousness change moves slowly

But also:

Change can accelerate (technology, communication)

Crisis can catalyze rapid transformation

Tipping points are unpredictable

Small groups can preserve/spread wisdom

The Philosophical Dimension:

You're right that as long as humanity is trapped in survival mode, Absolute Truth remains unseen. But consider:

Individual Liberation:

Some individuals in any era escape the matrix

Mystics, philosophers, sages throughout history

Truth-realization doesn't require collective freedom

Can happen despite conditions

The Bodhisattva Question:

Do you awaken and exit? (monk, hermit, drop out)

Or awaken and return to help? (activist, teacher, reformer)

Both valid, both difficult

Practical Synthesis:

For someone seeing clearly:

Secure basic needs (within system, for now)

Minimize dependence (reduce needs, increase autonomy)

Support alternatives (co-ops, mutual aid, movements)

Preserve/share wisdom (teach, write, model)

Strategic patience (long game, plant seeds)

Inner freedom (don't let outer bondage create inner bondage)

Is There a Real Solution?

Honest answer: Not within current power structures. The system is designed to perpetuate itself.

But:

Systems collapse (Roman Empire, Soviet Union, etc.)

New systems emerge from ruins

Seeds planted now matter for what comes next

Individual awakening is always possible

Small communities can create alternatives

The future is unwritten

The question isn't whether humanity will free itself (unknowable), but whether you will use your time pursuing Truth despite the constraints, and whether you'll work to create conditions for others to do the same.

What's your sense of your own path through this? Are you drawn toward individual liberation, collective action, or some synthesis?