What are the odds that you, an average dude, is Tier 2? Not very high.

[Daniel Balan]

Guys you can refresh your memory about what stage Yellow entails here: 

 

[Nivsch]

1 hour ago, Daniel Balan said:

Guys you can refresh your memory about what stage Yellow entails here: 

 

🥰

[Carl-Richard]

6 hours ago, Nilsi said:

Of course there are tradeoffs. If you want your essentialist metaphysics - Plato, Kant, Freud, Lacan, Jung, all that good stuff - go ahead. Neither side is more “true.” Which doesn’t mean there’s no truth, btw.

Just don’t come at me with your “both/and” bullshit. Sooner or later, reality will force your hand. When shit hits the fan, you’ll know exactly which God you’re praying to. That’s the thing about metaphysics - you don’t get to not choose.

"Choose your reductionist poison" - probably something Bernardo Kastrup has said. What he has actually said is that to explain something is to reduce it to something else. So it's all really reductionism. It's just some explanations are more reductionistic than others (e.g. explaining everything in terms of one thing, which is ironically what reducing everything to "differences" is ).

Edited April 12 by Carl-Richard

[aurum]

19 hours ago, LordFall said:

@aurum I don't think it's possible to live in isolation of effect meaning if you are truly conscious and have reached stage green and above then you will work on the worlds problems as they are our collective consciousness's problems. The idea of a stage turquoise dude meditating in a cave is an incorrect absorption of the lower stages and basically narcissism ala osho.

I'm saying beware of your expectations.

The devil is in what you expect.

[aurum]

19 hours ago, BlueOak said:

Being what we are calling tier 2 here is being reflected by others as proactive. Which I understand from a forum founded on personal development, but its a non neutral bias.  Elevation of consciousness doesn't make someone more proactive by default.

I didn't understand what point you were trying to make here.

Explain it again?

[aurum]

12 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Probably not very accurate, but I'm always trying my best to talk about the model on its own terms (or its creators terms). If you bring too much of your own interpretation into it, you are not talking about the model anymore but yourself.

Fair enough. I don't so much mind bringing in interpretation though.

My hunch is they are overestimating the amount of people at Tier 2. 1% at Yellow seems way too high for the global population in particular. But it would be great if we could get more data.

[Carl-Richard]

I also want to bring up another point about the role of identity (and survival) that is really obvious but seemingly often forgotten when interpreting SD:

Take somebody like Ben Shapiro. He is often painted as Blue or Orange. I severely doubt he isn't able to grasp what SD is. I also doubt he is unable to really understand what the progressive/"Green" ideas he is fighting against are. He has read a lot, he knows what post-modernism is, what post-structuralism is, all these philosophical underpinnings that supposedly spawned Green. Yet his identity, his upbringing, his attachments, his biases, lies with Blue and Orange values, politics and way of life.

Same with someone like Chris Langan, who I could also see somebody paint as Blue or Orange, with his support for Trump and general conservative views. He is a god damned panentheist that talks about the connections between Hindun and Christian notions of God! He has his own metaphysical hyper-model that puts "cognition" at the bottom of reality (it's in the name; "C"TMU). His context and construct awareness is millennia ahead of the average 18 year old stoner on this forum that self-proclaims knowledge of SD (I'm talking about me from the past of course).

Then you have the juicy examples, like the plight of Jordan Peterson (1) and more recently Elon Musk (2) who Leo funnily decided to "demote" from his list of examples of Yellow:

1. How could this be, that a highly credentialed professor of psychology, who has made it essentially his life's work to study the metaphorical interpretation of religious texts and connect them to insights in modern psychology and science, who claims to have studied post-modernism and cannot stop talking about it, who is routinely and ironically even called a post-modernist by many of his critics (both sincerely and tongue in cheek), could "fall" to the depths of Blue political punditry?
   
   Not a lack of understanding, but of course, identity and survival! He was even crowned as one of the promising spearheads of the "intellectual dark web", which Wilber himself called a potential catalyst for widespread Tier 2. Then he became severely ill, almost died and came back noticeably impaired and with a strong financial and power incentive to stamp out the wokeness that had plunged him into worldwide fame and that had also cost him his academic career and even his clinical license.
    
2. How could this be, that a geeky tech billionaire who has fixated on futurist fantasies for humanity for most of his career and has made rather successful steps in that direction (more than anybody else, but yes, granted giants flops, broken promises and failed predictions) could indeed fall to the depths of not just Blue punditry but frankly Red-ish monarchy? Identity and survival! Not a lack of understanding. Some say his sole motivation for funding the Trump campaign was to "destroy the woke mind virus" that allegedly had "claimed the life" of his then son and now daughter.

And of course, how can we explain the 18 year old forum dwellers that preach the Yellow doctrine? Identity and survival. Identity and survival directs your focus, what you find important, and it can be largely orthogonal to pure intellectual understanding or even organic "SD development" (which frankly is a very simplistic and yes reductionistic model which has been elaborated and expanded upon by other thinkers like Wilber and my favorite Hanzi Freinacht).

Just in general, I think identity and survival explains so much of what we see around us and also where staircase models don't fare as well. I was personally just an inch away from going down the rabbit hole of ethnonationalism as an 17-18 year old. I starkly remember standing at a spiritual crossroads and choosing one over the other; the familiar values of my social democrat upbringing, or the new and exciting, challenging and transgressive tribal taunts of my privileged brothers. I could've been one of the guys I almost banned from this forum for repeatedly rubbing in people's faces that Nick Fuentes is supposedly a perfectly swell guy.

So often, it's best to let the obvious points come to the surface instead of letting the cognitive dissonance from an overly simplistic model reign with its "totalitarian" grasp on your mind ( @Nilsi ).

Edited April 12 by Carl-Richard

[zurew]

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Just in general, I think identity and survival explains so much of what we see around us and also where staircase models don't fare as well. I was personally just an inch away from going down the rabbit hole of ethnonationalism as an 17-18 year old.

Yeah, I think people here often times confuse having the "correct" take with level of development.

I dont know if you have seen that convo, but this kind of goes back to the morally lucky convo Destiny had with Rem about Hasan. It was almost exactly was you said there - the reason why you(in that case Hasan) is not a neo-nazi is not because of your level of development or because you actually reasoned your way there on your own , but because you were lucky that your close environment indoctrinated you with beliefs that we collectively take to be more acceptable and correct.

"If you are a very good reasoner and you have the ability to synthesize and to juggle mutliple perspectives towards an acceptable moral and value system that is aligned with mine - you are highly developed and very much above orange and at least yellow , but if all the same things apply except the fact that you have a different moral and value system you are stuck in orange at best".

[AION]

I think people understand SD the wrong way. One isn’t just purely SD yellow or whatever. 

More correct way of seeing it is to see every person as a mosaic with different colors of light. Some are dominant SD yellow and some or SD blue. 

But all have a combo of the lower denominations. So even if you are SD yellow you still have the survival of beige, although very dimmed. 

Most beautiful mosaic is a good color integration and combination of the lower lights. A perfectly balanced vortex of mosaic light. Which is very rare to encounter. And most people won’t appreciate such a person in the same way a pig won’t value pearls. 

Edited April 12 by AION

[zurew]

5 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

"Choose your reductionist poison" - probably something Bernardo Kastrup has said. What he has actually said is that to explain something is to reduce it to something else. So it's all really reductionism.

That way of using those words seem to be wildly misleading and inappropriate in most contexts.

 

When you give for example a causal explanation, you dont suddenly provide a new substance to thing that is being explained .

"Why are you drunk? Well, because I drank 10 beers" - did I provide 'drinking acohol' metaphysics to being drunk? - that question doesn't make much sense.

Or another example would be saying that the reason why matter exists is because God created matter - that doesn't mean though that God is made of matter.

 

John Vervaeke has a  metaphysics that very clearly don't buy into the idea that things can be exhaustively explained by or that things can be reduce to their simpler/smaller components .

Edited April 12 by zurew

[BlueOak]

5 hours ago, aurum said:

I didn't understand what point you were trying to make here.

Explain it again?

Sure. 

This forum is a personal development forum, so by its nature there are proactive people here.
When people speak about tier 2, they are saying these people will change the world, or they will proactively fix things.

This isn't necessarily true of the wider population. Someone could still sit in a cave as what people call a tier 2 personality. I was agreeing with your point, and trying to add to it.

Edited April 12 by BlueOak

[Leo Gura]

Changing the world is not what defines Tier 2.

Tier 1 changes the world plenty. Tier 1 has way more power to change the world.

Musk will change much more of the world than me. But I am more cognitively developed than him.

Edited April 12 by Leo Gura

[ExploringReality]

@Leo Gura

Welcome to the UFC 😁 

This is what tier 5 God-Mode Activation looks like ladies and gentlemen.

Edited April 12 by ExploringReality

[zurew]

@Leo Gura Where do you put Jordan Hall?

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, zurew said:

@Leo Gura Where do you put Jordan Hall?

Tier 2 for sure

[Carl-Richard]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Changing the world is not what defines Tier 2.

Tier 1 changes the world plenty. Tier 1 has way more power to change the world.

Musk will change much more of the world than me. But I am more cognitively developed than him.

Why did you put Elon Musk in Tier 2 initially? What changed?

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Why did you put Elon Musk in Tier 2 initially? What changed?

He is a deep and visionary thinker within tech and business.

[Carl-Richard]

7 hours ago, zurew said:

That way of using those words seem to be wildly misleading and inappropriate in most contexts.

 

When you give for example a causal explanation, you dont suddenly provide a new substance to thing that is being explained .

"Why are you drunk? Well, because I drank 10 beers" - did I provide 'drinking acohol' metaphysics to being drunk? - that question doesn't make much sense.

Or another example would be saying that the reason why matter exists is because God created matter - that doesn't mean though that God is made of matter.

 

John Vervaeke has a  metaphysics that very clearly don't buy into the idea that things can be exhaustively explained by or that things can be reduce to their simpler/smaller components .

You got drunk because alcohol binds to your GABAA receptors, or because it invades all the cells in your body including your brain responsible for movement and higher cognitive functions, or because you wanted to have fun that night, or because you conformed to the social pressure to drink, or because you wanted to numb yourself to emotional pain, etc. 

You can explain it in many ways, and the point of calling it a reduction is that each of the ways are partial and often somewhat unitary (something gets reduced to "one thing"). You take the infinite complexity of reality and reduce it down to a specific structure. Whether or not your reduction base contains many units or notions like top-down causality, there is still a reduction happening.

Edited April 12 by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

He is a deep and visionary thinker within tech and business.

Which did not change, or did it?

[AION]

Elon Musk was more SD yellow than SD green. He was actually in between in the twilight zone until regressive authoritarian policies of SD green pulled him back out of necessity. He still has the integral mind which is most important and I believe he will revise his political stance before the end.