Science Podcast Appearance Coming Soon

[UnbornTao]

21 minutes ago, Joshe said:

We can easily agree on the experience of chocolate because it's a tangible thing. The nature of experiences are not. With chocolate, we can point to the same object, confirm we're eating the same thing, compare notes with some confidence. "Infinite Love" has none of that.

Words cannot grasp experience of things in the abstract. So how can you know your experience of "infinite love" matches Leo's experience of it?

You can't, yet here you and many others are saying that you know EXACTLY what Leo means when he says "infinite love".

How do you know it was "infinite" and not just really big? Is it really big, "infinite" or boundless? These are different things. 

For all I know, I've experienced it myself but never put a label on it, because I'm not gonna map Leo's labels to my own experiences - that would be a mistake. 

I'm betting a high percentage of Leo's followers unquestioningly adopted the idea of "Alien Consciousness" as well. Saying things like "I can't wait to discover Alien Consciousness", as if they already know it's a real thing. Then, one day, you have a deep trip on 5meo and experience something that fits the label, then you show up on the forum talking about you know with 100% certainty you experienced Alien Consciousness. 

"You'd know if you knew" is a great self-sealing epistemological bubble.

Concept introduced -> pre-accepted -> experience interpreted through concept -> reported as confirmation.

No different from religion and cults.

I'm not knocking anyone for making this error. I made it myself with Leo's work when I was younger.

Wise indeed. 

[Oppositionless]

People have literally been saying God is love for like a bajillion years. I'm not saying just take them at face value but you'd have to be pretty dense to just dismiss it out of pocket.

Most of Leo's original ideas are about the relative domain. His spiritual ideas are pretty generic (in the best possible way).

Edited 6 hours ago by Oppositionless

[CARDOZZO]

What is love anyway? The Greeks had 8 kinds of love. 

The only pointer is your own direct experience. Words are myopic bits of biased humans.

Edited 5 hours ago by CARDOZZO

[Natasha Tori Maru]

13 minutes ago, CARDOZZO said:

What is love anyway?

This is bricking users brains if you ask me. There has been no enquiry into what is. The isness of love.

At the heart of the confusion.

huehuehue a pun, the self disgust is great

[UnbornTao]

36 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

As much as I love the topics discussed here, I care more about ones wellbeing than anything else 

Sure, but that's not my priority with these posts. 

Setting all that side, what's true? 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

16 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Sure, but that's not my priority with these posts. 

Setting all that side, what's true? 

That you are emotionally disturbed and need to cool it.

[UnbornTao]

21 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

That you are emotionally disturbed and need to cool it.

"Disturbed" is a strong word. You might even say passionate. In any case, don't you think Leo may at some point have gone "you jerk, shut up already" behind the keyboard? Or you? Come on. Haha. Or something along those lines, directed at whoever, at any point in time. 

"Images" and ideals of what it means to be "high-conscious" are just that - images. And this is an online forum. I mentioned pretension in the context of being willing to show one's experience as it is, rather than covering or suppressing it under a spiritual façade in order to appear a certain way. Impressions are a big topic, it seems, but that's for another time.

Anyhow, people's reactivity is their own problem. Now - what's true?

Edited 5 hours ago by UnbornTao

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Just now, UnbornTao said:

"Disturbed" is a strong word. You might even say passionate. In any case, don't you think Leo may at some point have gone "you jerk, shut up already" behind the keyboard? Or you? Come on. Haha. Or something along those lines. 

"Images" and ideals of what it means to be "high-conscious" are just that - images. And this is an online forum. I mentioned pretension in the context of being willing to show one's experience as it is, rather than covering or suppressing it under a spiritual façade in order to appear a certain way. Impressions are a big topic, it seems, but that's for another time.

Anyhow, people's reactivity is their own problem. Now - what's true?

Nice try.

[UnbornTao]

12 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Nice try.

Haha, yeah. 

People's problems are their own.

What's true? That's the goal here, at least to me. Not whether we like something or not.

Edited 5 hours ago by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

1 hour ago, CARDOZZO said:

What is love anyway?

🤩

Who doesn't love love? 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

10 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

What's true? 

What is love?

10 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

That's the goal here, at least to me. Not whether we like something or not.

It is interesting how you reject compassion.

[Joseph Maynor]

Absolute Love involves Feeling, and recognition of Unitive Relation IMO.  Like Truth it's hard to point to in words.

[UnbornTao]

26 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

What is love?

Something to get for oneself.

It is also the case that people delude themselves by choosing that as a question to "contemplate" in the first place, in that their goal is feeling good and improving their experience, and not uncovering whatever turns out to be really true. Very rarely, if ever, are people concerned with asking what pain or manipulation are. I wonder why.

It is asked with the preconception that it is absolute in mind, is it not? It is not really a genuine question based on wonder, but an attempt to validate a fantasy. The power of the mind is such that any preconception can be made to be perceived as "reality."

But hey, people benefit from believing in God - in emotional, psychological, and social ways. Maybe that's the case here too. But that ain't the same as going after what's true.

Quote

It is interesting how you reject compassion.

I suggest the principle of compassion is not the images one has of it. How it manifests is secondary to the principle itself.

Edited 4 hours ago by UnbornTao

[Natasha Tori Maru]

16 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Something to get for oneself.

Needs inquiry.

[UnbornTao]

15 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Needs inquiry.

Oh, yeah. Not fantasizing.

[Joseph Maynor]

11 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Oh, yeah. Not fantasizing.

Is there a hard distinction between inquiry and fantasy?

[UnbornTao]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

Is there a hard distinction between inquiry and fantasy?

You probably already make it to some degree.

Inquiry is an open investigation aimed at uncovering whatever is true, independent of one's preferences, desires, biases, and so on. Fantasizing, by contrast, can be understood as coming up with imaginary scenarios in one's mind - usually based on wants, biases, and subjectivity - often aimed at outcomes like feeling better, more powerful, or reassured. Whatever serves one's agenda. 

A scientific experiment versus belief in God might serve as a succinct way of contrasting these two activities. Not the best examples, but hopefully the point comes across.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

28 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Oh, yeah. Not fantasizing.

Why not inquire further?

[Joseph Maynor]

10 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

You probably already make it to some degree.

Inquiry is an open investigation aimed at uncovering whatever is true, independent of one's preferences, desires, biases, and so on. Fantasizing, by contrast, can be understood as coming up with imaginary scenarios in one's mind - usually based on wants, biases, and subjectivity - often aimed at outcomes like feeling better, more powerful, or reassured. Whatever serves one's agenda. 

A scientific experiment versus belief in God might serve as a succinct way of contrasting these two activities. Not the best examples, but hopefully the point comes across.

This sounds like the Promise of Science almost.

[UnbornTao]

1 minute ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This sounds like the Promise of Science almost.

Nice. The book's quite pricey, though