Exposing falsehood ≠ Truth

[OmniNaut]

A reflection for Leo and the tone he sets on his blog and in this forum.

For quite somewhile now, I feel a growing distain to open the blog and the forum. Although Leo openly points out a big deal of his work is exposing human falsehood which prevents you of reaching the Truth. It becomes apparent that it is the main tone on his blog, which for a long time carried over his more pessimistic tone on the forum as well (although lately it feels a bit more neutral, but he also refrains from replying to much).

The logical fallacy that I get from Leo's communication on his mission, is that exposing falsehood does not lead to Truth by itself. I know that Leo is aware of that, but it does not reflect on his blog subjects. He talks about Love and what it takes to reach Love, but rarely provides the good examples that can be found on Love, and yes they are there.

Where does the distain come from? Constant exposure to the negative aspect of humanity does not work well to elevate the tone and set a positive outlook for the future of humanity. It also feels the tone of the blog is replicated on the forum as well. As a lot of people here somehow look towards Leo as the tone setter, (consciously or unconsciously) and it's hard to find uplifting examples of the outlook on human existence in his communication on the blog and the forum.

Maybe it's more the INTP nature of Leo to focus on the factual nature of his work and thereby neglecting the more emotional nature.

Also I think Leo is to limited in his US centered approach. Although he exposes himself to a variety of YouTube media, this media is mostly filtered by the creator itself. This is the nature of human communication ofcourse, the further you get from the source the more noise there is.
Especially on international topics on his blog, which often is a video from a Westerner (American or European) looking through their (Western) POV. 

One of the most difficult tasks for a website is how to weigh your direction when it comes to satisfy the current user base, and from another perspective attracting new users.

Probably Leo is not directing to much in these kind of terms. But maybe something to think about. At some point the loyal follower see the mechanism that runs falsehood, by being exposed by so many examples. Which is exactly the goal of his approach, teaching you to see it on your own.

At that point the loyal follower has no reason to come back to the blog if the mechanism is exposed because it shows nothing new anymore. So at some point the loyal follower drops out. I wonder if he has enough metrics from his site to see what is going on, how many returning IP addresses compared to new IP addresses over time.

So my request is to mix in some positive stuff as well. How humanity is catering to love and truth, maybe not all has to be with a capital T, but it can balance the emotional side of the blog as well. And maybe a more positive mind set on the blog can change the tone on the forum as well.
+ A more neutral POV and letting go more of the US (Western) centered POV, especially when it comes international subjects.

 

@Leo Gura Not telling you how to run your site, just giving some honest feedback from my perspective and my journey when it comes to how I experience the blog (and forum).

Curious to see if I'm the only one.

[Joseph Maynor]

I think Love is more about accepting perspectives that differ from what we would prefer.  Sometimes we do cut relations too.  They we may reconcile differently.  We're all operating at different pacing in different areas of Creation.  There's no guarantee.  This is why Love has limits.

[OmniNaut]

6 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I think Love is more about accepting perspectives that differ from what we would prefer.  Sometimes we do cut relations too.  They we may reconcile differently.  We're all operating at different pacing in different areas of Creation.  There's no guarantee.  This is why Love has limits.

Yes that is a perspective. But providing feedback is also a form of love. All is relative can be answer, but it's not the only answer, which in itself is relativistic. 
If all is relativistic and all is love then my reply is love as well. 
If all is relativistic then there is no need for Leo's blog because falsehood is love as well.

Love is relativistic in Absolute truth, Love is not relativistic in relative truth. Which is a mind fuck.

[Miguel1]

I appreciate your perspective but I think it is simplistic and reductionist.

Leo posts plenty of ”positive” content, he has a series on How To Fall In Love With Life, and at the end of the day, deconstructing falsehood itself is Good, Positive.

[OmniNaut]

7 minutes ago, Miguel1 said:

I appreciate your perspective but I think it is simplistic and reductionist.

Leo posts plenty of ”positive” content, he has a series on How To Fall In Love With Life, and at the end of the day, deconstructing falsehood itself is Good, Positive.

I appreciate your perspective but your response is to simplistic and reductionistic. 

If you read carefully in my post, it acknowledge Leo's contribution to exposing falsehood.

 

That series is over 3 years old. I'm not reducing his approach just pointing out it's lopsided.

Edited 7 hours ago by OmniNaut

[Natasha Tori Maru]

How else can you arrive at truth without ruling out and deconstructing falsehood?

Genuinely asking - not necessarily disagreeing with perceived negativity. 

Leo can be a ranty man.

Edited 7 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Miguel1]

There’s plenty of people focusing their work around the positive stuff you are talking about, it’s in abundance everywhere.

Nobody is really focusing on deconstruction, to the extent Leo is focusing. That’s why he does it.

[OmniNaut]

Again it's not a critique towards exposing falsehood, it's a good thing. But the blog feels to much focused only on exposing falsehood.

 

Too much negative inputs will colour the mind of the reader. A more balanced approach and examples of finding Truth in positivity can also have a positive effect on the reader.

 

Not requesting to stop exposing falsehood just a more balanced take on it.

[Miguel1]

38 minutes ago, OmniNaut said:

Too much negative inputs will colour the mind of the reader.

Interesting. I find his heavy focus on deconstruction Beautiful, and utterly Positive. It’s the reason I follow his work. But yes, some focus on positive construction here and there is nice to have, which he does have.

But as Leo has pointed out many times, his work is not for everyone (read: fainted hearts).

I’ve been in the community for years and I’ve seen people manage to always find things about his work to complain about.

[OmniNaut]

People please this is not complaining, it's just a request.

My complaint is now that people are seeing this as a complaint. If you only can look at this kind of feedback as a complaint maybe it shows more of your interpretation then mine.

Are people here so stuck up that they can't tell the difference to sharing a perspective and feedback and complaining?

[oOo]

Contextual balance in contemplating of “Absence” in the context of “Something” is a useful frame for creatively thinking about truth, and the falsity that defines it. “To be everything that it is not” and the rest of that juxtaposition brings an aesthetic beauty to our process of integrating story with reality that I personally often miss, but want to really deepen my appreciation of. My systematic understandings and processes for phenomena are born out of what emotionally remains in my aesthetic appreciation of life, so I am meta-aware of how much wonder I am missing in my openness to truth as I am the rigour of the patterns I need to expand in characterising it.

In our experience of life, we are utterly bound by the principle of closure and their points, and this is at work in all our responses here. It takes time and patience to slowly learn how to traverse  the edges of understanding in peoples words to a level where perspectivism and creation becomes the goal over closure point of the prison we confine ourselves in when evaluating someone and the thoughts that endure when we create our perspective of them.

In modern culture, strategic informational breaths in become so incredibly important to refine, as we compensate by replacing broader and deeper explorative synthesis with the tip of the minds informational closure point that meets in the middle between a messy world and the inner order we want to create about it.

Outside of the many ways the representation of information can be abused by AI, on a practical level I use three AI’s now personally that I shift between everyday, Perplexity for verifying research, Claude for deeper thinking and coding, followed by CharGPT as an all around go to for more strategic conversation learning with the chat mode.

AI simulations habe radically altered our relationship with truth and the creative strategies we can utilise in interpreting it. I am modelling various methodological processes and models to determine the limits of my own understanding information through the scope and closure points it’s presented through and marking it as just as important as the credibility of any one piece of information itself. 

More than ever, truth is going to go through many abstract evolutions in how we conceptualise it’s reality. New markers like scope and closure weighed against absence through exploration are will become increasingly more advanced tools both in our reasoning and the way AI is going to be taught how to reason about information as well. 

The core of human informational appraisal is going to become less fact base and move more and more to a conversation about abstract aesthetic appreciation and what further limits we can explore to move the needle on paradigms rather than just reinforce pre-existing beliefs and systems. This is a self-evident consequence analogous to how planes gave rise to multiculturalism meets anti-racism and transgender appreciation for toddlers, the global market for thought itself will be defined by permutations that directly lead to practical conceptual benefits to cultural conversations that matter. And this is because as much as AI moves the needle on reducing time for research and fact verification, it reduces conversational time while placing pressure on evolving the quality of the conversations themselves as the gap between idea and execution has dramatically closed. This means implementation now has shifted executional lag through informational bias, to streamlined error checked thinking for truths that are closer to how far we can stretch reality, rather than just arriving at reality. Today, more than ever we want our bubbles broken, and if I were Leo, I would be more excited than ever to continue to master that endeavour as he steps out onto the digital stage to viewers who are ready to be sold the idea that they can become aliens themselves. This is what’s culturally understood from a western point of view as the shifting of the Overton window, in this case on truth, with the raw conceptual ingredients now being given the time to have extra subwoofers and spoilers added to their base machinery for those that take the right leverage points. This also includes our human brains to minds to greater nervous systems, as all three are shifting the conversation completely as well. There is probably for example a new person thats reached a high degree of enlightenment per day. Every epoch reached in a demographic, and another person that meets it, enriches the truth of its aesthetics for better or for worse, from black pilled rages to new age hippies that steal more things than people locked up in prison, to people that are on the right path towards pushing the needle on the closure points of truth. And those closure points are not only individual, but it’s higher demographic alone, as implied, wills the frontier between expansion snd contraction point, and that’s what will not only bring about human originality we never believed possible, the collective synthesis between persons, but just the higher quality conversations on truth from those relevant demographics that in return have far reaching conversations totally previously unimaginable. Today is the point in history where two diametrically opposed opposites get to run rampant more than any other time in history, utter ignorance and stupidity as people rely on AI to think every one of their thoughts to those enlightened ones that come together, have little ego to have to quiet in order to collaborate with not just people but now informational engines themselves, and bring both new food for the masses and new paradigms for the inspired to leap towards. 

For the first time ever, our relationship with machines have become just as important with our relationships with other people in understanding the nature of truth and our relationship to the live that invents it in our minds closure points. Balance defined by iteratively advanced compressed expansions on that conversation, now more than ever is the time to just have daily fun on the whiteboard honing our minds ability to bridge those connection points. Today’s cultural revolution here, will define the next epigenetic adaptive brain changes, along with scientific breakthroughs, more than any time in history. The ground beneath and the ceiling beneath the grammar of truth is shaking, and it’s revealing both a higher and lower level we can go to, with lateral thinking as our positional escape snd advance point as both a hatch and space shuttle entry.

@OmniNaut And a hello as well by the way there. For fun I recommend to stick a Mona Lisa over the top of your thoughts through an Inner AI MidJourney that creates novel abstractions, not just visuals or with visuals to artistically represent in new ways. Today more than ever we need and can create new genres in the arts but we are going to more than ever have that in the closure points that define our world models for the stories we makeup about truth and the futures we base our present movements on. That said, I wouldn’t underestimate Leo, he knows this and I am sure he is preparing for it. 

[Cred]

7 hours ago, OmniNaut said:

Where does the distain come from?

Leo is heavily oppressed by societ because of his neurodivergency and he is coping by putting himself on a pedastal and everyone else down.

If he would finally realize why and how he is being ostracised, he could be able make peace with it and develop a more balanced view of society

[Cred]

@OmniNaut Your mistake is that you have the same wrong assumptions as Leo.

You are correct that you point out the hypocracy of someone who says "exposing falsehood is truth" and "love is truth". But you come to the wrong conclusion that the former one must be the wrong one. It's actually the latter.

I'll not repeat a point I've already made so here we go:

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Cred

[Terell Kirby]

8 hours ago, OmniNaut said:

He talks about Love and what it takes to reach Love, but rarely provides the good examples that can be found on Love, and yes they are there.

Depends on how you define Love, the mistake is equating it to feel good human emotions-which is a bias of the human mind.

8 hours ago, OmniNaut said:

Constant exposure to the negative aspect of humanity does not work well to elevate the tone and set a positive outlook for the future of humanity.

I believe Leo has stated countless times that his aim is not set some positive outlook and validate human emotions. We are dealing with a teacher who places Truth and understanding of reality above the survival priorities of humanity.

@OmniNaut - these teachings can be hurtful if you are empathetic to human suffering as a result of coming to grips to the dark nature of survival and corruption that runs paramount in human social institutions and hiearchies.

It is important that you take care of your emotional well being. Instead of trying to change the teacher, in this case Leo, it may be better to ask yourself how much you can stomach-and respect your limits. I say this from experience as I've had to do the same at different points of doing this work. 

[OmniNaut]

27 minutes ago, Cred said:

@OmniNaut Your mistake is that you have the same wrong assumptions as Leo.

You are correct that you point out the hypocracy of someone who says "exposing falsehood is truth" and "love is truth". But you come to the wrong conclusion that the former one must be the wrong one. It's actually the latter.

I'll not repeat a point I've already made so here we go:

 

I'm not pointing out some hypocrisy from Leo. I appreciate his work. I did a lot of falsehood exploration myself, even before I read Leo's blog about it. 
It's not about the exploration of falsehood. It's just lopsided with exposing the negative side of humanity and human existence. There is a good side of humanity and human existence too, but it's barely shown. 
I can look past hypocrisy, because everyone is a hypocrite in a certain way. 
 

 

3 minutes ago, Terell Kirby said:

Depends on how you define Love, the mistake is equating it to feel good human emotions-which is a bias of the human mind.

I believe Leo has stated countless times that his aim is not set some positive outlook and validate human emotions. We are dealing with a teacher who places Truth and understanding of reality above the survival priorities of humanity.

@OmniNaut - these teachings can be hurtful if you are empathetic to human suffering as a result of coming to grips to the dark nature of survival and corruption that runs paramount in human social institutions and hiearchies.

It is important that you take care of your emotional well being. Instead of trying to change the teacher, in this case Leo, it may be better to ask yourself how much you can stomach-and respect your limits. I say this from experience as I've had to do the same at different points of doing this work. 

I don't want to change the teacher, just giving some feedback and a perspective

[OmniNaut]

Trust me I have seen the dark side of humanity in real life. Been to many dark places in person to see what is going on in the world. Not from a desk chair like others. 
I know about the falsehood, evil and hypocrisy of humans.

I understand where in the humans it comes from. I studied it in depth.

There is always falsehood to be found and to be exposed till the end of time, it will never end.

People one last time. 

Take off your assumption glasses and see my post as it is. Not a complaint, not trying to change the teacher, not pointing out hypocrisy. Just a perspective, he is free to do whatever he wants with it. It's his blog. 

Edited 44 minutes ago by OmniNaut

[Miguel1]

57 minutes ago, Cred said:

Leo is heavily oppressed by societ because of his neurodivergency and he is coping by putting himself on a pedastal and everyone else down.

You have to seriously reduce the amount of diagnosing you do here on people that you do not know.

[Cred]

51 minutes ago, Miguel1 said:

You have to seriously reduce the amount of diagnosing you do here on people that you do not know.

This is the best explaination for his rethoric I've found so far. I feel like it is relevant for this forum.

I know that my rethoric is intrusive. That's because exposing delusion is inherently intrusive.

If you have a more complete explaination than me or you have specific arguments against my claims I'd like to hear them.