Leo's DemystifySci Podcast Appearance

[Sincerity]

6 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You understand that there are infinite Infinities?

No?

Admittedly, Infinity of Gods is not fully fleshed out for me. I’m still uncovering it.

For me, it’s been this naggling sense for a long time during my trips that I can’t fully „reject” Others - while also realizing solipsism at the same time. And with more and more trips I’ve been letting that insight into my consciousness more.

So for me it’s been kind of a squaring of Solipsism + Others Exist. Which in itself is an amazing joke and paradox (but also not really a paradox).

But those Others are probably completely separate for me. I don’t yet have a good grasp of „Them” - I don’t know whether there’s a possibility for an interaction, I haven’t made any sort of connection like you described, even an imagined one. I’m sure it’d still all be through Me though. But yeah, this understanding is still incomplete. Work-in-progress.

I actually rewatched your Infinity of Gods video 3 days ago - last time I watched it when it released I think. A lot of it resonated. Though my awakenings regarding it were still reached organically, not really remembering what you said there.

[AerisVahnEphelia]

Just now, Sincerity said:

Admittedly, Infinity of Gods is not fully fleshed out for me. I’m still uncovering it.

For me, it’s been this naggling sense for a long time during my trips that I can’t fully „reject” Others - while also realizing solipsism at the same time. And with more and more trips I’ve been letting that insight into my consciousness more.

So for me it’s been kind of a squaring of Solipsism + Others Exist. Which in itself is an amazing joke and paradox (but also not really a paradox).

But those Others are probably completely separate for me. I don’t yet have a good grasp of „Them” - I don’t know whether there’s a possibility for an interaction, I haven’t made any sort of connection like you described, even an imagined one. I’m sure it’d still all be through Me though. But yeah, this understanding is still incomplete. Work-in-progress.

I actually rewatched your Infinity of Gods video 3 days ago - last time I watched it when it released I think. A lot of it resonated. Though my awakenings regarding it were still reached organically, not really remembering what you said there.

At the ultimate level solipsism is a construct, others is a construct.
what is, is what is coming to you.

You cannot even choose to be in "solipsism" or with others, you're in the state that god put you in.
 

ha subtle nothing, brushing wind

[Carl-Richard]

26 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You understand that there are infinite Infinities?

No?

This is the crux of the previous issue I raised: you're invoking unnecessary conceptual entities (if your aim is to be precise, concise). "Infinite infinities" is not a concise presentation of what infinity is.

The way you explained infinity in the second interview was more concise: "In truth, there is only one thing: there is an infinite field of consciousness, which is infinity itself, which contains the entire possibility space of anything that can ever be imagined or can exist. And this infinity is God". That's perfectly concise. When you start adding infinity to the concept of God again, you're just adding unnecessary fat.

And the way you go about adding infinity to God in the Infinity of Gods video contains a logical error: you have to assume there is something outside of God to add something outside of God. If God is everything that could possibly exist, you can't do that. That's more than just being imprecise or inconcise. That's just being logically incoherent. That is the true signal for when you're really just waffling about something which is not needed.

Edited 19 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Sincerity]

1 minute ago, Carl-Richard said:

And the way you go about adding infinity to God in the Infinity of Gods video contains a logical error: you have to assume there is something outside of God to add something outside of God. If God is everything that could possibly exist, you can't do that. That's more than just being imprecise or inconcise. That's just being logically incoherent. That is the true signal for when you're really just waffling about something which is not needed.

There’s zero logical error. You just have to get it - both solipsism and the other insight.

Both can be (and are) true. God is mysterious.

[Carl-Richard]

9 minutes ago, Sincerity said:

There’s zero logical error. You just have to get it - both solipsism and the other insight.

Both can be (and are) true. God is mysterious.

You're in a conceptual web of lies. You can have multiple entities inside infinity already. No need to call them "Gods". It's just fat.

Edited 19 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Kastrup is not going to lead them to God. It will just be academic philosophy.

Increased acceptance for idealism/God in academia -> increased acceptance for idealism/God in society. It's not a very hard jump to make. That's why you are on the podcast after all.

Edited 19 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Elliott]

1 minute ago, Carl-Richard said:

You're in a conceptual web of lies. You can have multiple entities inside infinity already. No need to call them "Gods". It's just fat.

I found this enlightened master explains it well for you

 

☺️

[Joseph Maynor]

Why isn't the second video (part 2) showing up on their channel?

[PolyPeter]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

Why isn't the second video (part 2) showing up on their channel?

it is uploaded, but I think they might have hidden it for now

[Carl-Richard]

3 minutes ago, Elliott said:

I found this enlightened master explains it well for you

 

☺️

Sadhguru the Hindu supremacist 💀

[UnbornTao]

It's funny how infinity is actually held relatively.

You understand that infinit-ies is referring to something relative, no?

To Infinity and beyond.

[PolyPeter]

12 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

No need to call them "Gods"

What could possibly limit God from imagining infinite instances of itself, all distinct and disjoint from each other, total and absolute onto themselves?

There cannot be such a limit for God, therefore, it is possible. And if you think deeper, it is the case.

Edited 19 hours ago by PolyPeter

[Carl-Richard]

2 minutes ago, PolyPeter said:

What could possibly limit God from imagining infinites instances of itself, al distinct and disjoint from each other, total and absolute onto themselves?

There cannot be such a limit for God, therefore, it is possible. And if you think deeper, it is the case.

Oh wow, yeah, how can God imagine a boundary?

[Leo Gura]

25 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

"Infinite infinities" is not a concise presentation of what infinity is.

I am speaking of an insight which virtually everyone is missing.

It takes a lot of work to realize what Infinity is. You cut that work out and flatten the process so people will never have the insight I am speaking of.

Edited 19 hours ago by Leo Gura

[PolyPeter]

1 minute ago, Carl-Richard said:

Oh wow, yeah, how can God imagine a boundary?

directly

[UnbornTao]

It isn't "Infinity" when something is said to be beyond it.

There has to be one thing that is not another for the distinction of 'beyond' to be made. This is to point out that when you talk of things in this way, it might not be enlightenment. 

And voilà - bullshit uncovered.

Edited 1 hour ago by UnbornTao

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

And voilà - bullshit uncovered.

Look, dude. You are being so arrogant. You not hearing what I am telling you: there is specific insight which is being missed.

If you think you got Infinity all figured out, you're kidding yourself. There's way more to it than anyone comprehends.

I am guiding you towards real insight, not stories you can debunk.

Edited 19 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Carl-Richard]

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I am speaking of an insight which virtually everyone is missing.

It takes a lot of to realize what Infinity is.

You can keep adding layers on the onion of infinity. It's not a deep insight. I get like the general idea of making "God" a layer of the onion, and adding more layers (it's a quite expansive way of doing it), but that too is honestly not a deep insight, which is why I'm not particularly impressed by it (aside for the linguistic issues).

Edited 19 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[PolyPeter]

4 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

It isn’t "Infinity" when something is said to be beyond it.

this is precisely the reason why there is an absolute infinity, and within this infinity, all the distinct infinities. 

what makes them distinct is the imagining of a limit between them

this imagining is absolute infinity's imagining

 

We as humans can think of multiple infinities, think of the different infinites of numbers, nested within eachother

 

What if God can do the same, but on the cosmic scale? 

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's not a deep insight.

That's where you are totally wrong. But have it your way.

Edited 19 hours ago by Leo Gura