Drama Alert! Another YTber is calling us a cult! 😈☦️

[Carl-Richard]

9 hours ago, Someone here said:

 Yes what the other guy told you . Leo also says you can have the same insights that he had. Is the “leader”treated as unquestionable authority here? Big no .

There is like a spectrum of the alleged authority of the leader:

• At the very top-end, nobody is like the leader and nobody will ever be like them. That's like the peak Heaven's Gate type cult (not sure how accurate this is, but you get the point).
• Then under that you have where nobody is like the leader currently but that may change or is promised as a possibility. That's where Actualized is at.
• Then you have where the leader does not treat themselves as supreme and there are other examples of the same level of realization or teachings (but they still claim to be pointing to an Absolute truth). That would be perhaps some contemporary non-duality communities (maybe Sadhguru, Spira, Tolle).
• Then you simply have leaders or communities that claim special knowledge that is not necessarily absolute (or the leader is just charismatic) and they draw people in and exist on the margins of society. Perhaps Charles Manson's cult.

Regardless of this, the point is that the more power is given to the leader, deliberately or not, the more cultish the dynamics become. The siloing from the larger society and the various psychological dynamics become stronger. And it doesn't matter that the concrete teachings are about independence of thought or becoming aware of self-bias or whatever clever and virtuous teachings that make the members feel like they're in control. The fact that the leader proclaims to be in that position of power, creates conflict with such teachings, and it will play on the members' psyches in pernicious ways. And such teachings will be used to protect the teacher. "You're just not openminded enough". "Be aware of your projections and biases". "You're too attached to your survival story". You can watch the Bentino testimonies for all this.

Cult dynamics are notoriously tricky and shifty and may play in large part under the surface in line with ego defense mechanisms of the members (suppress, deny, accommodate) and systemic effects across members (scapegoating, keeping the peace, maintaining group harmony, etc.). And again, the concrete teachings can create a false sense of security and even perpetuate the very cult dynamics they are purported to prevent.

Edited 1 hour ago by Carl-Richard

[Thought Art]

He is sloppy too, just taking from other YouTubers. Leo didn’t take 5meodmt to improve his health either He has been studying this stuff and awakening for a long time,.

I was on the forum during the Connor thing, I don’t think the two were ever close. Leo spoke to him only because he was a public figure clearly misusing psychedelics. 
 

Actualized is the worst cult ever because it teaches cult dismantling and deep self reflection, studying multiple sources etc.

The YouTuber lacks integrity because he just took almost point for point lines from another YouTube video. 
 

A YouTube channel teaching philosophy and spiritual ideas, psychedelics etc and a public forum isn’t a cult. People demonize and use theIr mind in sloppy way. 

Edited 1 hour ago by Thought Art

[Cred]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I'll add - authority. 

Humans love authority. Most don't want to admit it, let alone recognise it! 

Normal people, in the sense of people who are not obsessed with truth, like to get told what they are supposed to do since it saves them energy not having to make a decision every time. 

They prefer to invest energy into relationships, happiness and meaning rather than epistemology and there is nothing wrong with that.

Authority is just one way that can be provided but it's not the only way.

The big tragedy of humanity is that the people who are actually qualified to tell people what to do are the epistemology people but they are too busy with theory and isolation to do that, so that at the end the only people who end up doing it are idiots and narcissists.

Edited 1 hour ago by Cred

[LoneWonderer]

@Thought Art Hey bro welcome back!

[Carl-Richard]

51 minutes ago, Cred said:

Normal people, in the sense of people who are not obsessed with truth, like to get told what they are supposed to do since it saves them energy not having to make a decision every time. 

They prefer to invest energy into relationships, happiness and meaning rather than epistemology and there is nothing wrong with that.

Authority is just one way that can be provided but it's not the only way.

My stepdad gets so angry when I start talking about environmental toxins in fish and he's like "I simply follow the recommendations from the institute of public health and they say we can eat fish; instead of doing my own research, I just trust the 1000s of scientists who have already done the research and have done it better than I could ever do on my own". (It's not that simple by the way; he has probably not read any of the more specific recommendations that deal with contamination of e.g. self-caught fish and fish organ meats, avoiding certain species of fish during pregnancy).

Meanwhile I'm like "hey, I just use it as a hypothesis for why I feel tired after eating cod and not salmon, and the institute of public health doesn't have a specific answer for that, so then I have to do my own research". He's like computing me talking about contaminants in the food he likes as "do not eat fish". He is really sharp and quick in a certain way, but he lacks any and all finesse and nuance sometimes. Businessman, super concerned about being pragmatic and forward-moving, getting results, not so much about getting to the bottom of things. It's like a complete clash, my entire being threatens his entire existence lol.

Also, the way the institutes settle on a recommendation depends on cut-off values for what they consider to be safe, and those rely mostly on studies on developmental deficits (neurological and behavioral) in children (and sperm quality lol). There is probably no way they would capture the issues I'm concerned about like acute post-meal effects on cognition and performance and general energy levels (in adults, let alone children). Yeah ok, if you don't eat more than two portions of fatty fish per week, you won't be "brain damaged" per the definition of the institute, but what about say a 10%-30% acute drop in working memory performance?

Edited 15 minutes ago by Carl-Richard

[Natasha Tori Maru]

9 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

those rely mostly on studies on developmental deficits (neurological and behavioral) in children (and sperm quality )

They should really be looking at womens eggs too 🤔

 

[Carl-Richard]

4 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

They should really be looking at womens eggs too 🤔

Phuack wymyn - Norwegian Institute of Public Health (and the literature they're basing it on 🧐).

Edited 9 minutes ago by Carl-Richard