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

[Carl-Richard]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

@Carl-Richard I will throw every human under the bus on epistemology. If you don't like it, tough.

Along with the "proper definition created by cult researcher and cult deprogramming expert Steven Hassan".

[Leo Gura]

Steven Hassan is not teaching epistemology. He is teaching about cults. And his teachings are spot-on.

If you want to actually understand what a cult is, read his book.

Edited 15 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Osaid]

If a cult is "excessive admiration towards a single group leader", which seems to be the standard definition, then I think deception and manipulation is inherent in maintaining a hierarchy like that.

The word cult is apt, but like many other psychological terms, it is co-opted and slung around for shallow insults by the majority, which causes it to lose its meaning.

The most powerful words have lost their meaning in this way, like God, justice, love, etc., because using such words is an easy way to appear powerful.

[Lyubov]

I don’t think this place is a cult as of now. As far as I know Leo earns shit from us and isn’t looking for girls to shag from here (he deleted the dating blog post quickly after it went up). We will see what this place turns into if those retreats take off. 

I do think this community and Leo’s style is dangerous for mentally unstable people though. And I think when his channel was mostly self help stuff but then transitioned pretty quickly into psychedelics/spirituality, it created a pretty dangerous pipeline into a ecosystem with poor support and resources for mentally unstable people.

 

[zurew]

 Leo still uses this confused talk  about "proper" definitions.

There is no such a thing as a "proper" definition (you can define any fucking term, in any fucking way you like and there is no law of the universe that tells you about what any given term is supposed to mean irrespective of use), but there is such a thing as investigating and firguring out how a given word is used by a given group of people (and yes, you can empirically investigate how society broadly uses a given term or how experts who study that given area use the  term).

But we can just drop the confused "proper definition" talk and just lay down multiple different definitions and then give an analysis under which ones actualized.org would be considered a cult (assuming Leo and people give more fuck about substance, than about getting lost in semantics). 

 

 

For instance using this definition:

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

A cult is a fringe group that uses deliberate mind control techniques to extract money, sex, and power from its user base. A cult is about abusing and exploiting its members in a pyramid like structure

I dont think even Heaven's gate would fall under this. It seems to be the case that Marshall Applewhite genuinely believed his own bullshit (he literally unalived himself along with the other members).

So under your use of the term 'cult' , Heaven's gate wasnt a cult.

 

 

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I will throw every human under the bus on epistemology. If you don't like it, tough.

I am the standard of what counts as proper epistemology.

if you are the standard of what counts as "proper epistemology" then we are fucked. If other people would apply the lack of rigor that you apply to make sense of the world and to reach conclusions about things, then we wouldnt get anywhere.

If treating the conclusions drawn from very weak inductive inferences about other people’s knowledge, experience, or awakening with absolute certainty counts as "proper" epistemology, then hundreds of millions of people on Earth already qualify as examples of "proper" epistemology. 

Like you unironically have a "God revealed to me that you are wrong and dumb" kind of epistemology.

And just to be very clear - you still have 0 reply to the issues that I and others have pointed out about the limitations of the mystic kind of epistemology and you have never ever replied to those and just brush them off or just simply ignore them (as if that would be a substantive reply to the issues that are brought up).

You are in a constant cycle of "of course I can be wrong" when pressed, and when not pressed - you immediately pivot back to "of course im the standard of proper epistemology, and Im more right than everyone else and all of you fuckers are completely wrong and have no fucking clue what you guys are talking about"

 

 

Also the double standards that you use and that you expect about how other should treat you and your owrk vs how you treat others and their work  is still very cute:

You expect and require other people to always run with such an interpretation of your statements and your work and your behavior, where you look the best and where you never contradict yourself and where there isn't any negative entailments to what you are saying that you would be uncomfortable with, but when it comes to you doing the evaluation of what other people are saying or what the entailment of their work is , then you dont do your most basic due diligence to try to check or reinterpret what they meant by certain statements.

When you interpret statements and the work of other people, you either project the most uncharitable and worst interpretations on their statements under which interpretation their statments become either obviously false  or insanely inplausible or just simply dumb ; or you just simply force your own frame and own use of words on their work and their statements (again your confused "proper" definition view in action)  and then pretend that they used those word the exact same way as you do (this is btw another sign that you are nowhere near the system thinker you think you are - you are extremely rigid and unsophisticated ,when it comes to entertaining alternative positions and alternative interpretations of things).

 

You mistake your lack of capability to entertain multiple different interpretations and hypotheses at the same time and you forcing your one and only understood frame on everything  with you thinking for yourself and being sovereign.

 

So what we are left with is something like:  

if anyone ever thinks that Leo Gura has ever contradicted himself or if anyone thinks that you ever said anything dumb or false, then your reply will be "the only reason why you interpreted my statements that way is because you are not intelligent enough to see that im right or that I was right, and of course and its obviously true, that all of my past statements has to be interpreted in a way under which what I said is true and under which there isn't any such entailment or consequence that I would be even remotely uncomfortable with"

If you have a conclusion that contradicts Leo Gura's view of things, then you better do more spiritual work or more psychedelics, because its impossible that the most awake person in the Universe is wrong and that there is someone who is more right about something related to spirituality and if you think that its possible that there is someone who is more awake than Leo, then you are just dumb and not intelligent enough to see the obvious truth.

Should Leo Gura do more work and should Leo Gura entertain that he shouldnt "settle" all disagreements about spirituality with "you are wrong , im right, do more work" , naaaah, the dude is already awake and knows his shit better than you do.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by zurew

[Someone here]

19 hours ago, Lyubov said:

Leo is honestly super autistic and lacks maturity and wisdom

You are joking or trying to come off edgy right ? 
 

19 hours ago, Lyubov said:

Leo earns shit from us

you wanna him to work for free? 

Edited 5 hours ago by Someone here

[UnbornTao]

 

[No1Here2c]

So guys it turns out after all my research that McDonald's is a cult. McDonald's uses mind control techniques. The alluring scent, coupons, rewards, low unbeatable prices. I mean if that doesn't reek of cult im not sure what does.

They're definitely a cult. Like seriously this time. A definite cult.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by No1Here2c

[zurew]

The first reason why atualized.org is not cult, is because you can disagree with the leader, its just that you should  do infinitely more work as long as you disagree with the leader and your best bet of being wrong is disagreeing with the leader and you are not open minded if you think that you are more right than the leader.

The second reason why actualized.org is not a cult is because the focus is not on the leader, but on the work itself , its just that if you do the work and you come to a different conclusion than the leader ( then again, you did something wrong and you should do more work as long as you have a different view than the leader). Again, just focus on the work and not on the leader. Have you heard btw, that the leader guy is the most awake person in the Universe? 

 

Edited 42 minutes ago by zurew