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

[Wilhelm44]

2 minutes ago, zurew said:

Sure if you are looking for an explicit phrase where he explicitly claims to be the most conscious being in the universe, then I cant show you that, what I can show you again is the general sovereingty undermining attitude where he consistently places himself above you and others.

Not sure what this establishes though and also not sure what the practical difference is between saying that im the most conscious being in the universe and im am the standard of epistemology. 

You seem to implying that a lack of thread created by him implies that he doesnt hold to the exact same sentiment anymore ,even though again I can show you many 2026 posts where he disses other actualized members and where he implies that other teachers wont get you to where he can get you and where he specifically target other guru and tell you that they are wrong or not advanced enough.

Still, claiming to be the best in your field, doesn't mean it's a cult.

[Thought Art]

It’s his school bro… it’s subtle but you want your opinions to be above his own. Good luck with your truth seeking. 

[zurew]

52 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Still, claiming to be the best in your field, doesn't mean it's a cult.

I think you missed a cute relevant context there - "Im the standard of epistemology" was literally replied  to establish authority over what should and should not be considered a cult. He didnt just say that you are wrong about cults, he implied that he is literally the proper foundation from which it can be accurately assessed what should and should be not considered a cult.

There is a difference between saying "I disagree with you and I think im right" and between saying that "you are so mentally impoverished that you cant even begin to understand what standards or methods are needed to judge whether something is a cult or not, so let me be that standard and dicatate and control all of  that shit"

Again this goes back to there not being any independent norms and standards from him - He wants to be  standard that tells you your level of development, he wants to be the standard that tells you whether you are wrong or not , he wants to be the standard that tells what is and what is not cult, he wants to be  the standard that can tell you whether he himself is a cult leader or not etc.

Edited 9 hours ago by zurew

[Wilhelm44]

50 minutes ago, zurew said:

I think you missed a cute relevant context there - "Im the standard of epistemology" was literally replied  to establish authority over what should and should not be considered a cult. He didnt just say that you are wrong about cults, he implied that he is literally the proper foundation from which it can be accurately assessed what should and should be not considered a cult.

There is a difference between saying "I disagree with you and I think im right" and between saying that "you are so mentally impoverished that you cant even begin to understand what standards or methods are needed to judge whether something is a cult or not, so let me be that standard and dicatate and control all of  that shit"

Again this goes back to there not being any independent norms and standards from him - He wants to be  standard that tells you your level of development, he wants to be the standard that tells you whether you are wrong or not , he wants to be the standard that tells what is and what is not cult, he wants to be  the standard that can tell you whether he himself is a cult leader or not etc.

How would you even go about setting up independent norms and standards for determining people's level of development ?

[Thought Art]

@Wilhelm44 Hmm, idk but Integral Metatheory is pretty good imooo

[zurew]

1 hour ago, Wilhelm44 said:

How would you even go about setting up independent norms and standards for determining people's level of development ?

I dont know what the answer to that question is because thats a metaphilosophical issue but I know for sure that if you let the leader to be the exclusive norm/judge itself, that in that case he will automatically create a cult or at the very least he create an environment in which cult dynamics will prevail.

But there is a relevant difference even there - there is a difference between giving norms and being the norm itself -  a mystical tradition can lay  down a specific theory about spiritual devleopment and can give you certain details about how to recognize for yourself whether you managed to rise to those given states or whether you managed to get to that given level of development or not and between the leader being the exclusive and explicit judge who tells you and corrects you about how conscious you are (despite the fact that he has no fucking access to what awakenings or experiences you have had up to that point).

And of course, you can have a problematic mix bag , where the leader provides you a set of principles or standards meant to help you evaluate things independently. But then, when someone uses those same standards to reach conclusions that conflict with the leader’s own views, he dismiss their judgment, question their competence in applying the standards, and or implicitly place himself above the very framework that he previously encouraged others to use. So ,the original norms remain in place in theory, but they are selectively overridden whenever they challenge the leader's preferred conclusions.

 

But before you or anyone else  tries to imply that im asking for something impossible from Leo,  Im not.

The criticism is not that he needs to solve this impossible issue (that he needs to solve all problems around epistemology and spirituality and philosophy so that he can find the correct norm and that after that he needs to explicate the ineffable), the critcism is that given the problematic epistemic nature of this issue and given the fact that he has no fucking direct access to the content of your experience and your awakening, that he shouldnt run around and pretend to be an authrority on any of this. Its not so hard to just shut the fuck up about making claims about what level of consciousness other people managed to acess or its not so hard to qualify your judgements related those things without implying that your are  the only  correct person to make a  proper judgement on  this and without undermining the ability of literally everyone else in the Universe who wants to make that judgement for themselves.

And then my advice for complicit actualized.org members is to find your balls and to not be spineless and complicit about this and around this. Dont make excuses for Leo and dont open up your asscheeks so that Leo can take free advantage of you  and  so that he dictate to you whatever the fuck he wants without any limits, but to stick up for yourself and to actually do what he allegedly wants you to be - be sovereign - act sovereign and use your sovereignty.

Relativizing this issue and not calling out Leo for this is exactly the thing that will make it so that cult dynamics will prevail on this site (irrespective of whether Leo is malicious or not ).

Edited 6 hours ago by zurew

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

I dont know what the answer to that question is because thats a metaphilosophical issue but I know for sure that if you let the leader to be the exclusive norm itself, that in that case he will automatically create a cult.

But there is a relevant difference even there - there is a difference between giving norms and being the norm itself -  a mystical tradition can lay  down a specific theory about spiritual devleopment and can give you certain details about how to recognize for yourself whether you managed to rise to those given states or whether you managed to get to that given level of development or not and between the leader being the exclusive and explicit judge who tells you and corrects you about how conscious you are (despite the fact that he has no fucking access to what awakenings or experiences you have had up to that point).

And of course, you can have a problematic mix bag , where the leader provides you a set of principles or standards meant to help you evaluate things independently. But then, when someone uses those same standards to reach conclusions that conflict with the leader’s own views, he dismiss their judgment, question their competence in applying the standards, and or implicitly place himself above the very framework that he previously encouraged others to use. So ,the original norms remain in place in theory, but they are selectively overridden whenever they challenge the leader's preferred conclusions.

Okay I hear you.

Personally, I'm not relying on Leo to tell me how well I am doing or not.

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, Thought Art said:

@Wilhelm44 Hmm, idk but Integral Metatheory is pretty good imooo

Well yeah, I mean if people want to rate themselves according to some system, they are free to do so.

Somehow I just can't do that to myself.

[Wilhelm44]

@zurew    " if you let the leader to be the exclusive norm itself, that in that case he will automatically create a cult."

I don't think Adyashanti or Tolle etc are using some independent development rating system at their meetings. Does that mean they are also cult leaders ?

[zurew]

3 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

I don't think Adyashanti or Tolle etc are using some independent development rating system at their meetings. Does that mean they are also cult leaders ?

If they are telling other people and correcting other people about how conscious those people are or what awakening they must have  have had  without any qualification and without making it clear that their judgements might be wrong  and without completely undermining the judgement of those people -   in that case yes, under my lights ,  they are cult leaders as well.

Edited 6 hours ago by zurew

[Wilhelm44]

1 minute ago, zurew said:

If they are telling other people and correcting other people about how conscious those people are or what awakening must have  have had  without any qualification and without making it clear that their judgements might be wrong ,  in that case yes, under my lights ,  they are cult leaders as well.

So if he just adds the phrase " I might be wrong " then he ceases to be a cult leader ?

 

[Wilhelm44]

Are you just making up your own definitions of what a cult is ?

[zurew]

4 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Are you just making up your own definitions of what a cult is ?

Thats super duper cute that you suddenly have an issue with that but you had nothing to say when Leo wanted to tell everyone what 1 definition ought to be used by everyone.

Notice that Im not telling you that you have to use my definition or my norms.

Its also cute that you dont recognize the difference between the responsibility that a forum member has and what a forum leader has, who has more than a million subscribers on youtube. (But again im not even saying that I have some special priviledge that Leo doesnt have, but even that would be appropriate for me to imply under my lights, because he obviously has more responsibility than a random forum member).

Edited 6 hours ago by zurew

[Wilhelm44]

10 minutes ago, zurew said:

Thats super duper cute that you suddenly have an issue with that but you had nothing to say when Leo wanted to tell everyone what 1 definition ought to be used by everyone.

Notice that Im not telling you that you have to use my definition or my norms.

Its also cute that you dont recognize the difference between the responsibility that a forum member has and what a forum leader has, who has more than a million subscribers on youtube. (But again im not even saying that I have some special priviledge that Leo doesnt have, but even that would be appropriate for me to imply under my lights, because he obviously has more responsibility than a random forum member).

Conveniently you ignored my first question.

If Adyashanti or Tolle or Leo just always remember to add the caveat, "I could be wrong" do they cease to be cult leaders ?

[Wilhelm44]

Notice I'm not talking down to you by calling your points "cute" etc.

Since the start of the day, you have called me a "motherfucker", told me to "just use my brain for once" etc.

And then you complain about Leo. Cry me a river.

[Thought Art]

30 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Notice I'm not talking down to you by calling your points "cute" etc.

Since the start of the day, you have called me a "motherfucker", told me to "just use my brain for once" etc.

And then you complain about Leo. Cry me a river.

Bow dowwwwwwn

[zurew]

2 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Notice I'm not talking down to you by calling your points "cute" etc.

No you rather act passive agressive and you dont engage in good faith and pretend that you are not asking questions to get an answer and to make a trap and to end it with your passive agressive remarks like the way you did in the other thread where you said "omg im so scared that I cant leave".

Given that you were too lazy to read 2 lines from the start , and that you demonstrated multiple times that you cant summarize accurately what my position is on this, even though  I literally fed all the relevant info to you and walked you through my line of thinking and answered more of your questions  in more detail and specificity that what Leo will ever do to you on any issue, let alone related to this specific issue and and then you ended with the "omg are you just making up your own definition what a cult is" implying that thats a special issue that you suddenly have now, with a straight face, while ignoring the fact that I showed you that Leo (you know the leader of this forum and the guy who has more than a million subscribers on youtube) arbitrarily made himself to be to be the exclusive  judge on what definition of cult ought to be used by everyone here and you had 0 comments and issue with that is just fucking perfection my guy, I dont know what else you expect me to do or  what else you expect me  to tell you related that delicious performance.

If you think that its too retarded or that its too much to ask from Leo to stop making definitive comments about other people's awakenings and to stop completely undermining their ability to make that judgement themselves then go ahead my guy, you do you and you can  freely use whatever different definition you want to use.

Edited 4 hours ago by zurew

[UnbornTao]

@Thought Art  Shall we add you to THE LIST?

I'm kidding - you were already on it.

@zurew can run circles around people in here when it comes to good-quality thinking and analysis. Perhaps people's animosity towards his persona is indicative of having one's fictions challenged.

I mean, you can see, by way of contrast, when people interact with him, who tends to be the defensive party and who tends to be the more "impartial observer." Do you need Leo to tell you what to pay attention to here?

Talk about truth-seeking.

Edited 4 hours ago by UnbornTao

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

No you rather act passive agressive and you dont engage in good faith and pretend that you are not asking questions to get an answer and to make a trap and to end it with your passive agressive remarks like the way you did in the other thread where you said "omg im so scared that I cant leave".

Given that you were too lazy to read 2 lines from the start , and that you demonstrated multiple times that you cant summarize accurately what my position is on this, even though  I literally fed all the relevant info to you and walked you through my line of thinking and answered more of your questions  in more detail and specificity that what Leo will ever do to you on any issue, let alone related to this specific issue and and then you ended with the "omg are you just making up your own definition what a cult is" implying that thats a special issue that you suddenly have now, with a straight face, while ignoring the fact that I showed you that Leo (you know the leader of this forum and the guy who has more than a million subscribers on youtube) arbitrarily made himself to be to be the exclusive  judge on what definition of cult ought to be used by everyone here and you had 0 comments and issue with that is just fucking perfection my guy, I dont know what else you expect me to do or  what else you expect me  to tell you related that delicious performance.

If you think that its too retarded or that its too much to ask from Leo to stop making definitive comments about other people's awakenings and to stop completely undermining their ability to make that judgement themselves then go ahead my guy, you do you and you can  freely use whatever different definition you want to use.

You making a lot of assumptions there.

And you still haven't answered my question which was following a very logical train of thought, based on your previous answers:

If Adyashanti or Tolle or Leo just always remember to add the caveat, "I could be wrong" do they cease to be cult leaders ?

[Thought Art]

@UnbornTao What list?