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

[zurew]

5 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Okay, but can you agree then, that by that very definition of using suicidal moments as pointers to psychotic tendencies, that most people on this forum have potential psychotic tendencies ?

Sure, given the underdetermination issue - the answer to that question is yes, they potentially do.

6 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Have you not had any suicidal moments in your life ?

I had, yeah.

Not sure whats the argument from here.

[Wilhelm44]

9 minutes ago, zurew said:

Not sure whats the argument from here.

The point is that if everyone in a group has potential psychotic tendencies, then by these metrics, no one would qualify as a suitable leader. ie if you were the leader of this group, there would also be the potential for you to lose it one day and steer the group down a dark path, just as would be the case for everyone else here.

Edited 9 hours ago by Wilhelm44

[zurew]

5 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

The point is that if everyone in a group has potential psychotic tendencies, then by these metrics, no one would qualify as a suitable leader.

I dont think that follows from what I said. 

My whole case is precisely to show that having potential psychotic tendencies is not enough to get you to such a conclusion, because of the underdetermination issue.

The recognition of the underdetermination will motivate you to do further investigation, but does not automatically disqualify someone from being a leader under my view.

Edited 3 hours ago by zurew

[Wilhelm44]

4 minutes ago, zurew said:

I dont think that follows from what I said. 

My whole case is precisely to show that having potential psychotic tendencies is not enough to get you to such a conclusion, because of the underdetermination issue.

Aha, got it.

I think that yesterday you narrowed this whole drama down to 3 very succinct points.

Hopefully one of the mods will approach Leo soon with some kind of formal statement, so that resolution can be found, and we can finally close this thread.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

2 minutes ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Hopefully one of the mods will approach Leo soon with some kind of formal statement, so that resolution can be found, and we can finally close this thread.

Do you think this discussion necessitates some form of action, conclusion or acknowledgement? 

Because if this is the reason for the extensive engagement on your behalf, you might be up for disappointment. Not sure if anyone feels a compulsion for any sort of formality.

We can all agree to disagree and nothing can come of it, as one potentiality.

[Wilhelm44]

5 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

We can all agree to disagree and nothing can come of it, as one potentiality.

Of course. 

[integral]

My blessed individuals. I have traveled far for the second time to be with you in this land to present de with a superior opinion. .✨

The way you differentiate a cult from a not-cult is by identifying its core values.

You have to separate two layers: the extrinsic values that are superficially present, the stuff it advertises, the label, from the intrinsic values that are actually operating, which are usually unconscious to the cult itself and to its members. Once you label those correctly, you get a clear picture of what the thing actually is, and whether it's a cult.

---

Most of this thread is trying to figure out what a cult is by looking at the symptoms.

Leo's unfalsifiable epistemology is a symptom of the core values of the organization. That doesn't mean it's a cult.

 

And the end of the day we got to ask what makes a value high or low? 

The domain is axiology. But that domain is pretty Limited, and Leo has his high consciousness axiology. "truth as the highest value" and so on.

Edited 2 hours ago by integral