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

[Carl-Richard]

And I'll address the "why don't you leave?" question which is regularly asked and is a serious question. There are obviously pros and cons to being here.

But if there is one reason to leave, it's that engaging in an atmosphere where delusions are entertained like this erodes your relationship to truth and that constantly calling it out invokes a certain mental state that is not healthy in the long run (one of incessant cuttingness and antagonism) and if you don't call it out, you also invoke a mental state that is not healthy (one of denial, submission, dissociation). 

Whichever way you slice it, you erode your relationship to truth and how you relate to other people in a healthy way.

Edited 13 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Osaid]

I don't know him well enough to say he's a narcissist. But he is quite objectively narcissistic, I think. I guess he'd say "that's important for being successful" or something.

[Carl-Richard]

As for "you guys just don't understand ambition", this response is entirely wrong and misleading. It's not ambitious to say "I am the most conscious being in the universe" or "I am the #1 authority on epistemology in the entire world". Those are claims of what you are, not what you are trying to become. If your ambition is finding the most accurate picture of reality in the entire world, that is entirely different than claiming you already have it.

And if you think you already have a pretty accurate picture of reality and you're currently not convinced that anyone is providing a better alternative, you say "this is the most accurate picture of reality I have found and I'm currently not convinced of any better alternative". You don't say "I'm the #1 authority on what constitutes an accurate picture of reality". That's a "subtle" nuance of epistemology right there.

And notice how sneaky he is in that post "I genuinely believe that I can understand Reality better than any human who has ever lived". As if he hasn't already said that he does understand it better than any human that has ever lived. It's sneaky snaky behavior.

Edited 7 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Joseph Maynor]

5 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

As for "you guys just don't understand ambition", this response is entirely wrong and misleading. It's not ambitious to say "I am the most conscious being in the universe" or "I am the #1 authority on epistemology in the entire world". Those are claims of what you are, not what you're trying to become. If your ambition is finding the most accurate picture of reality in the entire world, that is entirely different than claiming you already have it.

And if you think you already have a pretty accurate picture of reality and you're currently not convinced that anyone is providing a better alternative, you say "this is the most accurate picture of reality I have found and I'm currently not convinced of any better alternative". You don't say "I'm the #1 authority on what constitutes an accurate picture of reality". That's a "subtle" nuance of epistemology right there.

Yes.  This is not what one wants to do ideally.

[Inliytened1]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

"this is the most accurate picture of reality I have found and I'm currently not convinced of any better alternative".

That is not awakening that is theory.  

[Carl-Richard]

30 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

That is not awakening that is theory.  

He speaks about both awakening and theory. And to claim to be #1 in either, let alone both, is ludicrous. It is ridiculous beyond parody 100x over in a strangeloop that I have to say this. It's actually beneath anyone that they should even entertain this as a thought for one second.

Edited 6 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Inliytened1]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

And to claim to be #1 in either, let alone both, is ludicrous. It is ridiculous beyond parody 100x over in a strangeloop that I have to say this. It's actually beneath anyone that they should even entertain this as a thought for one second.

I wasn't disputing this. This is just immaturity.  There is no "most" awakened being there is just the awakened and the asleep.   If you think this then you aren't awake.  You're just being foolish.  That isn't an insult it's just what it is.  So I'm just saying that after you awaken you wouldn't say "this is the most accurate picture of reality I've found"   So you shouldn't expect him to make statements like this.  You should expect better of him than to proclaim "I am the best! I am more conscious than you".  But nothing surprises me anymore.  And, enlightened individuals shouldn't he held in a box as to their level of maturity.  They can still act like egotistical children.  Though I would expect more from them.  

Edited 5 hours ago by Inliytened1

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

And if you think you already have a pretty accurate picture of reality and you're currently not convinced that anyone is providing a better alternative, you say "this is the most accurate picture of reality I have found and I'm currently not convinced of any better alternative". You don't say "I'm the #1 authority on what constitutes an accurate picture of reality". That's a "subtle" nuance of epistemology right there.

Exactly. If I thought I understood reality better than everybody else, what is the point of implying it or saying it out loud on a regular basis? If I did that, I would have alarm bells ringing that my ego is being juiced. If you're often invoking or dealing in the idea that you're superior to others, it's the most obvious thing ever that your ego is getting juiced. A perceptive child can detect this.

[Inliytened1]

9 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Exactly. If I thought I understood reality better than everybody else, what is the point of implying it or saying it out loud on a regular basis? If I did that, I would have alarm bells ringing that my ego is being juiced. If you're often invoking or dealing in the idea that you're superior to others, it's the most obvious thing ever that your ego is getting juiced. A perceptive child can detect this.

The funny thing is we spend so much time here saying its not about being better.  Or smarter.  It is what it is.  Reality i mean. A more expected response from one who is God realized - who is in the public eye - would be - to tell the story of their awakening and what they discovered to be true through direct experience (mysticism) whether someone wants to believe there is any truth to it is irrelevant.  Or whether they think it is "correct" or not is irrelevant.   Put the stuff and the wisdom out there if you want to, as a framework for others to find it for themselves. But childish games are unnecessary.   

Edited 5 hours ago by Inliytened1

[Joshe]

You can't explain narcissism away by distinguishing grandiosity from ambition because grandiosity alone isn't the thing that makes narcissism toxic. The denigration of others as a strategy for self-elevation is the actual toxicity and the tell.

There's no way to explain that one away. And I don't think Leo will ever touch it because the floor falls out quick. 

[Joshe]

29 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

The funny thing is we spend so much time here saying its not about being better.  Or smarter.  It is what it is.  Reality i mean. A more expected response from one who is God realized - who is in the public eye - would be - to tell the story of their awakening and what they discovered to be true through direct experience (mysticism) whether someone wants to believe there is any truth to it is irrelevant.  Or whether they think it is "correct" or not is irrelevant.   Put the stuff and the wisdom out there if you want to, as a framework for others to find it for themselves. But childish games are unnecessary.   

Yeah, that seems like the obvious thing to me and you.

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, Joshe said:

Exactly. If I thought I understood reality better than everybody else, what is the point of implying it or saying it out loud on a regular basis? If I did that, I would have alarm bells ringing that my ego is being juiced. If you're often invoking or dealing in the idea that you're superior to others, it's the most obvious thing ever that your ego is getting juiced. A perceptive child can detect this.

Yeah it's like really odd to even have to frame your "ambition" as "being the #1 in the world" or whatever. If your ambition is truth, that's all it is. If anything, "Being #1" only stands in the way of getting to the truth. And in reality, it most definitely does, because you're most definitely not #1. That's most definitely the truth.

Edited 2 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Wilhelm44]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Yeah it's like really odd to even have to frame your "ambition" as "being the #1 in the world" or whatever. If your ambition is truth, that's all it is. If anything, "Being #1" only stands in the way of getting to the truth. And in reality, it most definitely does, because you're most definitely not #1. That's most definitely the truth.

Yeah, the more my own sense of a separate self dissolves, the more this whole concept of "the most conscious being on the planet" doesn't seem to make any sense at all. It's like, what/who would really be left to claim ownership of such a title ? 

(It would be like Adyashanti telling Sadghuru that, more of the infinite is flowing through me than through you.)

On the other hand Leo has realized a lot, so im not sure whats really going on.

Edited 1 hour ago by Wilhelm44

[zurew]

2 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Yeah it's like really odd to even have to frame your "ambition" as "being the #1 in the world" or whatever. If your ambition is truth, that's all it is. If anything, "Being #1" really only stands in the way of getting to the truth. And in reality, it most definitely does, because you're most definitely not #1. That's most definitely the truth.

He ends up stacking and betting everything on an incredibly poorly inferred unverifiable proposition. (him being the most awake)

I want to emphasize the inferred part, because that goes against his epistemology about direct experience.

His epistemology ends up running on propositional knowledge ( that he btw consistently shits on ) and not on non-propositional direct experience.

You can run through most of his claims using this method -  "Leo is this assertion inferred or do you know this to be the case because of direct experience ?" 

--

You also pointed out hyperbole . The constant use of hyperbole can be used in multiple different ways for your own advantage - one is what you pointed out, the other defense.  Its good for defense because you can claim that you didnt really mean the things that you explicitly said, because they were just hyperboles . (again the slimy frame game -  where the ontological status of a particular thing can be suddenly and conveniently changed depending on what makes you look better in that specific cornering session)

--

Take a look at what interaction I had with Leo here (particularly on that page). Notice the spineless , slimy shifts there and notice the cognition and character undermining rhetoric that he used against me .  "I didnt claim that I cant be wrong" when I show him that he  did , he changes that to "Okay but that doesnt mean that im right about that".

And then he ended up ulting on me by using a move that protects him from any possible future criticism:

Quote

I cannot be wrong. Because if I am wrong, then I was self-deceived, which means I was right, because I told you that self-deception is endless.

This is just a low tier move where he equivocates on what he is wrong about .  The accusation never was that his claim about self-deception being endless is wrong or that he explicitly claimed somewhere that self-deception is not endless, the accusation was about other specific claims  like: "I cant be wrong about the claim, that I am the most awake person in the Universe".

If he seriously wants to imply that anyone who affirms the claim once that "self-deception is endless" can never be wrong about anything from that point on (because if they are wrong about something,then they end up being right about self-deception being endless)  - then he can go ahead.

 

Edited 2 minutes ago by zurew

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

Yeah it's like really odd to even have to frame your "ambition" as "being the #1 in the world" or whatever. If your ambition is truth, that's all it is. If anything, "Being #1" only stands in the way of getting to the truth. And in reality, it most definitely does, because you're most definitely not #1. That's most definitely the truth.

Yeah, I mean, to even have the thought is weird as hell, but granting his explanation that "It's not egotism, it's just the truth of the matter that I'm the most sophisticated thinker alive". Ok, let's say that's true. Why does that truth surface so often? Of course it's not true, but if it were and if you weren't getting your ego juiced from it, you'd keep it to yourself, unless letting everyone know it on a regular basis was serving some egoic agenda. It's all just too obvious that it feels weird we're even fleshing it out, lol. Talk about being gaslit. 

14 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

consider that being here wasting your time funneling your time and attention to entertain somebody's delusions like this, you're being exploited, treated like a joker at a clown show jigging for a self-proclaimed king for their leisure and pleasure.

This is the thing that bothered me most about this issue when I raised it a few months back. It's a hard view to stomach but this is what I think is going on. Shit gets dark when you pull on this thread.

Edited 25 minutes ago by Joshe