Curt Still Lost in Concepts

[AtmanIsBrahman]

20 hours ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

Leo seems to have carved out the niche of God and Truth, without caring much about utility or how to practically implement that understanding into science. Which, again, is completely fine, and it's a very necessary niche. But I can't say with confidence that Curt's, or scientists' in general, only purpose is to understand God. Many of them also want to understand the relative structures of reality and how that understanding can help us practically in this world. That is equally valuable.

I guess the difference is understanding the functioning of the mechanics of the dream vs the dream that generates the mechanics. I'm sure Curt and other scientists genuinely care about figuring out the mechanics of the dream. It's kind of like being obsessed with a video game and learning all the strategies, lore, map, exploits, etc. The game is ultimately entertainment, but there isn't anything wrong with it per se. 

I find it problematic when scientists try to understand the dream that creates the mechanics and have no idea where to start, or insist on their mechanical explanations. It's like there's a different plane of thought they haven't unlocked.

Edited Friday at 05:36 PM by AtmanIsBrahman

[Leo Gura]

That is the tradeoff. If you care about practical things you will not realize God because God is not practical.

You want practical teachings? Okay, no God for you then.

God is rarely understood because you have to want it more than all the practical stuff.

Edited yesterday at 01:53 AM by Leo Gura

[moonawakening444]

On 09/07/2026 at 5:50 PM, Xonas Pitfall said:

So what should guide those choices?

Our connection with God

[Xonas Pitfall]

12 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

That is the tradeoff. If you care about practical things you will not realize God because God is not practical.

You want practical teachings? Okay, no God for you then.

God is rarely understood because you have to want it more than all the practical stuff.

I completely agree. My point was that just because you cracked the nut of God doesn't mean you suddenly have answers to every other question. There are still countless things that we, as humans, will have to wonder about for years, centuries, or even forever. That's an unavoidable reality.

Understanding God won't tell you how to discover molecular structures that are coherent enough to create silicon, how to refine that silicon into semiconductor-grade material, how to design transistors, how to manufacture chips at ever-smaller nanometer scales, how to build operating systems, how to create the internet, how to develop vaccines, how to cure diseases, or how to engineer new materials with properties we've never seen before.

It may give you greater creativity, intuition, neuroplasticity, or a broader perspective, but you still have to do the hard work of experimentation, measurement, engineering, and testing. Reality is reality, and you have to respect it. There are no shortcuts around that.

Most likely, you'd still rather live in a time where there are scientists, engineers, doctors, mathematicians, and researchers doing this work. They're the people building computers, creating the internet, developing medicine, investigating diseases, improving agriculture, designing aircraft, discovering new physics, and pushing civilization forward. That work is unavoidable if we want society to function.

It's also necessary if you even want a realistic chance of reaching self-realization. You need a stable society, food, healthcare, education, and technology before most people even have the opportunity to ask deeper questions about consciousness or whether they are God.

So I'm not disagreeing at all. I'm just saying that knowing God doesn't answer everything. There is still a very necessary niche for pragmatism, where people relentlessly crunch numbers, run experiments, test reality, falsify ideas, and search for patterns. As much as you might want to escape the "video game," you're still playing it for however many years you're alive. Ignoring its rules doesn't free you from them. If anything, that's how you end up with a Connor Murphy-type situation.

I hope I'm making sense. I completely agree that realizing God would be an incredible guide and could usher in a higher-consciousness era for humanity. But I think it's very important to separate God-realization from practical, day-to-day living, because that remains hugely relevant.

A scientist might not just want understanding. A scientist also wants to improve the current reality we're "stuck" in. Those goals don't disappear.

Or at the very least, we need to ask what God-realization actually means specifically for us as humans. Do we continue advancing science and civilization? Do we lose interest in improving the world? Do we kill ourselves? Those are still important questions that God-realization alone doesn't automatically answer.

[Xonas Pitfall]

12 hours ago, moonawakening444 said:

Our connection with God

I agree and disagree. For example, let's say we all know here to some extent what God is. Does that mean we would suddenly agree on how civilization should continue to progress?

Should we even continue progressing civilization at all? Should our priority be curing world hunger, ending disease, and reducing suffering? Or should we instead focus on consciousness research and understanding the mind? How should we allocate resources between those goals? Who decides? How much funding should each receive?

Should money even continue to exist? If not, what system replaces it? How would resources be distributed fairly? What kind of government should we have? Should there even be a government? If there is one, who should govern, and how do we decide who's qualified? Should decisions be made democratically, meritocratically, by AI, or through some entirely new system?

How do we balance individual freedom with the collective good? What rights should be universal? How much inequality is acceptable, if any? Should people still compete, or should society become fully cooperative? What incentives drive innovation if traditional economic systems disappear?

Do prisons still exist? How do we educate children? Should humanity continue exploring space, or should we focus inward on consciousness? Should we continue advancing AI, genetic engineering, and biotechnology, or are there limits we shouldn't cross?

Knowing God doesn't automatically answer any of these questions. It may provide a deeper perspective or a better moral foundation, but we still have to reason through these practical problems, experiment with different systems, and discover what actually works in reality.

All of this requires both an understanding of God and a practical, scientific approach. God-realization may provide the direction, but it doesn't replace the hard work of testing ideas, running experiments, analyzing data, and discovering what actually works. We still have to respect reality and figure things out through evidence and experimentation.

And if you say, "Well, I don't care about pragmatism at all," you're kidding yourself. There's a very good reason you prefer living where you do instead of in the Stone Age, a war zone, or a country struggling under severe conflict or repression.