If you self-identify with any upper SD stage, you're CRINGE

[Yimpa]

On 9/11/2020 at 4:08 AM, Leo Gura said:

If you want the truly ultimate stage, it is an Infinite Singularity of Consciousness/Love that increases endlessly without end, forever.

It is a ONENESS so complete that the entire universe is extinguished forever into a infinite field of pure indifference.

The final stage is simply:

INFINITY/LOVE

[Natasha Tori Maru]

3 minutes ago, oOo said:

@LordFall Can you quote specifically what I stated that was aggressive? Let's put it under the microscope. @Natasha Tori Maru There's a clear distinction between cultural interactions and meta-interactions interpersonally; I don't think there's anyone on the forum, less than maybe a few individuals, that are presently capable of lengthy meta-conversations, so I don't go out of my way to facilitate them. 

I can understand this. But you must have been aware of the inherent mode of your expression, correct? At your level.

The intent with the sort of language there was "I am hurt, so I want you to feel this way also".

Even if it was not intentional - it appears as unconscious leakage. Something unintegrated. Incongruent.

It might not be that way. It just appears so on reading. It also appears very strange to lower our standards for some interactions in such a way.

Edited 59 minutes ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Ulax]

@oOo You have to accept lower stages will be jealous of your development 

[oOo]

9 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I can understand this. But you must have been aware of the inherent mode of your expression, correct? At your level.

The intent with the sort of language there was "I am hurt, so I want you to feel this way also".

Even if it was not intentional - it appears as unconscious leakage. Something unintegrated. Incongruent.

It might not be that way. It just appears so on reading. It also appears very strange to lower our standards for some interactions in such a way.

Interesting, and how do you distinguish between projecting onto me versus an actual consciousness state of development that I inhabit? This is methodology, and intuition is a part of that but where is the silver lining; grab it.

This is learning.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 minute ago, oOo said:

Interesting, and how do you distinguish between projecting onto me versus an actual consciousness state of development that I inhabit? This is methodology, and intuition is a part of that but where is the silver lining; grab it.

This is learning.

By engaging in more relational dialogue to connect, be seen and reveal meaning. Diving into phenomenology, experience, meaning, feeling and thought type questions. To be seen and properly received - and have the person we are within dialogue with affirm this - gets us closer to understanding without projection. 

Cleanly observing free of judgement, but not divorced from discernment. 

Interesting question. The epistemology of a person.

I ask - I state what I see. I report where things don't align. Asking more questions without expressing my own interpretation.

I don't always get it right  When I feel emotional charge arise through any sensation whatsoever (even positive), it is generally an indication of my own projections coming into play to cloud my discernment.

[oOo]

@Natasha Tori Maru And how does that connect with what you said below rationally speaking?

22 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I can understand this. But you must have been aware of the inherent mode of your expression, correct? At your level.

The intent with the sort of language there was "I am hurt, so I want you to feel this way also".

Even if it was not intentional - it appears as unconscious leakage. Something unintegrated. Incongruent.

It might not be that way. It just appears so on reading. It also appears very strange to lower our standards for some interactions in such a way.

As for your last sentence, not at all. It's important to read the culture you are interacting with in the way that you have to know who's at the dinner table; I view much of the forum in the same way I do the Sentinelese, in the most positive sense.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

14 minutes ago, oOo said:

As for your last sentence, not at all. It's important to read the culture you are interacting with in the way that you have to know who's at the dinner table; I view much of the forum in the same way I do the Sentinelese, in the most positive sense.

I try not lower myself to standards of interactional rhetoric that are emotionally catalytic if someone is less than charitable to me. And I certainly do not intentionally do so. Unless triggered and projecting.

Quote

And how does that connect with what you said below rationally speaking?

I tried to observe, sandwich in a question. Rather than attack your claim of Coral or deny it. Express what is seen so you may correct my interpretation. An invitation.

I try not to explain a person or their behaviour. So I can see how my words of choice were poor "The intent with the sort of language there was "I am hurt, so I want you to feel this way also"." 

The cleaner version: "The language communicates as though you are hurt and attempting to transmit that hurt."

I might brainstorm and propose that there is conditioning present and unintegrated parts of lower stages. But this does not deny the Coral claim. Is it a sound expectation that someone of Coral stage would have successfully worked through this conditioning? I would argue I see parts of Coral. But residing firmly IN the stage is a hard claim to transmit to others without circular reasoning like "you would not know it if you saw it".

Edited 18 minutes ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[LordFall]

44 minutes ago, oOo said:

@LordFall Can you quote specifically what I stated that was aggressive? Let's put it under the microscope.

 

2 hours ago, oOo said:

Since last speaking to me, you've shown that you at least have some basic rhetoric, so enhance your credibility further by citing a clear example without revealing your own prejudice. Trying to strap me to the bed with a whip isn't going to do anything more other than showing that you have some gay fetish towards me; observing from a distance but never intellectually engaging with integrity.

 

1 hour ago, oOo said:

 

1. Red: someone else’s submission adds nothing to the agency I’m cultivating, though I could kill you.

It just seems like a odd way of writing, I'm curious what you had to say about it.

You also completely dodged the question about real-world output: What are you working on in life and what is your life purpose?  

[oOo]

1 minute ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I try not lower myself to standards of interactional rhetoric that are emotionally catalytic if someone is less than charitable to me. And I certainly do not intentionally do so. Unless triggered and projecting.

Interesting, so what you are instead saying is that you want me to change my standards and that I should just view people as beneath me instead of interacting as an experimentation of my own consciousness? 

When you say 'lower yourself', is this a personal, intersubjective or broader cultural boundary? 

For clarity, if it is a personal boundary, then this is a measurement of your own personal character to yourself. In which case, it is yours and yours alone. 

If it is an intersubjective boundary, this is a measurement of boundaries relative to the reality co-created between people, and if ethically, its based on consent.

If it is cultural, it is a measurement of a persons understanding of their cultural norms.

Now, let's change 'boundary' to 'statement'.

I would describe my own statements as 'intercultural', a blurring between the intersubjective and cultural boundaries with a meta-awareness of the individual environment co-created as its own meta-cultural space. 

Viewed from that lens, instead as merely being "oOo's personal statements", how does that alter how you now read potential advances I could make in my own rhetoric without purely supposing that I conform to your own intersectional norm? 

1 minute ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

I might brainstorm and propose that there is conditioning present and unintegrated parts of lower stages. But this does not deny the Coral claim.

Consciousness in the context of physicalism is a moment to moment integration, it does not cease.

When I stated, "this is learning", I meant it quite literally. 

[oOo]

 

8 minutes ago, LordFall said:

It just seems like a odd way of writing, I'm curious what you had to say about it.

When the breeze in the air said, "humour me", I submitted like a weasel with fresh glasses, not of spectacles but of wine; verbal snores made of blood, and satire made of Fox News sackings.

[LordFall]

2 minutes ago, oOo said:

 

When the breeze in the air said, "humour me", I submitted like a weasel with fresh glasses, not of spectacles but of wine; verbal snores made of blood, and satire made of Fox News sackings.

It seems that you retreat straight into dissociative surrealism and word salad. I think you might be at the exact opposite of being post-rational and land in the pre-rational camp my friend. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@oOo I might make this simpler, if I may. If someone treats you poorly (in your perspective) - do you lower your standards of communication to a form that has the propensity to be interpreted as hurtful, attacking, sarcastic, negative or derogatory?

I noticed this behaviour.

It is antithetical to connection.

Connection is top.