Rate of Change in Baseline

[Carl-Richard]

17 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Carl-Richard I think this is a bit of an uncharitable interpret of OP 🤔

Does "rate of change" in this case not imply linear change towards a higher ground? What sense would it make to talk about the rate of change of something (consciousness) that goes up and down? "So guys today I changed really quickly between being very banana to being very orange to then very apple-y, ain't that amazing?"

And yes I'm very done with people thinking they're special for having some spiritual high. And thinking other people are dumb, simplistic, lacking in depth, from their surface-level reading of them, perhaps somebody they haven't even met.

Edited 6 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Sincerity]

@Carl-Richard You have a right to your interpretation of the post and opinion. I won’t respond because I find no point. Agree to disagree!

Edited 6 hours ago by Sincerity

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Carl-Richard rate of change has no vector 

It's like the differentiation between speed & velocity.

Edited 5 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[integral]

A shift in mindset can do all this, i dont know what your mindset was your entire life before this. 

But probabilistically doing Basic math: 30 years of contracted mental state -> moves house -> shift in mental state 🧐

5-10% probability that the timing is purely coincidental

Edited 5 hours ago by integral

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Carl-Richard rate of change has no vector 

It's like the differentiation between speed & velocity.

omg duh, but in this context. Hello. He's talking about "exponential curve".

There are some concepts by Hanzi Freinacht where he distinguishes between state, depth, complexity, and code. I feel very often people take state for almost everything (of course they will tell you in words that it's more complicated but their repeated behavior and actions tells otherwise) and especially discount depth. When you scoff at a 60 year old person who is kinda brash and rude as "not developed", you're discounting so much depth. It's like those teenagers who look at their parents like "they just don't understand meee", meanwhile they understand you 50 times over in a circle.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Carl-Richard But then you went on to infer this was an attempt to dick wave? 

Obviously each case is context dependant.

I take it your argument then, is that your interpretation was charitable?

[cetus]

@Carl-Richard It's all about sharing a direct experience and inviting others to share along. What is there to look down on about that?

Edited 3 hours ago by cetus

[Carl-Richard]

2 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Carl-Richard But then you went on to infer this was an attempt to dick wave? 

Obviously each case is context dependant.

I take it your argument then, is that your interpretation was charitable?

"Attempt", it's more subtle than that. An offhand remark can tell you a lot even if it's not very deliberate.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Carl-Richard It is still an inference. You didn't even ask further questions to qualify this inference.

Hence, uncharitable.

[Carl-Richard]

2 minutes ago, cetus said:

@Carl-Richard It's all about sharing a direct experience and inviting others to share along. What is there to look down on that?

"hehehe you guys know how all these normies are so dumb right, yeah, how not-dumb do you feel recently?". Put hyperbolically.

[Carl-Richard]

4 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Carl-Richard It is still an inference. You didn't even ask further questions to qualify this inference.

Hence, uncharitable.

It's a feeling.

And it's not necessarily something the person is very aware of (what I'm judging them about). So asking them about it may not give much answers. Again, difference between deliberation and simply acting.

I can tell you what I think and mind-read you without you knowing better than me, even if the feeling is based on scant evidence, or indeed the fact that it is a feeling and not a legal trial. It's just a feeling, but you may not even feel it.

Edited 3 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Natasha Tori Maru]

4 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

It's a feeling.

And it's not necessarily something the person is very aware of (what I'm judging them about). So asking them about it may not give much answers. Again, difference between deliberation and simply acting.

Yes so, uncharitable. This is uncharitable. You're making my point. It appears like bias.

Edited 3 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Carl-Richard]

Just now, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Yes so, uncharitable. This is uncharitable. You're making my point. It appears like bias.

Can you define uncharitable?

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Just now, Carl-Richard said:

Can you define uncharitable?

No. You know what it means. You know the context. You know what I mean. You are trying to wiggle your way out of owning your behaviour by redefining words. Not gonna play that game.

Peace.

[cetus]

12 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

"hehehe you guys know how all these normies are so dumb right, yeah, how not-dumb do you feel recently?". Put hyperbolically.

What makes you feel that way? I saw what @Sincerity started here as inspiring to all members new and old.

[Carl-Richard]

3 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

No. You know what it means. You know the context. You know what I mean. You are trying to wiggle your way out of owning your behaviour by redefining words. Not gonna play that game.

Peace.

I'm literally uncertain about the word. Now you're being uncharitable ;(

Honestly, I never use the word, I always found it a weird word, and it seems to have at least two separate meanings that are equivocal in this discussion. So feel free to engage with me 'charitably' and not simply mind-read your way out. In what sense was I being uncharitable? Was I just being too harsh in my portrayal, or was I not being open? Both? Something else?

Do I ought to be charitable? Can I not simply share an opinion without performing a forensic interview of the person I'm referring to? Do i seem closed to discussing my opinion? Is perhaps the person in question the one who is closed to discussing it as per "I don't see the point to respond, agree to disagree"? And were they to discuss it, perhaps I would look less presumptive and you wouldn't be driven to make this characterization?

Edited just now by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

24 minutes ago, cetus said:

What makes you feel that way? I saw what @Sincerity started here as inspiring to all members new and old.

 

On 4.11.2026 at 4:12 PM, Sincerity said:

Would you say overall that you've experienced relatively a lot of change in baseline state in your adult life? Compared to others around you?

I feel like most people have a rather low ceiling for how much change in baseline mode of existence they will go through in their life. That's fine ofc. I note these thoughts especially when looking at older people. Who in the vast majority aren't too developed. (There are exceptions of course.)

Remove the padding and you have my sentence. But now you're making a big deal out of it. Like, can I not call out what I consider to be "low development" (I never use that term unless I'm forced to, it disgusts me) and people will consider me just a good ol' inspiring person? Can only you "spiritual people" do that? Seems hypocritical.

Edited 3 hours ago by Carl-Richard