"My Descent into the Alt-Right Pipeline" Good video on internet radicalisation.

[Adam M]

@Andreas

1. 2 + 2 = 4 is only true relative to humans because we have decided to categorize the world in such a way.

Dolphins would not categorize the world in this way. Meaning the the equation is only true relative to the mind that creates it.

 

2. There is Truth and there is truth.

I would agree that there is no truth because truth with a lowercase t is always relative to your limited ego perspective.

However, as your perspective expands from your little ego perspective to the perspective of God (all of existence).

Then, from that place of elevated conciousness. You can be aware of Truth. Because this Truth is borne of the meta-perspective of all perspectives.

This is why Leo is saying that you don't understand. Achieve the state of God conciousness and then you might.

 

3. And 4. Are answered by the above statement.

 

Don't entrench yourself in this idea of nothing can be true. That's a bastardization of the notion of relativity and is a serious signifier of an obvious lack of nuanced thinking.

 

Stop trying to refute other's ideas and instead try to understand. 

If you have any further questions then read what I said again.

[Adam M]

@kieranperez nice lol I had to answer too

[Andreas]

2 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

Any distinction you come up with is not fundamental. It is a relative distinction you came up with. In other words... you literally made up 2+2=4. You invented that entire world for there to even be that distinction. Anything that you invent and create is not fundamental. If it is not fundamental, it is not Absolute by definition. However, at the same time it is included in the Absolute. It existence is the illusion... and you created it.

How come there be a distinction between Absolute and anything not fundamental if there is no true distinction? How can you make up 2+2=3? Why would distinction be something that could be included in something that cannot have a distinction? 

 

9 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

When you taste the Absolute for the first time, you’ll know. 

Il know what..? There is nothing that can be true and nothing to be wrong, so what would I know?

 

14 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

You’re conflating Absolute and relative as the same. All relative truths are illusions (they exist as the illusion). Absolute transcends all of that yet includes that. 

What qualifies as an ‘Absolute’ truth? What is the non-existen distinction between the non-existent wrong truth and the non-existent true truth?

 

18 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

Because you can become conscious that you invented that. You invented “right” and “wrong”. You were programmed with that distinction. You can become aware that you, this silly character you think you are is an entire fake molding built of indoctrination, programmed beliefs, values, emotional triggers, dogmas, character traits, preferences that you pretty much had no awareness of as it happened. You can become aware that the “other” that programmed you to believe “right” and “wrong” are none other than you and you will have no one else to look to other than of course, yourself. Right and wrong are not fundamental. They are fabrications for a purpose. 

Then how can I know that if it is not true?

How can I know that I indeed am at this deluded level of being and not just think I am because I can not know that I can not know that I am deeply unconscious?

If there is no wrong, how is it not correct to say that you are wrong? And how does that statement not conclude as right if there is no conclusion of right? And how does that statement not conclude as wrong if there is no right OR wrong? What is right here? Nothing? So how is that not true?

 

26 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

By reading your questions. Your questions and responses says it all. 

How come? Because I disagree with your opinion? Im sensing a pattern here.

[kieranperez]

@Adam M great dolphin analogy. 

Quote

“It is unnecessary for any invention to be existentially true in order to prove useful.” - Peter Ralston

You actually think you’re invented distinctions are real without noticing that you in fact were the very one who invented them. 

[kieranperez]

@kieranperez stop fucking asking other people to do your work. You gotta become conscious of this stuff. All of what I say, Leo says, The Buddha, whoever you’re listening says is all heresay and falls short of the mark. Any conception and answer you create is not fundamental because you’re still operating in a limited perspective that still operates as an experience of duality. It’s all still heresay. Take a psychedelic or contemplate and meditate for years and then we can talk. 

People here who are telling you this (hopefully) have done some amount of work to have a direct consciousness of what these matters are.

It’s like we’re all eating our spaghetti for the first time for dinner at the table except you and you’re insisting you know what spaghetti tastes like and then when we call you out saying ‘no. You’re plate is still full and hasn’t been touched,’ you retort ‘well tell me how it tastes and I’ll see I think about it or if it makes sense to me.’ Except no matter what description we give you of what the spaghetti tastes like and why it tastes like, you still don’t realize that you still haven’t touched your fucking spaghetti so you won’t know till you eat your fucking spaghetti. 

Now go eat your damn dinner. It’s getting cold. 

Edited April 24, 2019 by kieranperez

[Andreas]

24 minutes ago, Adam M said:

@Andreas

1. 2 + 2 = 4 is only true relative to humans because we have decided to categorize the world in such a way.

Dolphins would not categorize the world in this way. Meaning the the equation is only true relative to the mind that creates it.

How would it make sense to have 1 ball and add 3 and have the sum total of balls be 4? How would you choose to categorize that? 

 

30 minutes ago, Adam M said:

@Andreas

2. There is Truth and there is truth.

I would agree that there is no truth because truth with a lowercase t is always relative to your limited ego perspective.

However, as your perspective expands from your little ego perspective to the perspective of God (all of existence).

How do you differentiate Truth and truth? What makes something absolute and something not? 

If there is truth, how come there be no truth from the perspective of Truth? How come there be truth at all?

How do you know that you have the perspective of God if you do not know that you do not know? How is the idea of God’s perspective possible if there is no way to know if someone has the perspective of God?

 

40 minutes ago, Adam M said:

@Andreas

Then, from that place of elevated conciousness. You can be aware of Truth. Because this Truth is borne of the meta-perspective of all perspectives.

This is why Leo is saying that you don't understand. Achieve the state of God conciousness and then you might.

Your statement is wrong because I disagree with you and I am right. I am right because I have a higher level of consciousness and you can not understand that because you cannot know that you cannot know. Achieve the state of my level of consciousness and you will understand that you are wrong. If you disagree with my statement then that is simply because you are deeply unconscious. I can for this reason continue to ignore your arguments. 

 

44 minutes ago, Adam M said:

@Andreas

Don't entrench yourself in this idea of nothing can be true. That's a bastardization of the notion of relativity and is a serious signifier of an obvious lack of nuanced thinking.

 

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

2+2=4 is a relative truth. It is true because you say it is and by how you situate it within your entire scheme of conceptual understanding. It is not an Absolute Truth.

You see that? He says so. So therefore it’s true! I mean, ‘true’. Well maybe not because that doesn’t make sense. Well this is akward. It’s probably because both of us are just to unconscious or closeminded to understand ;D 

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

What I am telling you is outside that paradigm. 

Aha! You see that? I was right! Oh wait.. maybe not. Oh well it’s probably because I need to work on myself and get a higher and better level of consciousness  

[Andreas]

23 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

@kieranperez stop fucking asking other people to do your work. You gotta become conscious of this stuff. All of what I say, Leo says, The Buddha, whoever you’re listening says is all heresay and falls short of the mark. Any conception and answer you create is not fundamental because you’re still operating in a limited perspective that still operates as an experience of duality. It’s all still heresay. Take a psychedelic or contemplate and meditate for years and then we can talk. 

People here who are telling you this (hopefully) have done some amount of work to have a direct consciousness of what these matters are.

Yes God is real because Leo says so. And Spiderman is real because my cousin says so. I guess there is a reason to why they tell you to stay of drugs. 

26 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

@kieranperez It’s like we’re all eating our spaghetti for the first time for dinner at the table except you and you’re insisting you know what spaghetti tastes like and then when we call you out saying ‘no. You’re plate is still full and hasn’t been touched,’ you retort ‘well tell me how it tastes and I’ll see I think about it or if it makes sense to me.’ Except no matter what description we give you of what the spaghetti tastes like and why it tastes like, you still don’t realize that you still haven’t touched your fucking spaghetti so you won’t know till you eat your fucking spaghetti. 

Now go eat your damn dinner. It’s getting cold. 

Yes. And some people make a good amount of money from this spaghetti. 

[kieranperez]

This whole thread is just a clear example of a devil doing anything to self-reflect on its dogmas and bullshit. You’re only hurting yourself man. 

[Zizzero]

Never had a nondual experience, but since we're talking about this, please tell me how far off I am with what I came up to understand.

So, when we're asking whether 2+2=4 is true does the following analogy make sense: "Harry Potter is a wizard" is a statement that is seemingly wrong; for it is true when there is an existing entity called "Harry Potter" and that entity would have to possess the attribute of "being a wizard". Therefore, in an absolute sense "Harry Potter is a wizard" is not true; Harry Potter is nothing but a construct created by a mind. However; withing the context of the Harry Potter world, the statement is absolutely true; withing that "reality" Harry Potter is an existing entity that happens to be a wizard.

In the same sense, 2+2=4 is true; but only within the rules of this dream we call reality. It is relatively true, meaning; true under certain presuppositions or within a context. But on an absolute level, number and mathematics are not entities that exists in the way we understand the concept of existence; they are not independent from "the observer"/consciousness.

(Even though it is also quite controversial whether 2+2=4 is true if philosophical realism was true; would be depending on one's position on the problem of universals and on your definition of "truth". But that just as a sidenote from a philosophy freak )

[Andreas]

1 minute ago, kieranperez said:

This whole thread is just a clear example of a devil doing anything to self-reflect on its dogmas and bullshit. You’re only hurting yourself man. 

Haha nice one! I was asking you questions to reflect on your own dogmas. And when you don’t feel comfortable doing that you try to turn it on it’s head by stigmatizing me. As usual. I did not defend any idea. If your beliefs was true they would be able to stand up to scrutiny. 

[Zizzero]

9 minutes ago, kieranperez said:

This whole thread is just a clear example of a devil doing anything to self-reflect on its dogmas and bullshit. You’re only hurting yourself man. 

Said the devil.

You have a point, but let's at least be fair. Calling someone a devil and getting angry at someone for asking questions is far from being "free from ego".

It's always easier to see the ego in others

Edited April 24, 2019 by Zizzero

[Andreas]

16 minutes ago, Zizzero said:

Never had a nondual experience, but since we're talking about this, please tell me how far off I am with what I came up to understand.

So, when we're asking whether 2+2=4 is true does the following analogy make sense: "Harry Potter is a wizard" is a statement that is seemingly wrong; for it is true when there is an existing entity called "Harry Potter" and that entity would have to possess the attribute of "being a wizard". Therefore, in an absolute sense "Harry Potter is a wizard" is not true; Harry Potter is nothing but a construct created by a mind. However; withing the context of the Harry Potter world, the statement is absolutely true; withing that "reality" Harry Potter is an existing entity that happens to be a wizard.

In the same sense, 2+2=4 is true; but only within the rules of this dream we call reality. It is relatively true, meaning; true under certain presuppositions or within a context. But on an absolute level, number and mathematics are not entities that exists in the way we understand the concept of existence; they are not independent from "the observer"/consciousness.

(Even though it is also quite controversial whether 2+2=4 is true if philosophical realism was true; would be depending on one's position on the problem of universals and on your definition of "truth". But that just as a sidenote from a philosophy freak )

Well I think there are certain things we can understand as truths. Such as 2+2=4. But some things such as "Is this a nice drawing?" is something we can judge. But we cannot judge someone to not be able to understand something. Transcend and include logic. Not repress logic. 

[Leo Gura]

@Andreas These are tricky metaphysical questions which I don't want to waste my time explaining unless I sense that I am talking to a very openminded person who is going to be capable of thinking outside the box.

These things cannot be argued at you. You must take responsibility to contemplate them on your own.

If you want to understand what 2+2=4 means, start by contemplating: What is a number? What is equality? What is truth?

These are questions which takes years to contemplate.

The greatest mathematicians on the planet do not understand such things. It cannot be explained to you in a forum post. This is very serious stuff. Argument, proof, and reason count for virtually nothing here because all of those have been co-opted by ego.

If you truly understood what a number is, or what truth is, it would collapse your entire reality.

[Andreas]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Andreas These are tricky metaphysical questions which I don't want to waste my time explaining unless I sense that I am talking to a very openminded person who is going to be capable of thinking outside the box.

These things cannot be argued at you. You must take responsibility to contemplate the things being said.

If you want to understand what 2+2=4 means, start by contemplating: What is a number? What is equality? What is truth?

These are questions which takes years to contemplate.

The greatest mathematicians on the planet do not understand such things. It cannot be explained to you in a forum post.

If this is such a great and advanced truth, why is it so that only you understand but not the greatest mathematicians working in number theory? Are they just too unconscious? Why should I, from my perspective, spend what seems like a very long time to try to figure out a question not even the greatest mathematicians know the answer to?

Can you see how this might be perceived as cultlike behaviour?

Edited April 24, 2019 by Andreas

[Andreas]

41 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Andreas  Argument, proof, and reason count for virtually nothing here because all of those have been co-opted by ego.

Then why is it not wrong to say that there is no such thing as Santa Claus if some kid tells me so? Am I being unconscious?  

Edited April 24, 2019 by Andreas

[Forestluv]

47 minutes ago, Andreas said:

Why should I, from my perspective, spend what seems like a very long time to try to figure out a question not even the greatest mathematicians know the answer to?

That is indeed a bar that you will need to cross. I know how hard it can be. I spent 20+ years and my career within the objectivist paradigm you are contracted within. 

As difficult as it is, it can be done. I would say the two most important components are open-mindedness and curiosity. The effort is well worth it - I’m telling you this as someone who made the same arguments as you for over 20 adult years. You can’t see that you are contracted within a paradigm. Expansion beyond that objectivist paradigm is more liberating and mind-blowing than you can imagine.

You believe in other minds you see as great. I did the same with scientists like Sam Harris. Yet in doing so, you limit and squander your true potential. For you have the potential to expand beyond those limited minds. Yet you will need to take responsibility. You’ve got to want it, be open and curious. You have no idea how much your mind can expand. It’s not about me or Leo or some mathematician. It’s about you. How far do you want yo expand? How high do you want to go? What levels of genius do you want to reach? Those are questions you need to answer. If you want to reach your potential - open-mindedness, curiosity and observation. And so far you have shown very little. I spent a lot of time trying to explain genetics to you and in the end, you defended your beliefs and showed no openness and curiosity to learn and expand. Similarly, people have tried to show you post-logical concepts and you show the same behavior. You just aren’t teachable. This is not a mind that is open to learn and grow. If you would like to read about such a mind, read up on Leonardo Da Vinci. A book on him was one of my turning points. Da Vinci is a great example of a mind in which logic and science was within a much broader awareness and mastery. Science and logic was within a more expansive holistic genius. Yet you will need to be the one to take responsibility to expand beyond your comfort zone and grounding. At this time, it appears you are extremely entrenched within a contracted mindset and highly motivated to defend that mindset. It’s as if your ego’s existence depends in it. It took me 20 adult years to crack through it. I hope you can do so earlier in life because what lies beyond is magnificent. Beyond what you can imagine. 

As well, at 17 years old you prefrontal cortex is still developing for several more years. Your brain will develop higher capacities for nonlinear and abstract thinking.

[Adam M]

@Andreas It seems like you may be underestimating the role that 'levels of conciousness' have in these cases.

Doing spiritual work (meditation, yoga, psychedlics, contemplation) radically changes your perspective on life. It blurs many lines that you once thought were solid. 

This has been a well documented phenomenon for thousands of years in almost all cultures and spiritual communities.

 

What is your goal by arguing here on this forum? To get the members of this forum to reflect on their own belief systems? That's literally what we are trying to do to ourselves. That's the essence of spiritual work.

I am being skeptical of the most fundamental aspects of reality...including the idea that I even exist.

 

Of course I am personally not perfect and I do admit that I occasionally hold "nonduality" as a dogma.

Your skepticism should be directed inward towards the conceptual framework from which you are asking your questions. 

Sure you can ask people questions, but your questions are only useful if your intention is to learn, not to 'expose' any contradictions that the people on this forum make in their reasoning.

[Andreas]

5 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

That is indeed a bar that you will need to cross. I know how hard it can be. I spent 20+ years and my career within the objectivist paradigm you are contracted within. 

As difficult as it is, it can be done. I would say the two most important components are open-mindedness and curiosity. The effort is well worth it - I’m telling you this as someone who made the same arguments as you for over 20 adult years. You can’t see that you are contracted within a paradigm. Expansion beyond that objectivist paradigm is more liberating and mind-blowing than you can imagine.

You believe in other minds you see as great. I did the same with scientists like Sam Harris. Yet in doing so, you limit and squander your true potential. For you have the potential to expand beyond those limited minds. Yet you will need to take responsibility. You’ve got to want it, be open and curious. You have no idea how much your mind can expand. It’s not about me or Leo or some mathematician. It’s about you. How far do you want yo expand? How high do you want to go? What levels of genius do you want to reach? Those are questions you need to answer. If you want to reach your potential - open-mindedness, curiosity and observation. And so far you have shown very little. I spent a lot of time trying to explain genetics to you and in the end, you defended your paradigm and showed no openness and curiosity. Similarly, people have tried to show you post-logical concepts and you show the same behavior. This is not a mind that is open to learn and grow. If you would like to read about such a mind, read up on Leonardo Da Vinci. A book on him was one of my turning points. Da Vinci is a great example of a mind in which logic and science was within a much broader awareness and mastery. Science and logic was within a more expansive holistic genius. Yet you will need to be the one to take responsibility to expand beyond your comfort zone and grounding. At this time, it appears you are extremely entrenched within a contracted mindset and highly motivated to defend that mindset. It took me 20 adult years to crack through it. I hope you can do so earlier in life because what lies beyond is magnificent. Beyond what you can imagine. 

Seems like a highly egotistical pursuit. This is really not about me or genetics, this is about actualized.org. This is about what's true and I have yet to be convinced. So far, these ideas have not stood up to any scrutiny. It all boils down to this: 

Take our ideas (which are highly unconventional) and spend your life actualizing them, if you do you will be happy and have a nice life. If you do not, you are egotistical and unconscious. Here, buy our life purpose course and spend your life doing that, but not too much because you need to do work on enlightenment. Do this, do that, don't do this, don't do that. No time for independent thinking. For if you do disagree, you need to do more work on yourself. And hat is your fault, you are not taking responsibility. 

[now is forever]

2 devils + 2 eggs = 2 devils

2+2=2

Edited April 24, 2019 by now is forever

[Key Elements]

I'm just going to say this. Maybe it helps. Maybe it doesn't. It doesn't really matter.

@Andreas You took me by surprise when you used that adjective "cultish" on me. It's not because it's your opinion or whatever reason. It's because when I was having a discussion with Leo on this thread, I was actually disagreeing with Leo. Cult refers to strong (brainwashed) similarities, not differences.