Leo featured in suicide cult article

[Inliytened1]

4 minutes ago, SOUL said:

@Danioover9000  This is the cult thread, the solipsism thread is all the other threads until Leo comes out with a new video topic, then all the other threads will be that topic.

Although, remember, you're the only one that exists and everything is imaginary including this reply... so why are you taking to yourself?

Enough with the sarcasm.

[SOUL]

Just now, Inliytened1 said:

Enough with the sarcasm.

...if you're the only one who e.... eh, never mind.... I mean it.... NEVER MIND!

[Inliytened1]

25 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Inliytened1  I thought the gist of his criticism was purely for attention, rumo, gossip and drama. Or was it just mainly him accusing Leo of being a cult leader?

Honestly I don't know.  That's why I asked.   I'm willing to meet him head on.  I also can take it on the chin if I'm wrong.

[Danioover9000]

@SOUL

10 minutes ago, SOUL said:

@Danioover9000  This is the cult thread, the solipsism thread is all the other threads until Leo comes out with a new video topic, then all the other threads will be that topic.

Although, remember, you're the only one that exists and everything is imaginary including this reply... so why are you taking to yourself?

   Yeah, I get that I'm the only one that exists, and everything is imaginable on the absolute level and relative levels.

   But honestly, no offense to Leo Gura, he sucks at being an actual cult leader. If we made a low to high tier of cult leaders, Leo's on the bottom tier easily. He can't compete witb the likes of Charles Manson or Donald Trump cult wise, so accusing him of being a cult is delusional and intellectually lazy. To me it's just bad and stupid with some individuals trying to build a case that Leo or Actualized.org is a cult, without realizing the foundation for sucb a case being built is on top of a sink hole. It's also not surprising, taking into account where they come from, their value sustem, cognitive and moral development, personality traits, states of being and consciousness, and other lines of development, and other areas if regression being projected.

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, Danioover9000 said:

@SOUL

   Yeah, I get that I'm the only one that exists, and everything is imaginable on the absolute level and relative levels.

   But honestly, no offense to Leo Gura, he sucks at being an actual cult leader. If we made a low to high tier of cult leaders, Leo's on the bottom tier easily. He can't compete witb the likes of Charles Manson or Donald Trump cult wise, so accusing him of being a cult is delusional and intellectually lazy. To me it's just bad and stupid with some individuals trying to build a case that Leo or Actualized.org is a cult, without realizing the foundation for sucb a case being built is on top of a sink hole. It's also not surprising, taking into account where they come from, their value sustem, cognitive and moral development, personality traits, states of being and consciousness, and other lines of development, and other areas if regression being projected.

He was joking 

[SOUL]

@Danioover9000  My impression is that culty behavior is way more prevalent than people realize, so much of society is ruled by it from social norms to religious belief to consumerism and on and on.

Even though there is definitely a concerted top down effort to control people, their thinking and behavior through all the means of society it appears people willingly volunteer themselves to be culty because of the desire to belong.

Even if Leo took every possible precaution to distance from any cultiness people would still behave this way because it's been ingrained in their conditioning to do so. It may even be accurate to argue that humans have a natural social disposition that leans towards it.

[Inliytened1]

@SOUL that's pretty scary 

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

 

 

@Tim R noted and agreed. I think I have said my piece around the ban scenario.

I would just like to address this final point of @Inliytened1, because I do believe it is constructive and fits the theme of this particular thread.

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

I think we got to the bottom of his ciriticsm.  And that he jumped the gun.

So I don't actually believe we did get to the bottom of my criticism because things got de-railed somewhat and so my understanding is that you feel something has been missed by me, and that my doing so indicates my "jumping the gun". I have read through the thread and can only assume you are referring to is the notion that Leo never claimed to have healing abilities, only that it was possible - thus my criticisms are invalid, and I "jumped the gun".

This is entirely incorrect. Here is the direct quote

"I can help you to discover that you are God. When you do realize that you are God, this will instantaneously solve every single problem in your life, not only that but it will heal you, it will heal you of every disease and problem that you have"

Here is the timestamp to him saying it - https://youtu.be/6BOSwQAM27M?t=111

Just to add a further bit of context this was said by someone who states they have already had such an awakening, many times in fact, and is now declaring that they can give other people the same awakening, which he is OBJECTIVELY stating (I know you struggle with this one) that it will "Heal you of every disease and problem that you have"

So my criticism is that Leo is making an OBJECTIVE claim with a real world outcome, and as I have said before to make such a claim is delusional, just as it was delusional when Connor Murphy was making such claims and Leo RIGHTFULLY described him as delusional.

Now in addition to my own opinion of what was said, Leo himself offered his own take on that particular quote right here on this forum on a conversation he and I had back in 2020. Here is what he e said about the exact quote I listed above, and I will leave the direct link below

Leo Gura - "That particular statement was overstated, to be fair to you. And I can see why that would arouse skepticism in people like you."

OK, so even the guy who said it admits that he did actually say it and that it was a bit "overstated". Once again we can see that the criticism is indeed absolutely valid, and that no - there was no "jumping the gun".

Now I will completely grant that later in the video Leo starts talking about some things which MIGHT be possible, which is what I think you are latching on to, but hey - that's a problem with much of Leo's content in that he says A LOT OF STUFF, some of which is contradictory to itself. Again this is covered in that original thread from 2020. 

I hope this helps clear up your confusion around "jumping the gun", and gives a useful lesson in not overusing the phrase "jumping the gun" particularly when it as actually you who is jumping the gun, in saying that someone else is jumping the gun. I hope it also firmly puts to bed the fanciful idea that I am just pulling these criticisms out of thin air - as you can see I keep fairly exhaustive receipts.

Are we all good now, or is there something else you would like me to cover? ?

34 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Honestly I don't know.  That's why I asked.   I'm willing to meet him head on.

As you know from experience I am happy to meet you head on anytime. Last time we did meet head on you ended up straw manning around things I have never actually said, and agreeing with everything I did actually say.

34 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

I also can take it on the chin if I'm wrong.

Glad to hear it, because you are in fact wrong so I hope you have a strong chin ?

 

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by AdeptusPsychonautica

[SOUL]

@Inliytened1 It certainly is in light of how the current political landscape has become. Looking at how the political parties have become almost like ideological cults with some extremists on the right even openly and eagerly talking about civil war and violence as the only way to 'resolve' it.

[Inliytened1]

@AdeptusPsychonautica here is your great misundersnding and you can only be awake to know this"

"I can help you to discover that you are God. When you do realize that you are God, this will instantaneously solve every single problem in your life, not only that but it will heal you, it will heal you of every disease and problem that you have"

Yes. In God Consciousness you WILL be cured of all ailments.   I have confirmed this.  However- once back in the ego these things will return.  It may take years to return but the further you sink back into the ego they shall return.   But Leo did not lie.  In a state of God Consciousness you will be cured of everything  because you will be God. 

[SOUL]

@AdeptusPsychonautica Were you referring to my sarcasm as a derailing force in the thread? I hope it did derail the hostility of the posting because we can discuss the topic and points without the antagonism and personal vindictiveness.

Even if you didn't start it or weren't the worst or whatever I do understand how being attacked online can dehumanize the whole discourse but I appeal to your humanity and understanding that if you rerail(?) the discussion back on topic you do so with compassion.

Thank you for your consideration and contributions.

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

Just now, Inliytened1 said:

Yes. In God Consciousness you WILL be cared of all ailments.   I have confirmed this.  However- once back in the ego these things will return.  It may take years to return but the further you sink back into the ego they shall return.   But Leo did not lie.  Ina state of God Consciousness you will be cured of everything  because you will be God. 

Cool, I will add the word "cured" to the list of words which you use but do not seem to understand what they mean ?

PS: I did not say that Leo lied (again strawman), I simply said that he was wrong to make this claim, and he at least partially agrees - so your woo woo white washing of this statement is kinda irrelevant at this point.

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, AdeptusPsychonautica said:

Cool, I will add the word "cured" to the list of words which you use but do not seem to understand what they mean ?

PS: I did not say that Leo lied (again strawman), I simply said that he was wrong to make this claim, and he at least partially agrees - so your woo woo white washing of this statement is kinda irrelevant at this point.

He was wrong to say it is permanent.

You have to clean up your own shadows. God will not do that for you

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

1 minute ago, SOUL said:

@AdeptusPsychonautica Were you referring to my sarcasm as a derailing force in the thread?

No I have not made any reference to you in any of my posts in this thread. The de-railing to which I alluded was @Inliytened1 having a meltdown and banning a user for no reason.

I would concur with your sentiments, and hey - I would like to think that I am here in good faith, providing well reasoned arguments for the points I am making, and I appreciate those that take the time to respond in kind. 

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

4 minutes ago, Fearey said:

@AdeptusPsychonautica If taking Leo out of context is the only kind of contribution you're capable of making, I'd recommend getting yourself a new hobby.

None of it is out of context, I mean this has already been covered at length within this thread so please keep up.

In regards to new hobbies though then I am always open to ideas - what would you suggest?

[Inliytened1]

15 minutes ago, AdeptusPsychonautica said:

Cool, I will add the word "cured" to the list of words which you use but do not seem to understand what they mean ?

PS: I did not say that Leo lied (again 

You dismiss it as a joke.  It is not.   But ailments ultimately lie within the mind.  In an infinite state of consciousness you will have no ailments. It is only as a mortal being and your need to survive as this being that you can suffer 

[AdeptusPsychonautica]

3 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

You dismiss it as a joke. It is not.

I am making a joke out of the way you use words, because I find it nonsensical.

5 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

But ailments ultimately lie within the mind.  In an infinite state of consciousness you will have no ailments. It is only as a mortal being and your need to survive as this being that you can suffer 

On some level I agree with you, particularly in conditions related to trauma of which I have some expertise. Trauma can result in the manifestation of physical symptoms as well as emotional and psychological distress, and so the processing of such trauma through altered states is well documented.

HOWEVER...

Stating that all ailments lie within the mind is, in my opinion, complete bullshit. I appreciate that what I am saying differs from your chosen flavour of solipsism but viruses, parasites, genetic defects, and mangled limbs from automobile accidents are not "within the mind", so to make a generic statement around "all ailments and diseases and solving every problem in your life " is just flat out wrong.

[Inliytened1]

4 minutes ago, AdeptusPsychonautica said:

I am making a joke out of the way you use words, because I find it nonsensical.

On some level I agree with you, particularly in conditions related to trauma of which I have some expertise. Trauma can result in the manifestation of physical symptoms as well as emotional and psychological distress, and so the processing of such trauma through altered states is well documented.

HOWEVER...

Stating that all ailments lie within the mind is, in my opinion, complete bullshit. I appreciate that what I am saying differs from your chosen flavour of solipsism but viruses, parasites, genetic defects, and mangled limbs from automobile accidents are not "within the mind", so to make a generic statement around "all ailments and diseases and solving every problem in your life " is just flat out wrong.

Be careful.  All traces back to the mind.  You have spun a wide web.  And you won't even know how wide your web goes until you look.

[zurew]

24 minutes ago, AdeptusPsychonautica said:

Stating that all ailments lie within the mind is, in my opinion, complete bullshit. I appreciate that what I am saying differs from your chosen flavour of solipsism but viruses, parasites, genetic defects, and mangled limbs from automobile accidents are not "within the mind", so to make a generic statement around "all ailments and diseases and solving every problem in your life " is just flat out wrong.

It's flat out wrong only,if you are looking at it from your paradigm.

You are using a different kind of epistemic foundation compare to most of the users on the forum, and thats all okay. However, your last sentence is an objective sentence, that "it is just flat out wrong", now speaking from a materialistic paradigm it could be true. It all depends on, in what structure you want to place that statement. Basically, all your critisism can be boiled down to this problem, that you and Leo are using different kind of epistemic foundations, and your criticism is only true and valid within your paradigm, Leo's claims will be true if you are using his foundations (or it can only be then realised). So for your critisisms to be objectively true, as you want it, you have to assume, that your worldview is objectively correct, and you can just assume that whole foundation(that you use) before you want to make a claim or a criticism.

Now, we can start to argue whose foundation is correct and why, but i think what i said above, must be understood first.

[Inliytened1]

9 minutes ago, zurew said:

It's flat out wrong only,if you are looking at it from your paradigm.

You are using a different kind of epistemic foundation compare to most of the users on the forum, and thats all okay. However, your last sentence is an objective sentence, that "it is just flat out wrong", now speaking from a materialistic paradigm it could be true. It all depends on, in what structure you want to place that statement. Basically, all your critisism can be boiled down to this problem, that you and Leo are using different kind of epistemic foundations, and your criticism is only true and valid within your paradigm, Leo's claims will be true if you are using his foundations (or it can only be then realised). So for your critisisms to be objectively true, as you want it, you have to assume, that your worldview is objectively correct, and you can just assume that whole foundation(that you use) before you want to make a claim or a criticism.

Now, we can start to argue whose foundation is correct and why, but i think what i said above, must be understood first.

that is a great point.  Only awakening can reveal this.  And you can only awaken if if you are open to other paradigms.