Leo's Blog: Infinite Insights — Page 2

Was Mother Teresa legit?

From what I understand, yes. The problem is that it's easy to nitpick and criticize anyone doing lots of good in the world by cherrypicking their faults and limits. This is an example of self-deception through lack of charitability. Regardless of everything, Mother Teresa helped thousands of people at great cost to herself, in a way which almost no one else would have the balls or selflessness to do. Mother Teresa suffered from the typical faults and limitations of Stage Blue, which is mainly ideological rigidity and closedmindedness. But for her era this was par for the course, not something to hold against her.

As for whether she was Awakened, obviously not. Helping people in need has zero to do with understanding God. In fact, it's a distraction. Sacrificing yourself to help others is not the same thing as realizing God. It is not intelligent to hold her lack of consciousness of God against her good works. You don't need one to do the other. Yes, you can help many people through dogma alone, although generally that will backfire.

Notice the self-deception of critics like Christopher Hitchens. His atheist agenda blinded him from seeing the genuine good she did. You don't need to buy into Christianity to admit that some exceptional Christians use the ideology to do lots of good. Dr Albert Schweitzer is a prime example. I have a good book about him in my book list. I have a good book about Gandhi too. I find criticism of these figures in poor taste because the critics are not better people. Before you go criticizing someone like Mother Teresa or Gandhi, first get honest with yourself about how many poor and sick people you have helped? It is very easy to criticize. It is very difficult to help thousands people while living in poverty yourself.

This is the dark underbelly of how AI is trained.

You can clearly see that this will not lead to AGI. So get ready for the AI bubble to burst.

Of course Jordan Peterson's online university is no rival to actual universities.

The irony of all these critics of mainstream things like universities or media is that their alternative solutions are all worse than what they criticize. Are universities corrupt? Of course. But some thing some right-wing ideologue throws together is going to be more corrupt than that. How is that no obvious? Is Jordan Peterson capable of inventing a system better, truer, more objective, less ideological, less corrupt than mainstream universities? Of course not. How could he? He's an ideological actor. An ideological actor cannot create a more truthful system.

The notion that Jordan Peterson is going to gather a handful of his intellectual buddies and invent something better than a university is laughable. Criticizing and ranting is easy. Inventing a better alternative is near impossible. It is not enough to criticize systems, you have to invent superior alternatives that actually solve existing systemic problems. It is ironic that JP attacks a 500 year old institution like universities and seeks to replace it with some flimsy, time-untested, cheap, online gimmick. That is the opposite of conservative.

This guy lived the Stage Red lifestyle and finally out-grew it at age 60.

This is an insane degree of corruption. And notice how ignorant people regard such corruption as good or even saintly. That's because they equate survival with Good. They aren't thinking about anything but their immediate survival.

A prime example of Stage Red.

A good case-study in corruption. A prime example of Stage Red. Notice how foolish Stage Red is. They all end up dead or in prison. And they cannot stop themselves even when they're ahead.