It’s not about beliefs it’s about experiences. Beliefs are left behind at Orange.
The OP consists entirely of unsubstantiated beliefs. There’s no shame in that, but call a spade a spade.
The OP has not substantiated his claims with evidence. The OP has not specified scientific puzzles that he wishes to solve. The OP has not specified practical problems that his tools address.
The OP has not defined free will, nor delineated between different definitions of the same.
The OP does have thinly disguised flattery: “Integral mind”, the highest stage, sounds attractive.
The OP is a new age motivational speech. Right?
The OP is a guy who did a bunch of acid.
All right, I can follow you on the illusory nature of the “me” character. Anybody can notice this, but it is a ‘subjective science’- a person has to participate to eventually see it for themselves. But who am I, or you, to tell them what to do? We don’t have the authority.
Still, if a person gets an idea of ‘I’, and traces that back to its source enough times, eventually they will see that ‘I’ isn’t what is commonly believed. Sure. It is more of a non-duality universe. Cause and effect are one thing, everything is one thing really, nothing changes and so what would a free will even look like? It’s just bliss, you wouldn’t want to change it anyway.
OTOH, I think there is a reality to the lower levels. The “me” illusion is at least still in play and still able to effect change its immediate environment. In other words, we can continue to act like normal individual humans even if we note the flaws in that point of view. It is just easier and more natural for everyone involved.
And I am not sure your logic follows that everyone is an “immobile awareness”. Of course the observer shares identity with its own impulses- that is what is creating the consciousness fer cryin’ out loud! :dubious: So, true at the top level, but not true at the level of the phenomena.
TL / DNR: Let’s not devolve into dissociation.
From my link on dissociation:
LSD isn’t on the list.
It integrates perfectly with science, but all statements are not yet possible to verify experimentally with objective Orange-level scientific methods. The function of rationality is to kill memes that are pre-rational, unfortunately the Operating system of rationality tends to treat trans-rational (Yellow+) memes as pre-rational (Blue-). Now Yellow+ levels are trying to find memes that will allow the Orange level to adapt to new ways of functioning. Specifically getting access to “Vision Logic” which allows you to independently observe the processes that are running within the body/mind system.
Basically when you are using Orange rationality you try to force everything into one system, rather than allowing separate systems to work in and inter-depentent way. By getting out of the 1:st person trap (I am thinking, I am feeling…) and into a 3:d or 4:th person perspective you give the different operating systems a chance to integrate more effectively. At Orange level the mind is run by symbols, thoughts and concepts that are not very effective at integrating the lower levels (instinct and emotion) and you end up with a lot of conflict
I’m sorry but it is not my job to convince you, I am sharing information and memes and it is up to your operating system to sniff out if there is anything interesting in it that might be helpful. I’ve already been at Orange level and don’t feel like there is much left of interest there right now, preferring to look to more integrated levels.
So you’re witnessing rather than debating? Understood.
FWIW, I sniffed; Smells like BS to me. <shrug>
So are you implying that endogenous drugs produce a temporary sense of association - starting in the early years and tending to fail in the latter ones ? Is that a view of reality or is that just some stuff the brain makes up because it’s useful ?
Buddhists like to look at the process of association and see how it works. They say that endogenous drugs are engaged in a process of fabrication - with the self as the result.
No personal shots, please. If you have this sort of concern just report it.
“Self determination is not a malfunction”.
OTOH, that quote is from a fictional android in a fictional milieu in a computer game. YMMV.
When I first inquired as to where his ideas came from, he said
…but what seems to have “appeared spontaneously” are large chunks of other already established new-wave teachings, coupled with second-hand knowledge of some religions(notice his pitiful analysis of Scientology, and his off the cuff claim that what he has is compatible with most other religions).
It’s true then, what they say: There’s nothing new under the sun - it’s all been done before.
What a tiresome, meaningless wad of word salad. This is so typical of self-proclaimed geniuses who don’t have the mental fortitude to subject their precious ideas of rigorous examination.
Bull. If you didn’t want to convince people, you wouldn’t start these threads. What you are actually claiming is the right to make the claim without the responsibility to back it up.
You are assuming that the only part of your brain which can make a decision is the conscious part. But it is perfectly feasible to make unobserved decisions in our subconscious. My subconscious solves problems and comes up with creative ideas all the time. Just because the decision making is hidden does not mean it is pre-programmed.
Some people may have free will. I have free won’t. I won’t be subscribing to your newsletter and I won’t be continuing to read this thread.
Let’s not get picky. Being able to predict rain when the storm clouds are over the next block is different from predicting rain next month.
To perfectly predict the behavior of another we’d need access to all the sensory inputs that person has and that person’s internal state, and be able to make the prediction in real time. Not going to happen.
To use your own example, to predict precisely when you go to the toilet I’d need to know what you ate and the bacterial content of what you ate, and what you are doing. (Being involved in something will affect it, right?) A lot of things we do are broadly predictable, not precisely predictable.
I’m of the school that says everything we do is in theory precisely predictable. And of the school that says this is no big deal. Predictability really has nothing to do with free will. Free will is just a subjective effect of consciousness. I might find it a bit disconcerting if you informed that your supercomputer has just analyzed 6,442,465,209 exabytes of input data and knew exactly what I was going to be doing at 5:00 PM this afternoon*, but it wouldn’t and shouldn’t make any difference to me – I would just go ahead and continue to make optimal and (subjectively) free choices.
- watching the Jays lose