Uh, okay. But regardless of whether you think “humans in reality” would do that, the guy we’re talking about is actually saying that stuff — and then he is actually still continuing to do things anyway, right?
It’s not like we (a) just watched an episode of a TV show that ended with this or that character reaching said conclusion, such that we (b) are eagerly discussing what that character will do in the next episode; the human in question, here in reality, said his piece and then just kept on doing things, didn’t he?
I like how the percentages add up to something way over 100, because obviously that petty math-stuff is just for the uninitiated.
And every time somebody tells you they have achieved such a state, what they really tell you is that they’ve invented a convenient narrative to judge themselves to be above all the other, unenlightened people. You can buy into this, of course: that way, you too get to be in possession of ‘absolute truth’ and get to justify some sense of superiority even if in the eyes of everybody else, you just don’t amount to much (for they who have not seen the light only see dimly, or somesuch).
Also, if anyone truly and completely followed what he said, and it truly and completely worked, I don’t see any way they could possibly express the opinion that it had changed their lives (I mean, that point of view would require the application of judgment)
I’m talking about replies like this: Thanks man…! I followed you since last two years, paid off…!! Initially when I started to watch your episodes I was a teenager. I am now in early adulthood. I invested abnormal time watching your videos.on Sundays literally I kept homework on hold and only work I did was just eat and watch your videos. I knew you are talking about something important but I can’t grasp it totally. In your one of the video(postmodernism I guess) you talked that the goal of actualized.org is the make you float while everyone is sinking in sand,I am floating now. Till now I watch your video because I was “helplessly dependent on them”.even there was no one around me who had same interest as me and able to answer the question satisfactorily. Ultimately I ended up with questioning absolutely everything and disbelief and loss of trust.I have shades of yellow and rest of green.I had hard time making friends.it was one way flow that okay I am in bunch of people they call me as friend but I don’t authentically feel them as friend.man…you have done great job…I am Indian …and we have a ritual so to speak that whenever a man gets his first salary …we keep that in front of “god”…we have a place in home called “devara” in Marathi (I am Maharashtrian)a small “thing”(I can’t describes it in english,see photo on google)where different idols of different deities are kept and worshipped, so we keep the salary in front of them in devara.it is holiest place in house and it is believed that brings good fortune by doing so…I can’t pay you money now because I am student currently .but I will pay you the first salary as a respect for what value you have provided till now….I would have hugged you if you were front of me…actually this comment is replay for green memes video but I just could’t hold the feelings in…love you…carry on great job…!!
Doesn’t that mean there is some merit? Or would that be wrong?
I know I probably should not be looking into this stuff but it’s been gnawing at me in the same sense that my first encounter with Buddhism continues to. It’s about stories particularly narratives. I know I heard something about it in eastern philosophy about how the self is really just a story we tell ourselves and that we are fundamentally empty. I have heard a few neuroscientists mention it as well. Sam Harris said soemthing around similar lines about how the self is an illusion and that there really isn’t a core you. Looking at life it does seem like it’s easy to see that to be the case. Ask people who they are and they list x y or Z, but then the author tends to cite soemthing about how this is just a story that we tell ourselves and that the stories we are born into (which I am guessing would be culture) narrow and limit us. Then there is some bit about consciousness that I don’t really get. But there is some gem there that I learned in sociology. That what we are born into defines how we see the world and that according to her one must unplug to “directly experience” reality. That it’s just an illusion. Personally I wonder if according to her she isn’t just spinning another narrative or story. Does wiping the slate clean so to speak really get at the fundamental of “who” (or in some cases she’s says “what” ) we are? Or is that just something we believe to be the case? I’m always a bit wary when people use the phrase “direct experience” (which I’m guessing is reality without our filters and judgements and fixings) because to me it just sounds like an assumption. That one assumes direct experience and yet I am reminded of the phrase “you don’t know what you don’t know”. Why are people so obsessed with being unlimited? I know this started one way but it ended up another, and I tried to summarize the links but I might have misssd a few bits here and there. I want to know others input on this. I am aware of the site name but perhaps we can gloss over it (asking a lot I know) and just address the words. I thinking other people here might have something to say. Personally I cannot put my finger on it but something seems off about it
That’s the part I get stuck on. They like to reference oneness alot and it is said that alot of the differences that exist between us are just in our heads.
Then there is a lot about relativity and that how we know the world is through relationships. Something is considered big relative to something else, or that the distinctions between the “parts” of our body are relative to other parts. The claim is that by dropping that story and “relativity” you see reality for what it is. I’m not 100% about that, but even saying science is relative gets me down.
Now I don’t really know how to make sense of the world. Considering how she mentions the stories we tell about us are limiting and life denying.
I’m not sure that this cannot be solved by thinking. As someone who has read a fair bit of science I doubt the accuracy of personal experience or if such experience really yields anything. As far as I know I am basically taking these people on their word. What I can say is that a certain set of beliefs, reasoning, and actions do yield such an experience. Whether that is truth is debatable. Sadly I don’t know nearly enough to know if she is right or not. I got a bit confused reading the links.
Mostly just the principles such as that which requires evidence for claims and such.
Which why I have skepticism about claims such as the following (which is made in the link):
“. Language ensures the content. Institutional grand narratives contain rationale, logic and presupposed truths about the nature of reality. They use different linguistic tools to influence the effect their big stories will have on the many people they are told to. And the peddling of truth in grand narratives is achieved through something called ‘nominalization,’ the act of turning verbs into nouns, of making connected processes into fixed objects. The grand narrative of health nominalizes the suffering of people as ‘symptoms,’ rendering processes and the movement of energies as immovable things. It crystallizes the movement of thought (in psychiatry), of emotion (in psychology) of the body (in general health) into concrete, separate forms that are acting upon a passive recipient. This grand narrative soaks into our personal stories, holding us hostage by feeding our innate sense of vulnerability. And other external objects, such as medication, are to pull us further away from the hidden knowledge which lies beyond our personal stories and activates our self-healing mechanisms.”
It sounds plausible to me but the again I have blind spots and historically have been very gullible