Holo Cene

Funny thing is this current trajectory started with a health problem. I had developed a bad candida problem and went to doctors who did nothing for me. Then I started to research online about how to deal with the problems of health. Ultimately this lead to revelations about the health industry, central being the government doesn't want you to be healthy. I had always had a deep skepticism about the government since I had devoured all of the obligatory knowledge in order to be considered well educated, including the new scientists like Dawkins, Hawking, Pinker etc. This was on a different level entirely though, as it was sociopathic the way they designed medicine and health that got me to understand that things were really skewed. After that, I became addicted to conspiracy theories starting with TZM and Loose Change. Then peak oil, Alex Jones, Jesse Ventura and David Icke. The world just seemed to be completely illusory and these people pretended to pull back the curtain, though even then I knew David Icke was insane with his whole lizard people thing, it was funny. Then from there it was Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente and all of the Economic Crash stuff. Started to prepare for that, then I watched There will be no Recovery, Prepare Yourself Accordingly by Stefan Molyneux and it was like someone had opened up my brain and was saying things that made absolute sense. The funny thing is it sounded exactly like I already knew it, but someone was articulating it. As if my unconscious already knew what was being said was true before a word was uttered. Then I began devouring as much of his podcasts as I could, slowing down at times to digest the intellectual nutrients. There have been a lot of changes in my life since, broke up with 4 year girlfriend, stopped talking to all of my friends, and am working on trying to realign my familial relationships. It has been the best and worst thing that has ever happened to me, if that makes any sense .

My mother was someone who only used her children to further her own needs/goals. This lead to any desire, emotion, need, or goal to be completely and utterly invalid and in turn suppressed and repressed from existence. This would happen because my mother would get incredibly angry if we expressed unapproved thoughts or behaviors. We learned to not have any. This in turn led to "friendships" where I would seek out narcissists who would then use my blank repressed state to manipulate and use me as a human mirror. There was never anything of myself, or my personality that was ever at issue, and any attempt on my part to express myself would be met with resistance and negativity so my "friends" would not lose the mirror to their narcissism. I was obviously a voluntary participant since my history had created a pattern of dependence on other people to fulfill my personality but it lead to a pretty vicious cycle.

I think of the hero's path as something undertaken for the self. The principle usually boils down to a young person begins to come of age. During that time a mentor will usually arrive and thus training the young adept at a certain skill until the hero gains proficiency. Then the hero can pursue the goals that he/she wishes to attain with the newly mastered skill set. That is how it usually goes in movies and books. The problem is that there is no outside agent who cares enough about you to spend the time to teach you something properly. This task is usually left to parents, and who for the most part do a terrible job. I think heroism in this sense is a journey of the self. You must become your own mentor, you must become your own Obi-Wan Kenobi. The process of heroism never stops because the skills you need to thrive are never ending. People like Stefan help along the way to provide valuable knowledge, but it's application is left up to you. Heroism is about first overcoming the social dogma of hopelessness and then learning how to master your environment by guiding behavior, emotions and cognition to a specific goal. This goal having a sound moral and philosophical consistency, is the path of heroism.

Are you wondering how people manipulate others to their own ends?

i love that idea so much. It has been very helpful in my relationships.

I think some kind of answer to pain and suffering is what these spiritualist's offer. When their answers fall short as they usually do, a new search must begin anew for a different source of information and teaching that is more aligned with reality and thus offer a path or solution to the problems that we face. The spiritual teacher/guru might offer a stopgap in terms of a solution that feels good but has no lasting effects, since it has gimmicks that do not address the fundamental issue, which is our histories. The formative years of our lives have had tremendous impacts upon how we view and interact with the world around us. A philosopher like Stefan helps us to relearn how to interact with reality by setting stringent standards of rationality and empiricism to every proposition and theory we come across.

I am definitely rocking my high horse for Christmas. It isn't personal, my horse was just born with really long legs. That being said, I didn't intend to imply anything other than the systems of thought and accountability in either Deepak or Tolle is at the very least suspect, never mind the marketing to unhappy people part, because that was just my conjecture. Is dirty fishbowls a euphemism?

The difference between the two is so profound, they should not be confused. Soul is a vague term meant to reference some immeasurable essence that has no property or value, other than to assuage confusion. Virtue on the other hand is a clear and decisive moral reference that clearly sets a boundary on responsibility and awareness. If one is selling a product, one must avoid making any hard distinctions that will cause discomfort or hardship. Claiming the soul is broken and that a guru can heal that soul or has knowledge of the right way, is a sure sign of deception. Essentially it is a marketing strategy meant to take resources from miserable people.

Applying to different philosophies in search of a "truth" using mainstream accepted religious sources, like Buddhism, Hinduism etc. is problematic. These religions have stood the test of time because they do not conflict with the ruling classes, nor do they effect any meaningful change in a population that is worth considering a threat. That in itself is a barometer of their relation to truth.

Sounds like a really awesome dream where you got what you asked for. The unconscious seems to be motivating you to explore the wonder that is your selfhood.

Having these types of conversations can be futile at times, or feel that way anyways. He obviously has no real arguments and doesn't even care that he doesn't. I have had a few discussions where people get really emotional and start to throw ad homs like grenades trying to diffuse the argument through attack. Stefan talks about this phenomena where your fellow slave attacks your for voicing truth. People can only see the truth when they desire to, because if they admit the truth then they know they will have to undergo a profound alienation from their society and relationships. People will not willingly pay that cost. Though that does bring up another point. Why do we choose truth over the lies?

I voted every day I could. I did forget the last few days though. Very well deserved. You have changed my life and so many other lives for the better. I don't know if you can feel the fellowship but it really shines when reading the accounts of your effect on peoples lives. May it continue for many more decades to come. Bravo sir!

I would stay until I was financially, mentally and emotionally strong enough to go out and do my own thing, which includes getting a job that allows you to live without help from your parents. That doesn't mean it is the right thing to do, especially with your mom looking to sabotage you, but I think it is the safest. That means a lot of commitment to self-work and to learning, because relying on your parents will always be the easy way out.

I don't think you understood my definition. If I define god as a being that sucks my penis at night, how would you disprove it? Him sucking my wang, while he is invisible is just a part of what defines god. You are defining god as something that is outside of context, then you basically make it impossible to argue anything rational because your definition is irrational.

Devil's advocate. Ok cool. So that argument is like me saying Jesus' farts smelled like cotton candy. How do I arbitrarily get to make assertions about something just because someone told me it was true? That is a self fulfilling prophecy. You define god as being exempt from his own laws, but then when asked how you know that fact you reply "because the bible said so". Therefore you win the argument because you can use a definition that contradicts the opposite position. I say 2+2=5. You say that isn't mathematically possible. Then I respond with the fact that 2+2=5 in the 8th dimension because a mathematical metaphysician proclaimed it in his book I HAVE VISITED THE 8th DIMENSION. How do I argue against that from the perspective of the 8th dimension? I can't because for all intents and purposes it is bullshit.

Some theories of evolutionary psychology posit the relationship between solidarity through religiosity and survival, which meant religious populations dominated the non-religious and thus spread the genetic basis for it.

You are way too deeply indoctrinated to even argue with, because no amount of reason or rationality trumps "faith". I'm surprised that a fundamental christian could apply to rational empirical philosophy.

First, you didn't address what I said. It would be a "good" because who the hell doesn't want to go to heaven? Having exceptions to universal principles is exactly the kind of bullshit predators use to enslave man. God and religion is no different. You are giving moral and political authority to religious figures who can then invoke gods will to violate the principles that the religion supposedly embodies. Principles cannot be good for one but not the other or they are not principles.

By that logic, you can go into a church and kill all of the congregation and call it "good" because your sending them to heaven.

That must suck man. A piece of hope I can give you, is that the self-work leads to better things. When you can integrate yourself and direct the course of your brain change through arduous work, commitment and dedication the changes will happen. This includes the things you want to do, as you grow the skill sets and the awareness, the opportunities and possibilities of the world open up to you. I would say the first step is embracing rejection and failure. Let them in, let their history fill your soul by embracing it in your present life.

I think black women only exist as they do because of the welfare state. From what I have been told a similar fate has befallen British women in some sectors because of the reliance on government welfare. I think without the welfare women pretty much have to readjust the paradigm, simply because women's standards will have a monumental shift, because a) A lot more will be in the market for stable male providers, and b) The increase demand for providers will shift male tactics in courting. The point I made earlier about conditioning versus manipulating applies here, as the government wants to avoid the rebirth of the family and thus fuck with female preferences in mating choices. How they do this once welfare becomes an economic impossibility will definitely be something to see.

Indeed. It is a very sad situation.

I don't necessarily disagree with you but it can become a self fulfilling property. We can easily become enmeshed in a dialectic where we think we already know the truth, perhaps because of emotional biases caused by our histories. This of course is the danger in any philosophy and one that must be challenged at all turns. It might lead to emotional reactions, as opposed to logical solutions based on rational analysis and thought. Women are not these heartless beasts who objectify men, They are just as caught in the web as men are. She was once a child who through intimidation and violence and fear learned to follow the herd. I think this gets a little lost in the mix.

Males have been proving worthiness since the dawn of genders. Consumer culture might be manipulating it but it isn't conditioning it. Just one line that I think could be thought out more.

I can't disagree. I do think as with all things there are concerns. As long as they are aired out and in open discussion I think it becomes a healthy activity. The fantasy aspect of the show for me is a little troublesome, but we are all on that journey towards selfhood where fantasy has been a pacifier.