Posts by Thomas Nelson25

Dana Davis5 said:I honestly never even doubted it... street fighting just pulls every single one of those raw, animal instincts right to the surface. You can practice gym techniques until you're blue in the face, but nothing—and I mean nothing—can truly compete with that kind of real-world chaos. It’s like trying to compare actual life wisdom to some guru who spends thirty years meditating in total isolation without ever actually stepping out into the world to experience anything real. They're just not even in the same league, you know? Anyway, thanks so much for the reply.

Exactly—that's why a truly wise person steps away from the crowd or stays on the fringes... a "life expert" (someone just surviving the rat race and playing it smart) isn't the real deal... right?!

Michael Gonzalez77 said:It's those specific mental capacities that kick in once you commit to that kind of discipline and maintain a much clearer headspace.

So, does it provide some kind of aura or shield?

I get what you're getting at—kind of like those ascetic monks.

Susan Sullivan6 said:I you’re saying the same thing... you aren't quite sure how much of it is actual fact versus just some kind of "movie magic."
It’s totally possible that after a lifetime of grueling training, their bodies just adapt to those kinds of extreme physical demands. Honestly, it's hard to say for sure.

As for Seagal, in any serious martial arts circle, he's considered a total fraud.😬

We're talking about actual spears here—say they weigh 130 lbs—so when you factor in surface area, force, pressure, blah blah blah... it's just wild.

Susan Sullivan6 said:From what I've gathered, their training sessions are absolutely brutal. It doesn't look like some choreographed performance routine like you see in Aikido.

So how do you explain those guys lying on actual sharpened spears without getting impaled?

Look, whether it's just for show or if some Japanese master actually cooked it up... honestly, having seen a few demos, it definitely feels like a performance. Kind of like Karate too.
I already brought up Seagal—those movie scenes are actually somewhat realistic depictions of technique, to an extent.

The thing is, the Japanese basically took that whole spiritual side from the Chinese, which brings in the concept of Qi—or Chi... or even Zen.

Susan Sullivan6 said:😁

It’s not even really about whether someone *wants* to fight or not; it’s more about whether the techniques actually work if things ever get messy. And honestly, in that department, Aikido kind of falls short 😁

On a side note, I personally believe there are certain energies in spirituality, sort of like an "etheric" body. 😬

A Shaolin? (I mean, there used to be a huge spiritual component to the training—not really anymore, but it was definitely there once)

Susan Price30 said:One should start from the premise that not all "energy" is the same (we actually call it something else, but anyway), and that your etheric body is essentially your own protection—not something meant to be manipulated at will by just anyone (especially not some random charlatan).

It is interesting, though, that only two people here recognized the suggestion for what it truly was.

I think psychology would call that state "flow."

To put it bluntly, we're talking about a spiritual state if it gets intense enough... whereas the psyche is always stuck on the ego, which isn't really true motivation.

Buddhism lets you imagine whatever the hell you want without getting hooked on it—once you hit that state of absolute freedom (you know, that "things as they really are" vibe, but on a deeper level where you've finally shaken off that tiny little ego). That’s true liberation. And it's about existing, too—it's definitely not that materialist nihilism stuff.
Syncretism is everywhere—honestly, it's just proof that information tends to decay and lose its edge, which is basically just how the laws of physics or the universe work. The whole point is the method you use to get to the goal, and that path can look like pretty much anything. That's what explains the Tibetans, or those shamanic Buddhists, for the most part.
Old-school spirituality is just dead. (My take, based on experience)

I'm messing around with a candle—energy from my hand is literally making the flame flicker—and there isn't even a draft in the room.

I mean, you gotta assume against an opponent like that, physical technique is gonna trump internal energy every single time—basically, mass and raw power take the lead. Of course, since their technique is rooted in that whole philosophy, they’ll just claim it’s a closed loop to justify it.
Just look at Seagal—the guy's built like a tank.

casualtiger2 said:I can't even remember when I first tried this—or why, really. Either way, there was zero hypnosis involved, and nobody was feeding me suggestions about what I should be feeling
(which is why I didn't claim any massive sensations were possible in the first place).
But, looking at how things work in spiritual circles, you’ve got people who haven't even tried it yet but already have an opinion—some cling to theories, while others see nothing but demons (or just assume it's all hypnosis/suggestion).
The practice doesn't need to be long; we aren't talking about exhaustion or hand cramping, nor is this some attempt to "clench hands" (?).
Anyway, here’s my take—after about 10 to 30 seconds, I start feeling these "ants" crawling through my fingertips and the center of my palms, along with a distinct flow of "energy."
In the middle of my palms, there's also this extra heat (if you've ever done Yoga Nidra involving conscious awareness shifting, or maybe some Autogenic Training, then you know the drill—wherever you focus your attention, that part of the body gets warmer, more relaxed, or "heavier").
After a few minutes, an "energy" flow establishes itself between my palms; when I slowly pull my hands apart, it feels like they're connected by some kind of elastic band.
That connection usually snaps and vanishes at around 15 or 20 inches.
PS
Elizabeth Castillo87, we're talking about etheric "energies" here. Does our discussion actually serve a purpose?
Thomas Nelson25
Do you practice Judo? I experienced some "incredible" things regarding ki flow back then.

I'm definitely interested in those kinds of skills—though, fair warning, I’m a skeptic (even if I do feel a noticeable energy boost compared to just hitting the gym). On the flip side, part of me isn't skeptical because I've had my own weird parapsychological moments before. They just happened spontaneously for reasons I couldn't pin down—maybe triggered by internal tension, total confusion, frustration, or even just some ego realization... usually accompanied by this surge of willpower or energy. Honestly, that whole phase was basically my awakening, which is what pushed me toward the psychological and spiritual stuff in the first place.
I think that's the key point right there (even if we're both just starting out)—there are all these different ways to generate energy within the physical body or even the more subtle ones, essentially plugging back into the Universe to recharge. That's pretty much the definition of a mystical state, isn't it?

So, basically saying Judo (and there’s plenty of other "ki" or "chi" based stuff out there too) is nothing more than just technique?

..that's my take—even if it's just a suggestion—as long as it fuels you up energetically, that's what matters. That's really the whole point of any spiritual experience, whether it's a specific skill or even medicine.

@Kevin Ruiz36
Nobody’s actually pulled off a transplant like that before—it was probably just some "viral" documentary making things look easy.
I'd be pretty shocked if I didn't know about it by now.

Jason Taylor said:So, I guess we could get into a whole debate about what "character" actually means.
In most cases, it’s just a bunch of learned behaviors we pick up along the way.

But I've been noticing how this cold, over-rationalized way of acting is starting to bleed into how girls are being raised these days, too. Maybe I'm totally off base here, though.

Whether it’s learned stuff from society, genetics, or even personal growth and self-correction—that’s possible, but it's really a journey of self-discovery. (Side note: I definitely lean toward that spiritual psychology approach)
Anyway, that's basically what various therapies do, except you have a counselor or mentor listening and giving advice. (Which often ends up being a form of programming, too)

Alright, I'm rambling a bit... so, anyway,

It feels like feminism has pushed women to mimic the male mindset—or maybe the system itself, through its values and goals, raises them that way—while stripping away all those innate feminine qualities. Instead of liberating women, it seems to have just piled on more weight to carry.
At the same time, you see more men becoming insecure—they're actually intimidated by these women because they live in a world where they aren't expected to be the providers/protectors anymore. And honestly? It's because that's how they were raised.

Robert Reyes4 said:Excuse me? I couldn't disagree more.
How are you supposed to actually connect with someone who has buried their emotions in a shallow grave somewhere?

I mean, when it comes to being a rock for kids or a spouse—those "tough guy" types—they're pretty simple emotionally.

It’s easy to talk to them—mostly because they’re actually the weaker ones mentally, so you end up playing the mom role. Everyone talks about guys crying or showing weakness, but nobody mentions that romantic, charming spark women actually want. (They try to make up for it by buying flowers or whatever.) Then you have the total opposite—guys who are all over their feelings, but they lack any backbone, so they aren't really what most women are looking for either. (And let's be real, not all women are wired the same, and they project those upbringing patterns onto men, too.)

Jason Taylor said:For sure, but let's be real—that kind of self-awareness usually gets crushed by super rigid, old-school parenting.
There are basically two massive pillars when it comes to how we raise kids based on gender.
Boys are constantly told they have to be "tough guys," while girls are basically drilled to focus on being "pretty."
And somehow, that’s the blueprint for raising a highly evolved, self-aware creature like a human being. Unbelievable.

Honestly, that doesn't really have anything to do with traditional upbringing or conservative lifestyles. (The world has moved toward liberalism; that's the dominant vibe now.) It’s just down to who a person is—their character and temperament.
Like, if someone is super rational, they don't get worked up easily... and honestly, that’s where the modern world is heading (if you aren't like that, people just call you neurotic or something), though I'd add a bit of superficiality to that mix, too.

I’d say women who end up with men raised with that "masculine" focus tend to hit their goals more easily—mostly because those guys aren't as distracted by chasing women. It’s basically a trade-off; women settle for that dynamic to get the sense of protection and security those men provide. Plus, at the end of the day, women are the ones raising sons. (Which, if you think about it, is pretty much the core of psychoanalysis.)
Maybe that whole model has been flawed all this time—at least in how we romanticize it—especially now that everyone’s trying to push this idea of the "modern man." Though, let's be real, people aren't exactly being honest about this stuff, even here.

Dionysus

Jeremy James3 said:Well, yeah. I suppose those old practices have just put on a new coat of paint, so anyone who isn't deeply familiar with them wouldn't ever connect the meat, the blood, and the fire back to pagan customs. It’s not even really about some "pagan tradition," because I think everything you do and everything you think just leaves its own mark on the universe for a while. It's pure knowledge. You really have to watch out for those types, though—most of the time, it's literally devilish business. There aren't many good witches out there, I think; most are just twisted people with wicked souls. And once you see that, you start to get a glimpse of who actually rules this country. But then again, I have a feeling you probably already know all that.

The only one worth praying to is the Almighty.

Well, see, if you're just using the four elements for immediate perks—like, you know, asking for rain or a better harvest—then I guess that isn't really spirituality. A shaman uses plants to shift their perception so they can actually learn something about the Universe and themselves, rather than just hoping for a good crop tomorrow. A shaman changes themselves, whereas a witch tries to change the nature around them, basically forcing it to bend to their will. But a shaman submits their own will to nature. It's probably good to understand both ways, but I think it's vital to know how to submit to nature for when it eventually decides to take control again.. 😉

First off, they're a doctor (and then a traveler to another realm)—so yeah, that's basically messing with natural flows, or what you'd call healing magic.

It seems like shamanism and witchcraft are pretty much the same thing (if you consider it the oldest form of human spirituality). Throw in Druids, then the Vikings and runes... as for Egypt, we can't say for sure.

Then on the flip side, you've got something like the Kabbalah—an abstract system that sits above those nine (or maybe fewer) dimensions—but even that has similarities, specifically with the four worlds. The real question is: have people actually evolved spiritually through patriarchal religions, or did those just overcomplicate everything?

The big question remains whether we as humans can move beyond trance states, or maybe even deep meditation. (Which kind of implies all religions are just fairy tales used for political and economic agendas)

Spirituality that’s all about being grounded in the country—if I'm not mistaken—goddesses and stuff. (though it uses the 4 elements too)
So what’s actually the difference between that and, say, shamanism?
I haven't quite figured that part out yet.

Betty Taylor34 said:So, after poking around this topic for a bit, I’m starting to second-guess whether this even falls under the umbrella of psychology, but I still can't quite bring myself to label it as just some "Alternative" nonsense, especially since I'm the kind of person who really leans on the scientific method and hard data... You know what I mean? Anyway, I actually stumbled upon that Law of Attraction documentary on YouTube recently, and there was this one line right at the start that just stuck with me—it said "universe does not exist without mind." When you take that idea, along with the whole movie, and try to mesh it with what quantum physics is suggesting these days, it actually starts to feel pretty logical... the only real headache is that you just can't put a ruler on it or measure it in a lab somewhere.🙂

What I meant was—for me, NLP lacks that real psychological depth. I mean, sure, it makes sense in a way (you see the marketing everywhere, all those subliminal messages, etc.), much like modern psychology, but it's just not quite there. (Still, worth looking into.)

That’s basically what Buddhism teaches too—that the mind is the creator of itself in some infinite sense... but how do you prove that? (Or maybe just prove it to yourself?)

From what I can tell, are you mostly looking for some kind of motivation?

There are tons of ways to go about it—everything from the more controversial stuff (ancient traditions found in all sorts of cultures) or Alternative methods (which you said aren't really your thing since you prefer science), all the way down to Jungian approaches—symbols, engrams, that kind of thing.

Andrew Doyle said:Why don't you actually explain what you mean by Neuro-Linguistic Programming to the rest of us since you're bringing it up? Do you actually have some hands-on experience with it, or are you just throwing around buzzwords?

Read a few books on it, but I don't know... let's just say some of it actually makes sense in real-life scenarios. (And if you're asking if psychology is my thing—nah, not really)