Posts by Nancy Thompson3

Hannah Morris3 said:And honestly, we’ve never cared about the environment more than we do right now. Even here in the States—where we actually do way less than people realize—we're finally seeing some movement after being stuck in neutral for so long.
Exactly—there were fewer people. That meant fewer mental health crises, simply because the population was smaller. Fewer murders, too. But there was also more violence against women, children, and anyone vulnerable. I see actual progress being made; I find it hard to believe you don't.
Sure, technology gives us the tools for global-scale violence, but I don't think that means we've collectively "fallen" as a society.

The issue isn't whether we're protecting the environment or not; it's that we're doing absolutely nothing while living entirely on credit. We don't have an answer to a single fundamental question regarding the survival of civilization. We’re just letting things spiral until the absolute last second. It's like we're falling from the eighth floor and cheering because we're picking up speed, feeling great just because we're passing the first floor, hoping some kind of deus ex machina will swoop in and save us.

Hannah Morris3 said:I agree that you could call that aspect a "fall." Though, frankly, I don't think people even 500 years ago cared about nature any more than we do now...

But there were just fewer of us back then. Now, we’ve basically decided to burn through a million years' worth of solar energy in a mere century.
When I see those types strutting down fashion runways, wearing overpriced designer boots... they aren't even looking at the world around them. It’s all just lights, their own personal frustrations, some vague design concept, a Vestax turntable, and whatever club track is playing...
Or when I see the corporate types preening in their crisp shirts and ties, driving luxury cars, hiding behind walls of glass and concrete while pretending they’re actually doing something important...
Then there are the idiots like Jack Welch, Donald Trump, and those other lowlifes who recite these endless odes to "business strategy," when in reality, everything they do is just glorified theft...
Or seeing George Bush begging Congress for another few dozen billion dollars just to keep the military machine grinding away in Iraq...
Or noticing how science has basically dwindled down to studying telecommunications, 3D rendering, and building "dream factories"...

And then, when I realize that despite being seventy-something years old, we haven't been back to the Moon, we barely know anything about planets outside our own solar system (aside from that one recently found), we have no clue what's actually happening inside our own planet, and we still haven't figured out anything besides spinning wheels and burning fossil fuels—all while those elites at the top whine about nuclear power plants and play around with their little art school concepts...

That’s when it hits me. We’ve just grown soft in our luxury, lulled to sleep by the warmth of disappearing oil.

Hannah Morris3 said:Both. Everyone loves to whine about the "decline" of modern society, but I don't see an obvious collapse here. Was life truly better a few centuries—or even millennia—ago?
On the flip side, we look at certain indigenous tribes in the Americas and label them "primitive," yet they live in harmony with natural laws and respect one another—some even operate under matriarchal structures, which is a clear step up from our current setup. It’s all relative, but I believe we are moving forward—slowly, sure, but steadily.

We’ve failed.
I think we know why. We've traded living in sync with the Earth for this sheer arrogance, fueled by temporary wealth that was basically just lent to us by the planet itself.
While we're busy taking daily showers, walking down brightly lit streets, chatting on smartphones, and cruising around in self-driving cars... we aren't even thinking about how we're squandering the inheritance the Earth left for us. Instead of using those resources to grow and finally move beyond our mother, the Earth, we’ve just sunk into luxury, debauchery, and pure egoism.
Yeah. Everything we have is just the result of the massive amounts of energy the Earth gave us, which we're lazily burning through. OIL!

Arthur Grant4 said:Why is there this obsession with climbing the corporate ladder or being number one?
It’s pure ego.
Competing and giving it your all? Sure. But enjoying the actual process instead of chasing some imaginary concept of success or failure? That's the key. Once you strip away the ego, you realize how hollow those demands actually are.
In that sense, American capitalism is completely empty. It’s cold and selfish, if you want my honest opinion.
But you don't have to be just as cold to survive in it.
You've got a job, you've got food on the table. That's plenty.
I don't see any egoism in that.

Because that’s just how the world works. The stronger force crushes the weaker one.
If you aren't successful, they just swallow you whole.
And if I remember correctly from back in the day, Americans rejected communism, right? Well, that system wanted EQUALITY! Now, suddenly, competition—which is what they call "market competition" these days—doesn't sit so well with you.
A company that isn't winning gets taken over by another firm, its people get laid off, and the entire system gets RESTRUCTURED.

Competing and giving it your all—that's the thing. Just enjoy the process instead of obsessing over some fiction or idea of success versus failure. Without an ego, you can see how empty those needs really are.
Capitalism is completely hollow in that sense. Cold and selfish, if I'm being honest.

It's the same with SPORTS! Just look at what people do in the world of sports.

Amanda Flores2 said:I really need to vent for a second... I’ve been struggling with these tiny breakouts all over my face, and honestly, it’s destroying my confidence. I feel so incredibly self-conscious. I’ve been seeing a dermatologist for months now—just going through the motions—but nothing seems to be changing. It’s frustrating, really. People keep telling me how beautiful I am, but I just can't see it; I feel terrible. I look at all these girls walking around the city with absolutely flawless skin—it feels like they're everywhere—and then there’s me, feeling like I want to hide whenever I step outside. Even when I'm talking to someone, I can't help but wonder if they're just staring at my blemishes instead of listening to what I'm saying. Every single morning, I find myself staring into the mirror for ten minutes straight, checking every possible angle, picking at my skin like some insecure teenager... even though I'm well past that stage. And yet, everyone insists it isn't even that noticeable—that they're just minor little spots! Why is it so hard for me to just accept this as part of who I am and stop obsessing over it?

Just ignore it. Guys don't even notice that stuff. Honestly, they care way more if you have a bad attitude.

hiddentrucker16 said:Alright, someone please walk me through this—what does it actually mean to be "adaptable"? To what exactly am I supposed to be adjusting... and more importantly, who or what am I held accountable to in all this?

I guess you adapt to your environment, but maybe not by just blindly following whatever bullshit society tries to force on you. You have to find some kind of balance, using a little bit of wisdom, I suppose.
As for responsibility, you should probably be responsible to the people around you.

Noah Sanchez7 said:I agree, it’s obvious, but Maya is a pretty powerful "reality"

Look, there's plenty of books and movies out there that explain this clearly. You don't even need to look toward Eastern religions or try becoming some kind of mystic.
Just check out the movie "instinct"... That should be enough, or close to it..

People have this urge to own things; humans just love saying "this is mine," so they spend their whole lives just swapping out one "toy" for another.

Is that tree in your backyard yours?

Based on how we usually think, yes. In the sense that you can pick all the fruit and eat it. But that tree doesn't actually belong to us, just like a mother doesn't own her son—though everyone still tries to claim them, and that's where things go sideways..

There is a massive difference between possessing something and simply EXISTING!

Jason Johnson4 said:Nothing that isn't eternal is actually real. I don't care what you call it or how permanent it might seem right now—it’s all just an illusion, isn't it? 🙂

Well, I guess that's neither obvious nor true.

Noah Sanchez7 said:If that's your answer—and I'd say it's the answer for most of you, including myself—then you actually need an ego..

If you want to change things, let me be blunt.. If you want to contribute to this world and you know that (change) aligns with what God intends, then you need an ego..

You need it at least enough to show others that you don't actually need one.. (nor do they).

That's right! 👍
The ego is just part of being human. It gets messy when human nature tries to run the show for the divine. But it’s just as bad when the divine smothers our humanity entirely.
So, yes to the ego. But the ego isn't God. It’s not the boss; it’s just a tool.
And I'm the one holding the leash. Believe me, I am. It’s bumped into plenty of people, and now they’re all crying about it. But I only bumped into them because they were busy using their own little egos to come after me.

Noah Sanchez7 said:Alright, I see this is one of those (rare) topics where the "experts" have gathered, so I’ll be completely honest with you..

I have lost my ego entirely. I don't think it happened all at once; it was more of a process..
If you're asking how, I don't really know how to answer that, but I can say I just followed that innermost voice..
And there's one more thing: I shifted my entire focus to the opposite side—moving from the object to the subject.
The object was the world around me, and the subject was me. Or rather, my existence in this world..

In the beginning, it was nice—blissful, even. I was focused (and still am) on my chest area, and there is nothing but absolute peace and tranquility there..
That lasted for a while..
Then I started descending. I should mention that it is a truly, deeply unpleasant experience. I don't know how to explain it; it’s like falling off a thoroughbred onto a donkey, or like trading gold for scrap iron and being forced to pay extra on top of it..
My thoughts turned to: "What have I lost?" I began this futile search for my former self, but going back was impossible..
To make a long story short, I'm lucky I stumbled upon the Tibetan Book of the Dead. It gave me some direction; otherwise, I’d probably be on lithium and whatever else people with schizophrenia take..
It was an experience where logical self-control vanished—a total absence of reason, where a flood of subconscious or unconscious content literally overwhelms my mind..
Do you have any idea what kind of hell that was for me?!
I’d be sitting with my mother, my brother, a friend, a neighbor—doesn't matter who—and this torrent of subconscious thoughts just keeps flowing. They’re talking to me, and I’m just staring at them, completely losing it, while a mass of dark thoughts and everything else attacks me. Literally, everything that crossed my mind, out of nowhere, became reality..
There were times when I’d be sitting alone on my bed, and what was around me wasn't reality, but just distorted projections of it—hallucinations.
Or I’d go out for a drink, and the sound of a car would be so piercingly loud that I’d start feeling nauseated by the noise, or the sound of sticks hitting the pavement..😲
I'm telling you, thank God someone finds a teaching like the Tibetan Book of the Dead in a state like that..

All those hallucinations were due to my karma. Whatever karma I had, those hallucinations were the result, whether good or bad..

Even now, I don't have a "self," but I haven't reached enlightenment either. I'm somewhere in between, and as the book says, I am in the process of re-forming—finding the new body I will inhabit... This might all sound a bit too mystical for some..

But let me ask you something. Before you start overthinking all of this, ask yourself one question: do you actually want to participate in this world? Do you want to be a human, something more, or something less?

I’m not going to bother commenting on your experience; you were honest about it, so I guess there isn't much point.
As for my answer to your question:

Yeah, I want to be part of this world. It feels like my mission—and honestly, it's the mission for everyone actually participating in this thing. To do nothing would just be pure selfishness, and that would basically mean failing our purpose.

I want to be human, but I'm not *just* human. I know what I am, which is why I can play the human role without feeling any disgust or shame or whatever.
But I won't let "humanity" take over me. I'm the one in control here.
I'm already something more, and being something less... well, that's just not my mission.

Arthur Grant4 said:hahahahaha... sure, you can dress sharp without letting your ego run the show, even if you're doing it specifically to turn heads... but let’s be real, that won't actually matter to you, and you won't even identify with it... right?

I don't think that's possible. I guess... because "dressing well" basically just means following established rules. There’s no such thing as a universal standard for what looks "good."

Arthur Grant4 said:Look, I’m not trying to be some yoga guru, a sage, an enlightened being, or some Zen master... I just want to figure out how to drop the baggage, like in that one Zen story. HOW?
The ego is nothing but dead weight. It serves zero purpose.
It’s like driving a pickup truck that’s constantly stuffed with trash, and then you wonder why there’s no room left inside.

The ego is actually an instrument. Sometimes it feels heavy, like a massive telescope sitting in a vault at JPMorgan Chase, and other times it's light as a laser rangefinder. But it's necessary.
The moment you start dressing to look harmonious or pleasing to the eye, you're basically just following the ego's lead. Because if you dress totally haphazardly—not because you actually want to, but just because you couldn't care less—you're going to catch heat from women first and foremost. And let me tell you, fighting them is a losing battle; they'll scream and tear into you like Tasmanian Devils.

Arthur Grant4 said:Nancy Thompson3, I’ve been there—I was a victim of the ego back then, and honestly, part of me still is. I get why the terminology trips people up. Look at it this way: we exist, right? So, "I" exist. But the second you actually stop to ask *who* or *what* that "I" really is, everything gets blurry. Most people just end up inventing a version of themselves to cling to. They latch onto this concept of who they think they should be. That mental construct? That’s the Ego.
So, I’m a corporate guy, a skater, a goth, a politician, whatever... it’s all just social branding. It's basically the ego playing out on a societal level. We’re constantly trying to project some specific image, presenting ourselves to the world as one thing or another just to fit in or stand out. That’s the ego at work. Obviously, the ego is a total lie. It isn't us. It’s just a deeply ingrained thought pattern.

I’ll say it plainly: without that Ego—using your definition, which I respect because, honestly, an undefined Ego means nothing... you can't function in society
. For society to accept you, it has to recognize you. ("Recognition," alongside "concept" and "communication," is just one of those overused, hollow words favored by art critics, those pretentious wannabe intellectuals in New York, certain activists, the poor souls over at Barnes & Noble, and so on).
To recognize you, society has to be able to categorize you. If they can't put you in a box, they’ll just label you as "WEIRD" and start ignoring you, belittling you, or even attacking you.

That’s why I choose the label of REBEL. I like to mess with those little pretenders, the posers, and the pseudo-intellectuals, breaking through their polished facades. And I do it well—not physically, obviously, but psychologically. And man, does it sting.

Kyle Nelson2 said:If I were to translate what you're saying into plain, small-town talk:
punks? Please. They're just posers with a slightly different wardrobe...

It’s not about the style, it’s about the whole damn concept (you know how people in big cities like New York or LA tend to draw out those vowels when they're being condescending or snobby).

Goths are basically the same thing—posers who eventually grow into it. Either they're just kids, or they're broke and can't afford the high-end designer stuff, or maybe they're just acting out because they're bored or feel like they need to lean into some "edgy" persona involving death and darkness to feel special.
But honestly? It’s totally mainstream. Everything you see at the local dive bars, the offbeat boutiques, or that park over by the downtown plaza... it’s all just predictably basic.

Jesse Wright24 said:Nancy Thompson3, do you actually consider yourself superior to those who fall under the stereotypes mentioned above?

No. I'm just me. I'm not any better, and I'm not any different.

Arthur Grant4 said:Look at any random guy walking down the street or someone in your own neighborhood. There’s a massive chance that person is basically just a collection of social labels and a self-image they've built up over time. They’re a product of their environment... waking up really means grasping your true nature and finally snapping those ego chains.
But wait—could adopting that identity actually be a necessary stage of growth? Like, maybe you have to play the part before you can move past the ego toward actual consciousness?
Or is our modern civilization just designed to brainwash us? Is it possible we're spiritually regressing compared to those who came before us, meaning this whole spiritual movement sweeping the nation is actually just a collective attempt to remember what we lost and find our way back?
Which one is it?

First off, this whole task of breaking free from a forced social identity is something that can be handled quite easily through a simple act of will. Whoever wants to do it, does it. But most people? They just DON'T want to!
They want to belong to a certain social class, they want to behave according to imposed norms, and honestly, that isn't some far-off thing or anything hidden. The problem is just that we won't admit we're like that, or that we don't actually want to toss out everything that's been pushed on us.

Take, for instance: people want to dress "properly," wanting to look "normal." What is that?
They go to church every Sunday. What is that?
Women want a tall man. What is that?
Men want women with big breasts. What is that?
Young girls want to be rebels and sleep with everyone they meet, regardless of gender. What is that?
Young guys want to fill up their "body count" books. What is that?
Adults want to take out a mortgage, buy a house and a car, and then spend the next 99 years paying them off. What is that?
You can't bike to work, it's rude to ride a motorcycle, the bus feels too low-class, and walking is just too much effort. What is that?
If someone gets into spirituality, the first thing they do is stuff their heads with platitudes about cosmic love, Gurdjieff, Osho, and the like. What is that?
Artists all feel they have to live like Picasso, rebelling against morality, living decadently like Caravaggio, bluffing to the outside world about how successful they are while eating bread and water at home. What is that?

Yeah, what is it? Why do people have to follow stereotypes? Why is it that when they try to be different, they just end up becoming the same kind of "different" as everyone else?

Because being truly different requires a brain. And when you don't have one, you just start making excuses about how the mind is bad or how emotions are good. It turns out that the people who praise emotions, sex, cults, money, and superficial thrills the most actually have nothing inside them but a vacuum. Sometimes, literally.

Sean Martinez4 said:Whether you call it chi, qi, mana, prana, or just life force—basically that whole concept of sexual energy. 😍

Look, chi isn't just sexual energy. Life force isn't strictly sexual energy either. Sure, chi *can* be sexual energy, but generally speaking, it’s way more than that.
The problem with that sentence is that word "or." It's not an "either-or" situation because they aren't the same thing; they're all just different facets of one larger energy.

silentnomad23 said:How would you describe yourself—if you were to put it into song—and what does the concept of "the self" actually mean to you?
Can you describe, feel, or explain your own personality? How do you perceive yourself versus how you think the rest of the world sees you? In what ways do you observe your own being?

I suggest coming back in a few days to review your thoughts. Do you still stand by everything you wrote?
Do you feel as though your personality is becoming more blurred and undefined as you grow, or is maturity helping you become more distinct and defined? Perhaps a better word might be evolution
. And ultimately, what does the process of maturing or evolving truly signify to you?

To me, the concept is just... flawless. No description needed, no morphology required. It just is.

Quotation:

Can you promote, feel, or explain your personality? How do you see yourself, versus how you think others perceive you? In what ways do you observe yourself?

I observe myself either through this raw sensation of being "me," or through the actions that this "I" performs—basically just managing the body, the sensory inputs, and the mental processing.
Most people don't get me. Honestly, a lot of them don't even want to try because they're too lazy to think about anything beyond the basic stereotypes that I don't fit into.

Quotation:

Come back in a few days and look at what you wrote. Do you still stand by everything you said?

I suppose I will. Though, my views tend to be pretty consistent—not necessarily rigid, just... steady.

Quotation:

Does it feel like your personality is dissipating or becoming more blurred as you age—maybe a better word would be evolving—or does it become more defined as you mature?

No.

Quotation:

And what does maturing or changing actually mean to you?

It doesn't mean anything. It's just adapting to the outside world.

Richard Murphy6 said:I can’t even remember my own birthday! Honestly, at this rate, I’ll probably have to wait until I’m old enough to get some serious memory loss just to stand a chance of recalling it.😁 And that way, I won't even know!😁
Now I just need to figure out a game plan to dump everything onto that guy with Alzheimer's as fast as possible! To kick things off, I'm going to go totally silent—no reading and no posting on the forums for a while.😛 😎

It’s honestly easier to just become an alcoholic. Or an addict. You don't even notice when you're dying, and honestly, you won't even care.

Rebecca Cox2 said:Word has it that Bohr was once asked a question—following his "formulation" of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle as a complementary system (the idea that you can't simultaneously pin down a particle's position and its momentum; the more you know about one, the less you know about the other)—what he believed might serve as a complement to truth (wahrheit)?

Bohr’s response was simple: Clarity. (klarheit)

When you carry this over into the realm of philosophy, it lands right in the middle of some of the most heated debates out there (and not just among philosophers). What does this tell us about:

a) the existence of God? How much of a concept is God—is He defined by clarity, or by truth?

b) our theories regarding "Truth"? If Bohr was onto something profound with that remark, how much "truth" can actually be clear and comprehensible?

c) our fundamental understanding of the world and the laws of nature?

Alright, physicists, philosophers, psychologists, biologists, mathematicians, and everyone else! This is a multi-disciplinary topic, which is why I'm bringing it here to philosophy—the mother of all sciences...

a) Maybe God is a clear concept, but that doesn't make Him the Truth. It reminds me of digital electronics. Instead of wrestling with messy, complex natural laws, we just package them into a few proven elements—basically logical circuits. Then we build entire systems out of these neat, predictable blocks. It’s easier than dealing with analog systems where you have to grapple with actual, complicated processes. We’d rather just write a program that SIMULATES the truth—even if it's technically inaccurate—than try to build an analog system that actually executes those raw processes.
God is essentially a simulation of a supreme intelligence; we invented the concept just so we could have a clear way to look at that intelligence. I mean, obviously, I’m talking about religion and the religious perception of God.

b) Truth is always complex. Actually, I’d go further—it’s infinitely complex, almost transcendent. We just compress it. We simplify it... and in doing that, we move further away from it. It becomes clearer to us, sure, but it gets less and less precise.

c) The laws of nature are basically just descriptions tailored for our minds—they're dried out, stripped down versions of real processes. It's pure data compression, because the human mind just can't handle the raw Truth. So, it hunts for simplified patterns. In physics, whenever we derive a law, we almost always use the word APPROXIMATION!