When I looked into global warming before, I found I would alternate between believing in it and believing against it.
I would read “denier” websites and believe all the evidence was compelling. Then I would watch potholer54 video debunking it and believe in the “science” side. Then I’d read other sites replying to potholer’s point and believe against it. Then watch more pro-sites and believe for it, etc.
But once I was able to dig into the core of the premise, that it lays upon, and see the simple argument of why it doesn’t make sense – none of that happens anymore! I no longer believe in it or believe against it. It’s just that the argument makes perfect sense and is so simple to understand. It’s a factual basis.
The other thing that stood out as I wrote it is that – it is entirely possible to be wrong! It is refutable. It makes definitive statements that can be disproven with the right experiments. It is falsifiable, i.e. scientific. And if I see a counterargument that makes sense, my understanding will adjust. I suspect I won’t since Richard already spent weeks digging into it on one occasion, and definitely more since then (as Vineeto said they refreshed their memory on it and looked into anything new recently).
That doesn’t mean there isn’t a counterargument out-there or that it is valid… but just like with actual freedom and Enlightenment, someone already did all the work so it’s probably going to hold. But I will see for myself .
If the aluminum foil with 95% IR reflection really would heat a heat source with its own heat, then all I have to do is line a small closet with aluminum foil and step inside it. My body heat will reflect off and heat me up more which would heat up more etc. But common sense wise, I ‘know’ it wouldn’t. I needn’t have bought all that equipment
And the pristine purity and perfection started to hove into view…
Then the thought: It’s really just about being OK with everybody being wrong about this. Pristine purity becomes more apparent…
Then: oh, everybody is just wrong about this!
Pristine purity now abounds in all its clarity and perfection. Then: “Haha there is indeed no greenhouse effect in actuality.”
And also then: just like everybody is wrong about actual freedom being an impossibility (ie “You can’t change human nature” and “life is a vale of tears”)! This is an even ‘bigger’ thing for everyone to be wrong about (AGW can come and go with still humanity continuing as it does.)
But then it fades and the feelings of doubt and anxiety and uncertainty start to creep in, would the aluminum foil closet really not work, how to calculate it etc. etc… …
Very interesting!!!
It really seems to be more about being willing to accept that so many people can have it wrong, than anything else … …
I’m not sure yet what prevents me from the seeing of it ‘sticking’, why I keep finding myself back in the fear, uncertainty and doubt…
I felt it more like being afraid to accept that everyone can be so wrong. Like who am ‘I’ to say they are wrong? But at the same time I can see that it’s not me per se saying they are wrong, it’s that they are wrong and I am aware of that fact. So I don’t have to defend ‘my’ opinion of them being wrong, it’s seeing the fact of it, the fact is that “they” all happen to be mistaken …
That being said.-- I’m quite sure I wouldn’t bake if I entered an aluminum-lined closet. And it should really reflect 95% of IR – but does it? (seed of doubt). But then how much really temperature would I generate? One site says human body generate 100W at rest. And that avg human is 18000 cm^2 = 1.8 m^2 surface area. But that translates to -95.33°C equivalent temperature with the Boltzman equation (haha). So something is wrong there. Or is it so little that it would multiply to some degree in the closet but the effect wouldn’t be big enough? etc. etc.
But rather than it being that I don’t see it clearly, it seems more like I have the feeling of doubt first, or anxiety, or not wanting to accept everyone is wrong, and from there the concerns spring eternal. Cause when I did see it clearly it was very clear…
I figured an experiment would be definitive, but it is tricky to design one. I think it might be good enough to be sure tho…
I’d say the more important experiment is the vibe-experiment! Can you get to the point of seeing the possibility that you’re right with clear eyes? The point of disagreeing with all the esteemed experts? Even in the face of near-universal ridicule, associated with fools in the minds of the elite.
Well my experience with the global warming thing has been as Richard described what Vineeto reported:
Moreover, and pertinent to all this, is what feeling-being ‘Vineeto’ reported after the first few weeks of listening to Richard/ reading Richard’s words. Speaking in regards to the effects any and all attempts to fit this totally new paradigm into ‘her’ existing mindset were having, ‘she’ explained the process as being … (1.) as if ‘her’ brain was being turned upside-down … and (2.) how ‘she’ was having to relearn how to think all over again. Discussion of Non-Actualist Topics
In short, although I grasped most of the individual points of Richard’s article, I thought point 11 missed the mark and wasn’t relevant. I thought the greenhouse effect was a physically possible mechanism, that just hadn’t been proven yet – as opposed to the fact which is that it’s physically impossible, in large part due to this point 11 among others (“In the physical world no externally heated substance can raise the temperature of its heat-source.”).
Finally coming to my senses and accepting fact above feeling with respect to this topic — it felt really extremely wrong at first. Like I was betraying ‘my’ integrity — which ‘I’ was! ‘I’ betrayed ‘my’ integrity to ‘my’ former way of thinking — of which some key elements were:
1 - a hubristic assumption that I am by default right;
2 - an arrogant supposition that I am more well-versed in a topic and know more about it than I actually do;
3 - a prideful presumption that my first reactions are correct; usually followed by
4 - a superficial looking for, scanning of and bare skimming of some internet web-page that seems to agree with what I initially thought, then presented as evidence that I was initially right all along;
5 - a following long convoluted of seemingly-clever-yet-ultimately-just-cunning trains of thought without much regard for facts along the way; leading to
6 - a feeling of certitude in the conclusions derived that way.
However I observed that after doing all these steps, even though my conclusions thereof felt/seemed right… I did not really feel good about them. My “being right” was landing me further into ‘humanity’ not away from it… .which didn’t sit well.
Finally ceasing to do this left me in a state of disorientation, of feeling that I don’t know what is right or wrong in general anymore, of having no solid ground to rely on with my thinking. It felt like 90% of my way of thinking was essentially useless, as in invalid, not an effective way to determine facts and arrive at factual conclusions.
But what I found is that even though I felt disoriented, I was still perfectly capable of – and actually more handy at – sticking to what is factual, and also perfectly fine to live my life the way I had been anyway – i.e. it didn’t interfere with my day-to-day life at all, except being more mentally tired due to constantly reflecting and ruminating on what was happening.
I certainly was disoriented undoing my spiritual conditioning after my first trip to Australia – and I similarly found that sticking to what I knew to be factual despite my feelings, successfully got me through it. But for this topic it seems to have cut deeper – and be over quicker (a matter of days of disorientation rather than months of undoing spiritual conditioning).
I think it is because I really put my all into the topic, trying to figure it out, obsessing over it, putting all my apparent insight and intelligence to the task. So then when I saw I was just completely wrong at the end of it it hit me quite hard .
It seems to be a good approach with actualism though – go all-in on something and see where it takes you! Then you know whatever you found at the end is genuine, cause you gave it your all along the way. No excuses can be made that you had reservations or weren’t really trying.
But remember to stick to the facts or you will end up in a strange place .
Thanks for sharing your thought process so openly, it is very interesting. I am writing a response to you on the Global warming subject but I am super busy at the moment so it is coming along at snail pace. I am really enjoying the conversation, it is interesting to explore concepts and understanding. To see how different people perceive or conceptualise information as well. You much remind me of my friend who introduced me to AF who is now dead. I remember when you first appeared on the forums, at first I thought you might be my friend pretending to be somebody else because you had similar writing styles and meticulous thought out responses.
I hope that you understand that I am not being antagonistic or playing devil’s advocate. I am just curious about how science, the facts, the approach to laws, theories and models, how they work and how facts are interwoven together.
Wow, this is very interesting. We have very different mentalities. In the past, I would never have even engaged on such a subject for fear of being out of my depth, incorrect, misguided, making a mistake. In my response to you I made some mistakes, which I will flesh out in that response, such a thought previously would be paralysing-ly shameful! Best to not even risk any form of conflict or failure. Human engagement on any subject seems an uncomfortable overlap of social and performance anxiety.
For me personally the equivalent points are more like this:
1 - I am not sure I am right (sometimes even when the facts clearly show I am…such doubt).
2 - I constantly feel I don’t know enough or there is something I have missed or forgotten.
3 - I am more prone to shame that I have messed up and am wrong somehow, waiting to be humiliated.
4 - I try to explore as many interpretations as possible, sometimes maybe it can get overwhelming because there is so much information, I feel like I want to just give up on a point.
5 - I feel more like that phrase there are many ways to skin a cat…I am more stuck trying to determine which is the more accurate way to skin the cat. I think I have more questions than answers.
6 - a feeling of doubt in any conclusions I have derived, even when dealing with facts, I still doubt I have somehow misinterpreted them or done something wrong.
This is how I have always felt. I always envied people who seemed so sure and determined on a subject. For me AF has taught me that it is ok to break down the facts and take time in understanding concepts, there doesn’t have to be an emotional reaction to them. We can review information, accept and reject information, create models, accept and reject them. It is all ok, there is no pressure to be 100% to be right. It is ok for understanding on complex issues to take time.
I have a similar approach but I am usually more cowardly and don’t expose my attempts and explorations of understanding in the limelight, previously I would never engage on subjects deeply with other people other than my most closest friends. It is good that you are willing to put yourself out there and take a risk on any subject to try and understand it better, but also communicate what you think openly, that is still something quite new for me. Years of just silently watching and reading others with almost zero communication. The only subject domain on forums that I openly discussed in the past was atheism and rejecting religion, where there were plenty of absurdities and contradictions to point out. However, it was more out of anger of religious people not just allowing me the freedom to think and not believe what they do.
I always had this approach, I think I had a good understanding of facts and models before being introduced to AF, I had quit a Maths degree but always was a bit of a nerd for science, maths and technology. When I put aside my first misconceptions of AF being some form of spirituality in disguise, the appraisal of facts and highlighting that certain scientific theories with no experimental validation are pushed as something absolutely true, already struck a chord with me. I too had already begun wondering why they pushed things like string theory and other purely theoretical concepts as facts. It only goes to further confused the general public and diminish the value of the scientific process.
In my Physics class at uni, the majority of the class actually chose to go the theoretical path rather than experimental. It seems people are drawn to the theoretical and mental worlds, above the real world experimental physics. There is nothing wrong with creating new branches of mathematics and theories, as long as one remembers the rules of the game and that those principles may not apply to reality or are just an approximation or idealisation of reality. Sometimes, a branch of mathematics established in the theoretical ends up finding a real world phenomena that can utilise that math to help describe the relationship between different variables. What I don’t like though, is that it seems theories are sold to the public as ideas of truth or facts without any experimental validation.
Even sticking to the facts can leave you disorientated though, as sometimes due to the limits in our technology or understanding we only have disparate facts about certain phenomena that we are not able to unify and understand collectively.
Ahh well here’s the very interesting thing. During this process I felt the same way as you described in your points 1-6 – when it was coming to evaluate the facts!
i.e. when evaluating the facts I felt doubt, wasn’t sure I was right, felt I didn’t know enough, felt like I should be ashamed for asking stupid questions, felt like I should defend myself, etc…
Yet what would then happen is that feeling of doubt would transform into a feeling of certitude that the non-factual belief was correct! That is when the points 1-6 I wrote came into play – when riding that wave of feeling sure, of feeling the belief.
Then when a hole was poked in the belief, I would briefly see the facts clearly, often with actuality hoving into view… and then the feelings of doubt (as your points 1-6) would come again, which then… again transformed into feeling of certitude in the belief, etc. etc.
This happened many times! Lol.
So now I see the feeling of doubt as nothing other than the flip-side of the feeling of belief. The feeling of doubt is basically really a feeling of belief in the opposite of that which is being doubted.
Sticking to the facts, there’s neither hubris nor doubt, pride nor humility, it is just a matter of carefully and with great consideration and discernment, figuring out what is the case. And it’s often really hard! I mean you have to do due diligence. You have to actually read the stuff you are reading, understand it, piece together what it means, etc., instead of just skimming. When driven by doubt it’s easy to just skim and feel like it’s fueling the doubt, and when driven by belief it’s easy to just skim it and feel like it confirms the belief. But when looking for the facts you have to actually read it lol.
Just as you wrote:
Hmmm I wouldn’t call this disorientated though. I would call it properly oriented, as in correctly understanding that this is a phenomenon that is poorly understood… and not drawing from it conclusions that are unwarranted. Knowing what is fact and what is supposition, etc…
Interestingly, this made me realise that I have an emotional reaction to not knowing and not understanding something or there being something humanity doesn’t understand sufficiently either. The disorientation is really an extension of the emotional discomfort of the fact that I am not able to know everything about everything. I always wanted photographic memory so desperately when growing up.
Pre-AF, my first encounter of feeling ok with not knowing everything was from the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, who had a big influence on me.
Nineteenth-century man is a walking encyclopedia , stuffed with useless knowledge.
I always felt there was still a pressure in the 21st century to feel like walking encyclopedias and how much of this knowledge was useless, does it matter if I know the tallest mountain or the longest river or the last time my football (soccer) team won the Premier League? Then it was clear that this pressure on myself was ridiculous. I guess that whole premise of knowledge, for what purpose? This really started to change me, I started to decide what knowledge matters and why? I stopped feeling this pressure to have to have as wide a general knowledge as possible.
So, I agree, it is being properly oriented and is coming from a place of integrity, there is integrity if one can admit the limits of the facts available to oneself.
These days a lot of things are so crystal clear and obvious, such as:
God has served quite well as a provider of a morality societally accepted to be objective.
God has been torn down, but prematurely - without the thing that is “better than God” in place yet.
One can only hope that enough people see sensibility before it’s too late:
That there is something outside of ourselves that is objective, namely the factual and objectively existing universe
That this actually-existing universe has the quality of being benevolent with respect to life flourishing (just look around to see how life teems in every corner & crevice of this Earth)
That one can tap into this benevolence to experience a purity and clarity of heart and mind
And that this automatically provides a “guiding light” or principle (importantly one outside of yourself) by which to act, and all flows effortlessly from here
Damn you don’t write anything in your journal for 7 months and then come back with this nugget, it’s like the less you write the better the precision, I have taken the opposite approach
Do you find at this point that this continued awareness of pure intent is the ‘driving force’ behind feeling good?
In times when I can access pure intent consistently then feeling good is effortless, in fact it seems silly to be doing anything but enjoying and appreciating. Then in times when the connection is blocked it seems an uphill struggle to get things going.
So I am constantly in this back and forth of 2 approaches, one is all about ‘me’ continuing to chip away at ‘myself’, it is ‘me’ doing the work and somewhat working from ‘within the human condition’. This approach is epitomised by effort and control.
The second one is about putting ‘me’ and ‘humanity’ to one side and allowing pure intent. This is no longer fixing things from ‘the inside’ but rather it’s like I am side stepping the whole thing.
The thing is they also seem to go hand in hand, because at times I have to roll up my sleeves and chip away at something so that I am willing to allow pure intent. Equally when pure intent is experienced it’s effects will cascade into ‘my’ world and start to shift things about.
But a lot of the times it’s like I am at this fork in the road - do I go into the human condition and tinker around in there OR do I forget about all that business and move towards pure intent.
From the vantage point of actuality all of the ‘inner world’ stuff is completely irrelevant, so I can see why it doesn’t matter if it is ultimately resolved or not. I guess the whole point is that ultimately it cannot be resolved, that you tinker around until you realise that it’s just rotten.
Then the further I move towards actuality the more pointless it seems to entertain any of the real world stuff. Like when Geoffrey wrote about the letter arriving from the leathery armchairs society :
For I had been exploring the unknown continent, its golden cities and living clouds, for weeks, without a word. When some letter found its way to me, its ink faded from the sea voyage, enquiring about matters so home-bound as to appear foreign
Across this holiday season I witnessed first-hand the immense benefit that actualism has had on my life and others around me.
Through some of the most intense familial conflict I’ve ever encountered, I was able to continuously operate from a bed of purity where otherwise ‘me’ at ‘my’ center would be.
This enabled me to operate with – and now the words make perfect sense – minimized reference to self. I genuinely had no ill will or rancor towards anyone, and was able to navigate the situation in a way to resolve as many problems for and be of as much benefit to everyone around me.
The conversations I had clearly helped everyone and I was even able to diffuse a personal rancor that one member had started to hold against another (due to them thinking the other was holding something personal against them).
These really objectively should have been some of the most difficult conversations of my life, but they didn’t emotionally drain or exhaust me in anyway. It was tiring just from the sheer energy and effort spent, but it was engaging and interesting, all the while recognizing that essentially everyone was being in a grand scheme unreasonable (as in we all did want the same thing, namely for all of us to get along).
This path really isn’t just for me, it’s for everyone around me also. The benefits to others – and therefore also to me – are palpable.
The cantankerous ravings of offended spiritualists do not impinge upon or detract from these ongoing experiential successes in any way. I know first hand the benefits of the path, and how ultimately simple it really is, and just how rewarding the rewards are to reap.
This path really is for anyone and everyone. Onwards!
A good example is in one of the convos, I made a point, the other person said “But that’s not right, I’ve already told you two times in this convo that X/Y/Z…”
Really they misconstrued what I said, I meant something else.
Normally this would put me on the defensive, I would feel put-upon, upset that they don’t understand, etc.
But what happened is I didn’t feel that way whatsoever. Instead I clearly saw where the miscommunication was, in fact the way I said it it was possible to construe it the way they did and I see why. So I just regathered my thoughts and said it in a different way, where they then accepted what I said. I even took some time with some hmms and ahhs to do it, where normally me doing that would also upset me like I’m put ‘on the defensive’. But this just didn’t happen.
Anyone else notice the more life experience you have, the more you understand things differently, and the more you realize things have actually always been that way?
.
I wanted to ask, were you attacked at any point? I don’t mean physically, I mean psychically. Was anyone angry at you?