This is entirely misconstrued. I wasn’t suggesting that I’m correct because I don’t lose bets often, or that my track record makes the conclusion I shared legitimate. What I meant is that I’m so confident in the structure of my own logic and the available evidence, that I’d be willing to stake a lot of money on it because it feels like an easy, low-risk conclusion based on the facts. I was merely expressing the level of my own conviction.
You don’t say, lol.
I understand that your 25 years of experience in “unusual phenomena” has given you a deep knowing of what’s possible. I’m not dismissing it, but I feel as if you are positioning your own personal insights as being beyond the need for biological or scientific grounding. I’m curious about how you’re separating valid observations from personal belief or bias. I’m also curious about how you protect yourself from self-deception or delusion. The framework of biology might not explain everything, but if it didn’t exist, then we would lose any shared standard for testing whether something is actually happening or not. If results alone are enough, regardless of their mechanisms - then how do we distinguish between a real phenomenon, a placebo, a coincidence, or even a straight up psychological illusion? I mean, this allows for literally anything to be claimed and nothing to be challenged. I think that’s not only dangerous, but unhealthy for the mind because it’s easy for someone who adheres to such thinking to become disconnected from reality.
Just because one has done programming, studied calculus, and learned about scientific concepts, doesn’t automatically mean that they apply rational and intellectual discipline in how they evaluate claims. Especially when it comes to “unusual phenomena”. Rationale and intellect is demonstrated by how someone thinks - not by what they’ve been exposed to. I think that’s an extremely important distinction.
I disagree. I think that “consciousness” is a broad, overused, and imprecise term, especially when used in the context of subliminals. The fact of the matter is that the domain of subliminals simply deals with the subconscious mind - hence why the literal name is “subliminal”. A subliminal message is designed to pass below the normal limits of conscious perception, allowing it to be perceived by the subconscious mind. So I would say that we are dealing with the topic of the subconscious mind and its interaction with perception, emotion, and behavior - not the abstract “hard problem” of consciousness.
These are all examples that fall comfortably within the framework of known biology and neuroscience. None of them require us to go beyond established biological mechanisms to be understood.
I generally agree. However, I don’t see how having a straightforward desire for strong evidence regarding extraordinary biological changes (growing 7 inches after puberty or completely reconfiguring bone structures on a level equivalent to surgery) conflicts with this view. Having a desire for clear, rigorous evidence when encountering those type of claims doesn’t limit consciousness - it’s just a practical approach to understanding what’s actually happening in our physical bodies.
It’s great that you’ve discovered this recently. From what I’ve seen, this idea has been popularized before by people like Joe Dispenza who talk a lot about how altered states (deep relaxation, meditation, trance, etc) increase suggestibility and deepen the impact of affirmations or mental programming. It’s also foundational in basic hypnosis and NLP.
What is the difference between this, and New Age “just believe bro, just believe harder”? So, I can become a mermaid if I believe it on a deep enough level? What you’re saying sounds oddly familiar, but expressed in a different way. If I say that physically transforming into a mermaid is biologically impossible, then consciousness is going to be “okay, let’s act that way”? - therefore preventing me from becoming a mermaid? So is this not just the old New Age style “limiting beliefs, bro”? - without the New Age? I’m not dismissing or criticizing your take, I’m genuinely asking you what is the difference?
Where is the boundary between possibility and delusion, if consciousness doesn’t “care” about what’s true?". Previously, in this thread - I pointed out that someone made the exact same argument that a Flat Earther would use.
This:
Is exactly the same argument that 15 year olds in the YouTube subliminal space who are trying to escape from reality into Harry Potter worlds, anime universes, and physically morph into dragon-mermaid-werewolves use. They literally say the exact same thing, just in a different, New Age influenced, non-intellectual manner (probably because they’re 15 years old).
Hopefully you’re understanding my perspective here.
Anyways, I enjoyed your response. Thank you for sharing.
I didn’t see that you had another post under it - my bad.
Every single example that you’ve listed of superhuman strength and endurance:
mother lifting car off a child to save a kid fueled by adrenaline and emotion (note that you’re already implying that adrenaline is a factor)
a violent man on drugs requiring 3 or 4 men to hold him down and tase him multiple times for him to comply
a soldier who has been shot multiple times walking miles to their base unaware of their injuries
a master of chi breaking boards or taking down a man twice is size
Literally, every single one of these is already well-understood within the framework of biology and neuroscience. Adrenaline surges, pain suppression, conditioning, trained efficiency, etc. These aren’t “bendings” of physical law - they’re still explainable responses of the human body under extreme stress or altered states. I would even say that emphasizing them actually reinforces how powerful our biological systems are, and how consciousness works through the natural built-in mechanisms of the human body. It’s not like consciousness is overriding physics.
My whole stance in this entire thread has not changed throughout every post (including the deleted) of every discussion. It’s simply that physical changes manifest within the rules of biology.
Of course mindset, belief, and mind-body connection can influence performance. I’m a powerlifter, lol. This is basic knowledge to anyone who is into sports, lifting, MMA, etc. One can learn this in their first week of a kinesiology course in college. Again - this is all already well-understood within the framework of biology and neuroscience.
My friend, where exactly are we going beyond here?
Yogis who can change their physical appearance and body structure solely using their breath - is still comfortably within the framework of biology. What is the degree of change in their body? Are they gaining 8 inches of height, permanently changing their eye colors (from brown to blue for example), or completely reconfiguring bone structures in their face, etc (I’m talking about scope which I alluded to with the psychosomatic skin argument in a previous post)? Unless they are - then it’s still within the laws of biology. Also, living for extended periods of time with a small amount of calories is not unheard of in even the most mainstream of biological science, lol. I’m pretty sure that medical science has plenty of documentation on extreme fasting or metabolic adaptation. The examples that you are giving have a “this sounds really extraordinary” flare to them which can excite people, however none of them are inexplicable in actual base-level reality.
I don’t think you understand the premise of my biological take because you are completely ignoring the issue of scope here. I genuinely find this strange because you just claimed to be “no stranger to the rational and the intellectual”.
Again, same thing. Visualization and mental rehearsal used by athletes to affect performance outcomes is still within the framework of biology… that’s why you’re even able to reference a scientifically grounded study (based in rational, scientific thinking) from the Journal of Sports, Science, and Medicine in the first place. Who thinks it’s bull-manure? They’re not supporting the idea that just imagining exercise can replace physical training. They’re saying that mental imagery and visualization can enhance performance, especially when combined with physical practice.
If you’re attempting to use this study to support the claim that consciousness can “bend” physical laws or create supernatural outcomes, then I think you’re severely misapplying the findings. That would be the literal equivalent of trying to use physics to argue that gravity is optional. The study is merely showing you how the human brain can be optimized for enhance performance.
You and I both know that our views clash - which I think is healthy and creates good discussion, as long as we’re civil. We have the maturity to do that. No sarcasm here, I really appreciate the time and energy you took to reply to my posts - and I’d be lying if I said that you didn’t help me consider things from a different perspective, as momentary as such a consideration may be. The medical case that you’ve recommended to me is now something that I can refer to in the future, so thank you for that as well. These are a lot of paragraphs, so I’m probably going to move on to something else now.
I’m finding myself enjoying the deep level of conversation here, so we’ll let this debate and discussion continue, but please remember to remain civil.
And here lies one of the big problems in this discussion. You state that you believe the term consciousness is a “broad, overused and imprecise term”. I disagree. It is very precise and specific. The fact that you clearly don’t understand it, as evidenced by the fact that you conflate “conscious” and “consciousness”, does not change the fact that it has a precise meaning. Consciousness encompasses waking consciousness or “the focus of awareness”, subconscious, superconscious and any other forms of consciousness. Just because you don’t verbally hear the words of someone speaking on the audio, translate them into English lettering common to the early 21st century United States variant of a particular human language, intellectualize the meaning of those words and know them at that moment as a concept you can repeat back, does not mean that you do not have consciousness of the signal. Most of the time you do not have nearness of consciousness / focus of awareness upon your heart beat or your breathing, but the energy which constitutes a manifestation of your spirit and is largely connected with the perceiving thing and continues acting within the body, flowing through the channels, expressing itself in different forms, regardless of whether the part of you which is flapping your gums is aware of it.
Consciousness is the thing that is aware and the thing that acts, the thing that “recalls” various memories to itself (consciousness) via known or unknown laws and which is present whether or not you are rationalizing, intellectualizing, waking, dreaming, having no thoughts and only pure awareness, etc. It is another “scientific” name for the living, “breathing” entity also known as the spirit or soul. The word “spirit” is also used by certain commentators (such as the 16th century Rosicrucians within Fludd’s circle) as a term for an energy manifesting in the ether as the result of the controlling entity, a third force between the soul and matter, and soul/spirit are terms that have been used by religion, so science steers away from them and uses the more generic term “consciousness” which has evolved greatly since the 16th and 17th century introduction into something that can not only exercise the power of knowing or being aware, but acting on matter.
It is a very precise term for what it refers to, however people misunderstand or misuse it, or have a wide array of dialogs about it that could suggest an inaccurate perspective on what it is. Let’s be clear here: science has had a very difficult time dealing with the problem of the observer, it is not comfortable that we have a spirit, that things are ALIVE. It has a problem with LIFE, it has a problem in fact with anything it cannot measure with a measuring instrument. A problem with measurement itself as quantum physics demonstrates. Because life is a dynamic, non equilibrium phenomenon, which produces in the course of its ordinary operations negative entropy, and which most importantly cannot be measured except in terms of its effects (such as bioelectromagnetic energy, ultraweak photon emissions, insert other sciencey terms here), even I have been guilty of using phraseology such as speaking of atoms or cells that have consciousness or are consciousness, where it is more accurate to say that consciousness has the ability to permeate matter in these forms, to enliven them, to perceive information from them.
Because science is unable to measure consciousness, and can only measure its effects (because the measuring devices are made out of matter themselves), it is difficult to speak of consciousness using the same terminology we use to describe, say for example, the speed of a “particle”, or some fluctuation we have measured like the movement of ions within a cell.
Serious consciousness research has therefore largely remained the domain of “engineers”, that wonderful cadre of individuals who do not care about the pure why of how things operate, as long as the theory being applied is able to produce a practical and reliable result. So we have remote viewing which was taken seriously enough to be used for intelligence gathering by multiple intelligence agencies in different countries, even though a precise definition of why it works has not been formalized, only that specific processes have been shown to work.
Do they really? Can you explain for the benefit of the forum using well established frameworks of biology and neuroscience, how someone in a hypnotic induction can experience qualia such as the taste of an apple without any corresponding signalling molecules, or see a vision of some memory without photons hitting the retina of the eye? If you can, get ready to collect your Nobel Prize, because I can tell you that there is no such explanation out there. It is one of those big unanswered questions. But go on and try. I’ll wait.
Here you are just making shit up. “Metabolic adaption”, :“oh there’s plenty of documentation, I’m sure I’m sure”.
Here’s the problem. Pick any one of these “controversial” topics. Ask ten scientists their position on the topic. You’re going to get ten different answers. Those answers might range through:
It’s fraud, it’s imagination, it’s wishful thinking, its mass hallucination
Okay, we’ve measured that it really did occur. It’s “just” that this person has obtained an incredible degree of control over their autonomic processes, over their hormones, over their muscles and the force they generate (how???). It’s “just” a “mere” acquired skill, there’s nothing supernatural here at all.
It’s possible that this individual is somehow exploiting quantum physics principles in order to use energy in ways we normally do not.
And so on. Often a person appealing to science will try to comment on some subject without having ever properly studied it (as has been the case with many commentators on alchemy). When a proper understanding does exist, the answers are going to depend on that person’s depth of understanding of “the science”, by which you should read “the prevailing scientific paradigm”. However, private research projects (such as defense or aerospace companies) routinely use classified science that is many decades behind the established teaching in universities, and only becomes established science decades later if it is economically expedient/convenient to do so.
So basing your decisions on the current, publicly popularized version of science ultimately becomes a form of confidence game. You psychologically want to believe, desperately, that all phenomena can be understand through the lens of the current paradigm, and if they cannot, well they must be some kind of fraud or misperception, they simply do not exist.
But, here’s the problem: we see no more and hear no more than a tiny sliver of the universe, less than 1% of it, through our sensory organs, and through our measuring devices which attempt to extend our range we get nowhere near 100%, so we come up with theories such as “dark matter”, ie there’s something physical or tangible here we can’t see which will make it all make sense. The measurement problem will always remain unsolved if we insist on using devices made of matter, because they introduce limitations into the domain of perceiving the universe, because the measurement device is not separate from the universe itself.
Humans have this desire to feel like they are in control of things, that they are so knowledgeable that nothing escapes their perception. This is clear in your own writing style, as you have said:
You are “so confident” your snap judgement of the case is accurate, you’re willing to stake money on it. You believe your logic and assessment of the evidence is superior to any other analysis of the data. This is normal human psychology, and it’s pure hubris.
It means that consciousness is the actor, causing the fluctuations of the medium or causing things to appear to act in unison and that the word belief in this context is inadequate to the task at hand.
You are looking at consciousness through the lens of “it’s what I use to perform rational thought and see images in my head”. Consciousness “embodies” (again a very poor term) itself in a number of different modalities. The substrate in which we form images and visualize the logical progression playing out (the mind, the ether) is not the same thing as the thing which perceives or creates these images or more accurately energy patterns.
Part of the difficulty of describing consciousness is the fact that there is many of them, which are all intimately connected with one another at the deepest level. And again, it is not bound by the same conventions of time and space that we are used to operating in the default world. You can have a dream in which you feel like you’ve lived several years or months in a single night, with detailed perception. Our perception of time is linked with information density. And we form a relationship between ourselves (as consciousness) and the things being perceived.
Let’s switch it up a bit. Tick tock god’s doing a magic trick.
Stage magic relies on manipulation of perception in order to create an illusion.
A written language, abstract thought, scientific materialism. These are methods of manipulating or informing perception, what you are capable of thinking about.
Change the representational system and you change what you are capable of perceiving, even how you perceive it. If you choose logic or scientific materialism to inform how you think about what is possible, that is the filter through which you pass all your perceptions.
Quote pseudo-ascribed to Einstein: You cannot solve a problem from the same level of consciousness that created it.
Recognise the limitations of your filters which ultimately determine how crystalized or fluid your thought process is.
There is no reason why this discussion has to turn personal. Quite frankly, especially when it comes to subliminal audio and particularly our subliminal audio, both of you are hitting really good points. You are literally looking at the same situation but with different “lenses” on.
@Skadoosh – correct me if I am wrong – is placing his results and mindset in a very practical and grounded framework, which provides a structured path that can lead to constant and progressive growth. There is nothing wrong with this. Many people will stop all self-development efforts (including their stacks) because they lack this framework to gauge their growth upon.
@emperor_obewan – (same, correct me if I am wrong) – you’re doing the same thing, except you’re utilizing a more abstract and spiritual framework. Discussing these topics can be difficult because words fail to explain the spiritualization process. You seem to be open to more diffused or subtle results that spark a contemplation process, mirroring the nature of the subtle realms your mind explores.
If spirituality was easy to explain, the ancients wouldn’t have written their knowledge as scripture and parable, requiring the person to deeply contemplate on the deeper, hidden and esoteric meanings.
And this doesn’t mean that one person is more “spiritual” than the other, but rather they approach the life experience itself wearing different “lenses” that colors perception in a different flavor.
Both of your viewpoints are valid and necessary to create a balanced, universal title that takes both a practical route for those who want that AND a spiritual route. You can see this in play with The Light That Blinds. Some people are immediately gravitating to a more spiritual route, others are using it for more practical purposes.
So again: Both viewpoints are needed for us to create titles. We’ve gotten ideas from BOTH of you (and others expressing the same ideas, just differently) directly and synergized them. @emperor_obewan – clearly you can see how some of your observations made it into HERO: The Light That Blinds, specifically about flexibility.
We’re all here for the same thing – to transform our lives. So why do we need to attack each other’s unique viewpoints, the very thing that is absolutely necessary for Zero Point titles to even exist? So let’s all relax and just discuss these topics with the mindset that even if you don’t convince the other person, SOMEONE out there is vibing with what you’ve said.
It’s that, but it’s also that I’m specifically focused on biology.
Here is how this discussion has gone from my POV:
I express skepticism with the idea of growing 7 inches in height, permanently changing your eye color (from brown to blue for example), or completely reconfiguring and reshaping your facial bone structures on the level of surgery - with subliminals. I’ll believe it when I see evidence for it. My core point is biological feasibility and scope of extreme physical claims. I’m skeptical of claims like “you can physically transform into a dragon, a mermaid, or a werewolf” for the exact same reasons. I mentioned this in one of my posts to make the scope issue unmistakably clear.
This is my core argument - it’s the entire thing. It’s that physical changes occur within established biological limitations. It’s about the realistic scope of physical transformation.
It’s the exact same logic involved in what this person said:
It’s simple, right.
EmperorObewan replied to me (remember, he replied to me and started the debate), explaining to me why my skepticism and way of thinking is inherently flawed. He does this by essentially zooming out into the abstract. So, he points out how consciousness is complex, and how science is flawed, limited, and doesn’t have all the answers. He focuses on the broad narrative, without directly engage with the biological portion. That’s why I felt like he was avoiding points, and that there was no point to further discussion. It felt like like he was just redirecting into broad frameworks and spirituality.
I’m thinking "what does this stuff have to do with exteme biological claims - such as shapeshifting into Brad Pitt, or me reversing the state of my body into a 5 year old, or - insert literally any absurd claim of physical transformation that’s far outside of biological laws - ". Is my skepticism flawed because I’m narrowed-minded? I even got into why that complete lack of skepticism is dangerous, as one could become disconnected from reality, delusional, or taken advantage of through gullibility.
The easy way to counter this is to just keep going broad and into the abstract. This is how I would counter my own stance. It’s to keep shifting the discussion towards “we do not even know 1% of anything, brother”, or “science does not have all the answers”. It’s like yeah, well no shit.
I read his posts, and I thought to myself “What do these abstract ideas about the observer effect or consciousness have to do with someone claiming they can use subliminals to shapeshift into Brad Pitt, reverse their body into a 5 year old, or turn into a dragon? If my skepticism of those claims makes me “limited” or “narrow-minded,” then sure - I’ll wear that no problem”
Watch this, lol:
I’m skeptical that someone can grow 100,000,000 feet tall and shoot rainbow laser beams from their penis.
Well, because it’s way outside of the biological laws. It’s pretty much biologically impossible.
“You are narrow-minded @Skadoosh. You think you know everything. We know nothing. Science does not have all the answers. Consciousness has no limits, and is neither bound by time or space. You are chained to logic. You are conditioned by social culture. This is only what you believe. You don’t even research science yourself, you just blindly believing experts. You are desperately attached to your own paradigm. You are full of hubris for having enough confidence in your own skepticism to bet on it. - List every reason of why science is flawed -. You don’t know what consciousness is. We only know 1% of the universe.”, etc, etc, etc. Abstract, abstract, abstract.
"Look @Skadoosh. Your thinking is flawed and I’ll tell you why. You see, people once thought atoms were mystical, invisible, and unknowable. They were just a theory for thousands of years. An unexplainable phenomena. But eventually, science caught up - and now we understand atoms in great detail. So just because something isn’t currently measurable or explainable by science, doesn’t mean it’s not real. It could just mean science hasn’t figured it out yet.”
It’s way too easy to dodge the actual scope and the specific biological mechanisms being challenged. This is why I felt like the discussion was pointless and lost its grounding. I wasn’t getting responses to the specific standard of biology that I was questioning. All I got is a redirection into broad, conceptual or spiritual claims.
Yes, I absolutely understand your position – and that’s why I want to reiterate that there is nothing wrong with this approach. We can gather a lot of information from individuals with this exact same mindset because the results are generally obvious and clear (or lack of results).
Likewise, we can get good information from those who think in the abstract as well, especially for titles that deal with abstract thinking or spirituality. We synergize both viewpoints into a practical title that everyone can use regardless of their level of growth.
In my opinion, this is not about right or wrong, it’s simply two very different mindsets in conflict. And all I’m saying to everyone – without targeting a single person – is that these two mindsets can co-exist in peace. Yes, there will always be friction, since those with diametrically opposing viewpoints are naturally going to agitate each other, but considering the fact that both viewpoints are equally useful to the creation of new titles and helping people grow.
And thus, there is no need for anyone to fight, because no one will “win.” There is no “right” side because the truth of the matter is that a person should use whatever framework currently suits them. If it gets them results, it gets them results.
I wholeheartedly agree that both approaches are useful, but context matters - and in the discussion, the context was biological change.
I have no issue with someone using BDLM and giving abstract reports of experiencing a bigger penis without measurements. That’s definitely useful. I also have no issue with someone providing proof via measurements — that’s useful too. Even me, when I anecdotally said “the bones in my face expanded” while using WANTED, I’m sure that’s useful. As you’ve said, what matters is the results. But in both cases, notice how the reports are operating within a biologically feasible framework, and they have to do strictly with physical transformation.
My viewpoint is not diametrically opposite towards abstraction. It’s a grounded, biological viewpoint that encompasses abstraction up until a certain, reasonable limit. It’s specifically towards physical transformation. The opposing viewpoint that I’ve encountered and debated within this thread, appears to be pure abstraction (without any groundness) without any limits towards physical transformation.
So basically, the opposing viewpoint supports the idea of consciously guiding a subliminal to become a werewolf, for instance. We meme those things for a reason, right? It’s because it’s a joke - and it’s clearly rooted in delusion, fantasy, spiritual bypass, escapism - and incredibly poor mental health. It’s something that people should be seeing therapists for - not using subliminals for, unless they are attempting to heal the very issues that created that level of coping mechanism in the first place. I don’t even think SC entertains that, because one has to be mentally stable in order to use the products.
So, I agree with your point but I do think that you’re slightly missing the context.
The only context that I’m really trying to convey is that fighting is unnecessary on this topic because all authentic viewpoints are valid for the purposes here.
The fantastical, indescribable abstraction that many here display vitalizes our imaginations (that’s why we engage in artistic pursuits while creating a title) while the grounded reports helps remain true to our goal of creating practical titles.
And you actually just proved my point by mentioning that you do understand and can accept the abstract up to a certain limit. Now consider the fact that people who express the abstract first and the grounded second are doing the same thing, just with reversed priorities.
Most people have a primary and secondary mode of expression (maybe more). For example, you are actually interacting with my secondary mode of expression — a more practical and direct mode. But my primary method of expression is most certainly that of the abstract.
However, for the sake of this business I’ve learned to bring them into harmony. As such, I agree with you to an extent — let us first remain practical in looking for an anticipating results. You are not going to imagine yourself into growing angel wings…
… right?
And that’s the high abstract side coming out. What exactly is the relation between personal mind, personal reality and collective mind and collective reality?
While there are obvious, obvious benefits to remaining in the concrete world — and I would recommend that those who just started on a path of self-mastery to follow that path (at least in the beginning to build that foundation), I always remind myself that current biological frameworks are based on modern human knowledge.
And humanity has not stopped evolving. And thus, the beauty and the awe of THE WONDER calls to me, but only if I have solid ground to stand upon.
I would’ve loved to see where this conversation went if it didn’t fall into the realm of personal attack, to summarize.
I apologise for the way the thread turned out to be I wanted it to be a civil friendly discussion and sharing thoughts and opinion so that we can learn and expand our knowledge every day we learn new things I really wanted to share knowledge of mine and listen to others hopefully we can steer in the direction now
@GeneticBeast It sounds like there is a lot of over complication in the thread.
To simplify,
The limits of the subliminal’s, are the limits of what you believe are possible, and the amount of action you are willing to take to achieve what you want.
They do not work without action, there are people here who get 0 results after months of trying, while rare, and there are people who listen to 30s and get very good results contrasted to what they want to achieve.
I would also be aware, that you only have so much physical and mental resources. To the question of can you be a billionaire, playboy, fitness model, genius, I will just give it to you straight, if your asking that type of question then no you can not, and you would know if you could, and already be elite in at least one or two of those categories.
All of those things take time, most truly great accomplishments take a decade, or more, and that will still hold true with subliminals, although you may find yourself pursuing something that you previously didn’t think you were capable of.
My best advice, is to not ask anymore questions, because to achieve even one of those goals, you need to get clear on the 1-2 that are the most important, remind yourself every day why they are important,
Then pick the subliminal that would best aid that goal based on the objectives.
Proceed to take action on that goal, and don’t expect anything to come to you via manifestation or law of attraction as that’s not how these work.
You can do all of these things within a scope of practicality.
No amount of “believing”, patience, and taking action with subliminals is going to result in you or anyone growing nearly 1 foot after puberty. If you’re 50 years old, you’re not going to become the best MMA fighter in the world.
Shoot for the stars, but don’t lie to yourself. There’s a difference between dreaming big, and chasing delusions.
You wrote somewhere (I think it was you) that your self help started when you managed to defeat a non curable disease (if it was you you didnt say which disease it was but you were bedridden), am I right? So how do you reconcile being able to go against all odds and cure some incurable disease to now saying “be realistic”.
I mean, @Skadoosh made it clear that he does believe in and can accept these events, but he simply prefers to remain realistic in expectation and that’s what works for him. He’s made it clear that when fantastical events happen – even outside of human biology – he can accept it with evidence.
There’s nothing wrong with this approach, just like there’s nothing wrong with using the approach of pushing beyond what would seem conventional and then grounding yourself.
The core idea here is that grounding is necessary, regardless of which position you take. I personally take a more unified approach, blending both polarities into one transcendent mindset. I believe in the fantastical, I operate in the practical and in doing so, I transcend both. My opinion is held in stasis while the truth reveals itself, and then I respond with clarity.
We are not here to force our personal worldviews on each other. We are here to adapt and grow. Expansion comes from being forced to face the things about ourselves that we don’t want to see or admit. Essentially, we’re all looking at mirrors, reflecting things we like or hate, and humanity as a whole has a tendency to then project that darkness on another person in order to conquer what’s within ourselves.
This is how I think of it: I sit here and I observe everyone from a neutral standpoint. But the truth is, words fail to convey the deeper meaning of a inner / spiritual event. In fact, when I try to explain the intense spiritual awakening I have with regular words, it almost feels like I am profaning it. I am highly aware that I am looking at not only the outer form of a person’s expression, but any emotions I feel from their post are self-generated.
I then began to expand this mindset beyond the business, recognizing that in many situations that frustrated me in the past, I had the power to seize control over my emotions and realize that nothing is “happening to me,” but rather just happening. And my emotional response wasn’t something that someone imposed upon me, but rather my own memory and life experiences generating that internal response. Now, obviously you want to avoid the extremes of this position, allowing people to abuse you and the such, but looking at it from a practical viewpoint will grant you A LOT of inner power.
Look around at the people near you, or think of someone you know. We all assign these people “roles” or parts to play in our personal life drama that they may not even accept if you were to tell them that’s the role they’ve been cast in. Why? Because those roles and positions we expect were self-generated based on our own experiences. So essentially, even when you’re looking at another person, you’re looking at yourself. And when one grasps this, it becomes incredibly easy to change your inner perception, and the outer experience will automatically adjust.
And that is the nature of Zero Point’s intense focus on self-exploration and discovery. The connection between inner reality and outer experience is absolute – a constant cyclical mirror, constantly reflecting that which is hidden within right back at you. And Zero Point then asks the question: “With this knowledge, what will you create, because you ARE capable of building a life that is more authentic to you.”
Or, if you’re subscribed to our emails, you’ve seen the subject line: “What will you do now that you can do anything?”
Will you continue to remain locked within rigid societal conditioning (which is necessary to maintain a stable society, for better or worse), or will you break through these fears, stop projecting and seize control of things?
And thus, both viewpoints are equally important. Remember when Season 3 began and there was the poll that equated to whether people wanted more spiritual titles vs. material and it was a 50/50 split? We WANT people to express both viewpoints. Then, trust us to synergize them – just as we’ve always done.
and enjoy what comes out of the oven.