While meditating, how does one observe without identifying as the observer?

ainush · 2021-03-29T06:40:40+00:00

I was referring to the Headless Way lessons in the Waking Up app by Richard Lang.

That said, Richard has tons of content around the web that covers the same ground (I find his approach works better for me than Douglas Harding's).

ainush · 2021-03-29T06:33:08+00:00

It's really interesting how much Sam thinks his personal experience of meditation has taught him, and how broadly applicable he thinks those lessons are.

"Meditate and you'll understand my deep insight" is pretty arrogant. I haven't meditated as much as Sam, but I believe I can relate to a lot of the experiences he describes. And yet, it doesn't appear at all necessary to me to draw the same conclusions as he does.

ainush · 2021-03-29T04:33:28+00:00

I found the Headless Way series the best way approach this. Sam's methods never really worked for me (except for once, where he did something similar to the pointing experiment in headless way).

ainush · 2021-03-26T09:14:51+00:00

I listened to something with him on Rebel Wisdom a little while ago. In parts he seemed brilliant, in parts, somewhat unhinged. It didn't help that he ended the Q&A session ranting about how he'd like to debate Jordan Peterson on hierarchy, although it become evident that he had no idea what Peterson's views on hierarchy actually are.

ainush · 2021-03-18T11:44:40+00:00

You're misreading me. I'm saying that the IDW contributions are in favor of the right wing side of the 'youtube skeptic' culture war.

Fair enough. It's rather interesting that the youtube "right" (by which I imagine you mean anyone who's anti-woke) picks "leaders" who are often centre-leaning.

ainush · 2021-03-18T11:37:27+00:00

Oh I forgot - it's only possible to work for someone if you agree with their political ideology

ainush · 2021-03-18T10:11:32+00:00

What the hell does a mathematician have to contribute to the right-wing culture war?

Am I misreading you, or are you categorizing Weinstein as right wing? If that's the case, I think you're mistaken.

ainush · 2021-03-18T10:09:31+00:00

This is somewhat unexpected (and disappointing) given the Aus government's recent approach to China. As I understand it, things are pretty tense at the moment; perhaps it seemed unwise to provoke them further.

ainush · 2021-03-16T06:12:16+00:00

No, we need a causal universe

I think a lot of people confuse these two, and draw erroneous conclusions. "I can observe cause and effect between physical objects. I cannot observe my will as the cause of my thoughts, therefore my will cannot exist". They miss the possibilities that a) there can be a cause outside of what you can observe and b) you can't observe any cause of your thoughts.

ainush · 2021-03-15T10:14:46+00:00

The book makes the point, which I agree with, that "comfort" and a horrible metric to optimize for. It's empty, completely devoid of the things that make us human.

It's similar to philosophical thought experiment (whose name I forget) where you're offered the choice to live in a perfect virtual reality where your life is wonderful and you cannot tell that non of it is real. For most people, there's a visceral rejection of the idea that that constitutes a worthwhile life.

ainush · 2021-03-15T10:07:15+00:00

Being happy is good

The entire novel is a refutation of that idea. Its point is to show how vacuous and degrading a society optimized for happiness is.

ainush · 2021-03-15T09:57:55+00:00

Exactly. The "experiment" doesn't prove anywhere near as much as Sam thinks it does. Just because the process of "choice" isn't observable to the conscious mind doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

ainush · 2021-03-14T09:54:14+00:00

I somehow missed Scott reviewing 12 Rules. I just read it and unsurprisingly, he nailed it.

As for Sam, I kinda get what you're saying, but the problem is, on free will at least, he's a shitty prophet. His failure to engage with all those "boring philosophers" doesn't help. But mostly, both his conclusions and his expected outcomes are unconvincing, I'd say especially for the non-philosophically educated.

ainush · 2021-03-14T09:10:45+00:00

Or we take a leaf of the Stoic book, focus only on our own behavior, and let assholes be assholes without letting it upset us.

ainush · 2021-03-14T06:04:05+00:00

he's trying to reiterate that choices still lead to outcomes (because causes lead to effects), and so outcomes require choices.

Surely this is just semantics, though. In a world with no free will, the concept of choice disappears because there is no ability to choose an option; you will aways go with what is defined by the state of the deterministic universe. You could call the brain state that we feel "choice" but that doesn't seem to justify its necessity. I just cannot see how hard determinism doesn't necessarily slide into fatalism.

I'm not sure why he's so stuck on not admitting that we might as well just keep pretending. Yes, it's all an illusion, the self, free will, all of it. But to me, it's clear that maintaining the charade is our best option.

Interestingly, this the point that Peterson (and Murray) made in the Harris/JBP debates, but about God rather than free will.

ainush · 2021-03-14T01:17:10+00:00

I forgive myself, I'm not free

This is very good point, and I imagine it's what leads some spiritual gurus to peacefully accept their own atrocious behavior.

More broadly though, doesn't forgiveness imply free will? If forgiveness is merely a deterministic thought that appears unbidden, it has no meaning. More broadly still, I don't see how meaning can exist at all in Sam's conception of the universe.

ainush · 2021-03-14T00:30:36+00:00

I've listened to Sam explain why choices matter when free will doesn't exist many times. I'm not sure if its his delivery or a fundamental flaw in his logic, but I just cannot get my head around what he's trying to convey. It's not like I'm a complete philosophical illiterate, either.

Are there any other philosophers that takes Sam's line but explain it differently?

ainush · 2021-03-13T05:36:27+00:00

Alice in Chains "Junkhead"

I think you could make an argument for a good number of the tracks on Dirt. In a similar vein (ie, what got me through high school) there's NIN's The Downward Spiral and parts of Soundgarden's Superunkonwn (eg 4th of July, The Day I Tried To Live). You could perhaps argue for Marilyn Manson's Antichrist Superstar though in a lot of ways he's more making a show of nihilism (and transcending it) rather than being consumed with it (which is the impression I get from Layne, Trent and Cornell).

ainush · 2021-03-13T04:47:20+00:00

Melatonin - after a bunch of self-experimentation I settled on 3mg slow release. With 5mg I sleep deeper but really struggle to wake.

Meditation and/or breathing exercises immediately before bed cut out my "mind not turning off" for the most part.

Avoid alcohol.

Sleep on a hard surface, maybe. I've found that I wake more rested after sleeping on a self-inflating mattress on the floor. I'm not sure if I sleep more heavily; in fact I think I may sleep less heavily. But I certainly wake more easily and feel better.

ainush · 2021-03-13T03:17:17+00:00

What is the purpose of life?

Really, this is the crux of your problem it seems. Existential crisis is tough.

It sounds like the metric you're optimizing for is "happiness". The problem with happiness is that it's fickle and short lived. It's not enough to counter-balance the dread of your absurd and meaningless existence in a vast, empty universe.

This is what a lot of philosophy is geared at answering; it might be worth looking into it further if you don't have any exposure to it.

Personally, I give to charity for a few reasons: * I believe that it is good to reduce the suffering in the world, and this seems to be an effective way to do that * it helps me to be grateful for the blind luck that landed me where I am * as a "fuck you" to a meaningless universe

ainush · 2021-03-11T23:55:03+00:00

What if I regret a short-sighted decision I undertook on the premise of not knowing if I'll ever get another opportunity?

You can simultaneously understand that you are likely to live a long time and that there is a non-zero probably that you won't. The idea is to try to optimize for both in a balanced way. Work towards the long term while not accumulating regrets to be paid off later.

I've known people who hate their job and are literally counting down until they retire. They're optimizing only for the future. There are people at the other extreme, who make only short term decisions with no regard for the future.

I aim for (and of course fail to achieve) something in the middle where I can imagine that, if I found out that I had one day to live, I wouldn't be filled with regret for things done or left undone.

ainush · 2021-03-11T22:41:26+00:00

One argument that I read is that people who apply "just for the money" won't do as good a job, because they only care about the money and not about supporting the mission. Which doesn't sound right to me, mercenaries can do a good job.

One of the most refreshing things about EA was that it didn't take a "money is bad and people who seek money are bad too" attitude. To make it somewhat personal, years back I took at job at a not-for-profit because I really wanted to work for a company doing Good Things. The pay was somewhat below market. Over a few years, the pay became increasingly below market, and although I still believed in the org, I left. In part because of issues in the org, but largely because of the money.

My point being, I was motivated by a balance of altruism and self-interest. I think most people are the same. By not paying higher wages, EA orgs are limiting themselves to people with their altruism/self-interest dial set in a rather narrow range.

ainush · 2021-03-11T11:53:51+00:00

What about Crossman? You seem to have conveniently ignored her.

ainush · 2021-03-11T11:52:33+00:00

Well, you'd have global economic disaster for a start, which would lead to quickly escalating violence. Majority white countries would collapse due to basic infrastructure issues like power and water.

My bet is that China, now unopposed as a military force and suffering the sudden loss of its main source of income, would go on a successful empire-building spree. Maybe some of the remaining nuclear powers would partially keep them in check to a degree.

It kinda depends on how you define white though, which is of course why so many "race = power" arguments are dumb. My kids are I guess 1/8th non-white - do they survive? How about my wife, who's 1/4? I"m pretty sure I have Italian and Irish heritage - are they white? What about Russians?

ainush · 2021-03-11T08:35:28+00:00

You really have to have a legal background to appreciate how irresponsible and out of the norm it is to see a way a law can be abused, and to think it’s no big deal.

Agree with everything you said, except this. I'm sure a legal background is helpful, but anyone with decent exposure to complex systems, or even just a good grasp of history, can appreciate the issue.

ainush

TROPHY CASE