naivecortex
naivecortex has not written any posts yet.

naivecortex has not written any posts yet.

An example of what I consider strong evidence: a person who had their brain imaged by an fMRI while performing some set of relatively simple mental tasks both before and after experiencing a PCE had radically different results.
It is indeed a strong neurological evidence. It is a pity that Richard have denied all requests to take a brain scan for reasons pertaining to personal preference (he was more interested in the experiential/practical inclinations to be happy/harmless). Recent actually free people may have different preferences (Trent - a member of DhO that is actually free - is on record saying that he would be willing to undergo such tests if he is fully... (read 380 more words →)
Wow... a cult formed
Ha, and where is the evidence for that? Is it too much to ask for evidence in a forum pertaining to human rationality?
[...] to actively seek neurological dysfunction.
Sorry, there seems to be a misunderstanding. I should have perhaps written clearly; psychiatry being a field dealing with dysfunctional peoples (i.e., dysfunctional identities involved with feelings) the psychiatrist who diagnosed Richard of course had to label (without choice) his sensuous / non-affective ongoing mode of experience in psychiatric terms (whose normal meaning pertaining to identities-with-feelings do not apply to a person with no identity/feelngs).
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I located this page http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Affective_death_spiral This process creates theories that are believed for their own sake and organizations that exist solely to perpetuate themselves, especially when combined with the social dynamics of groupthink.
It is worth pointing out that an Actual Freedom is not a "theory" let alone something to bolster one's "beliefs" upon (and let alone forming an identity around it). Richard is the first actually free person; and others who have personally seen him verified (to an extent possible) the absence of affective reactions (followed by carefree interactions, for instance). Richard himself was once diagnosed by a psychiatrist who reported the following conditions (abeit in psychiatric... (read more)
You came here to convince people to adopt Actualism (it seems). So, actually convince me.
You're way off the mark. I am not intending to convince/convert anyone to Actualism; there is no group/belief-system/cult here (outside the human imagination, anyways).
I'm posting about Actualism here in LW (which presumably was never mentioned before) simply in the spirit of sharing information and possibly engaging in mutually-interesting discussion with other fellow freethinkers.
Why should I pay more attention to you and your alleged non-cult than I do to someone else's alleged non-cult?
As it is your life you are living with - and I am only posting here in the spirit of sharing - then what you... (read more)
I make no claims about whether or not your group is actually a cult, only that I believe it to be very likely.
Ok. Again my response is similar: if a fellow being being is to discover a remarkable way of living completely rid of sorrow/malice, and promulgates his discovery for the benefit of others (much like the sharing of a technological invention, for instance) ... and if someone is to call the discoverer, his discovery and a few of those experimenting with his method as a cultic organization, then the burden of proof lies on the shoulder of this someone, does it not?
Here's a hint: the fact that the AF method is primarily about investigation of one's own feelings/beliefs and how they cause malice/sorrow in oneself and others should automatically imply that phenomena such as groupthink, affective death spiral, dogmatic identification, belonging-to-a-group and so on are completely unproductive to its very thesis/goal.
If this is not helpful, perhaps you could glean further details from the Frequently Flogged Misconception page.
Having woken up to reality itself, as [Richard] sees it, he starts a website or two, and after more than a decade, he has gathered a very small nucleus of people who also find meaning in the particular theory and practice which he espouses.
Two things:
The reality that you speak of is referred to as actuality (the sensory experience, minus the affect) in the AF lingo; where the word 'reality' is used to refer to the affective inner reality (the emotive cloud surrounding the actual sensations).
The 'meaning' that you speak is found only in a PCE or other lesser forms of experiences (feeling good/carefree/etc). There is no meaning in "theory" (AF is not
I have a very high prior probability that you are [promoting a cult].
Could this "prior probability' be your intuition?
Suppose I came to you with a creative idea about a new product; where I detail you on the specific steps and resources needed to create that produt, and you were to respond with "I think you are promoting a cult", then it stands to reason - does it not - that I ask just what exactly [the factual events/knowledge] made you think of my specific method to be a cult?
... (read more)To overcome the strong weighting of my prior probability function and convince me that you are doing anything other than promoting a
Calling something "Non-spiritual" doesn't make it not a religion.
And calling something 'religious' makes it so? You said "the LWer concludes that this message amounts to religious spam or close to that." And I responded with a question "what is the factual basis for such a conclusion?". Don't you think it would be a much more fruitful discussion if we sticked to the facts instead of intuitions/impressions/guesses/probabilities?
Human cognitive biases and other issues make it almost impossible for humans to judge anything about our own cognitive structures.
Yet what I originally claimed is a rather simple and obvious fact, based on common sense and experience, about bucketing our experience into sensations, thoughts and... (read more)
Hi - I will respond briefly to the various points you raised further below, but first:
What is the value of such a person - to the world, to the readers of this website?
It seems that my post was not written carefully, and led some to mistake it for religious spam. I've been visiting LW for a while, and practicing actualism (AF) for more than year. The value of the AF method (not person) personally to me is increased well-being / light-heartedness / carefreeness without having to believe in a God or some other metaphysical concept. I have virtually no belief system; Actualism is an -ism like tour-ism, not the -ism in philosophy.... (read 799 more words →)
I am not clear as to what point you were trying to make in relationship to all the quotes above except the last one which, without any context, seems absurd to me in some respects. With respect to the first bold text - "psychic" - what the word refers to is the identity that is tangled in the web of psychic currents, which further refers to the affective vibes (eg: sadness of one person creating a bad vibe among others; "loving atmosphere" and so on).
But as an actual freedom from human condition "is no longer worth your time" - then it makes no sense for both of us to continue this discussion.