Dmt and ancient religions

[Panpsychic]

You my friend have earned yourself a "butt-hurt" ban. See you tomorrow.

This is really not the purpose of moderation though. Otherwise the entire enterprise becomes a little clique of "don't criticize or hurt the mods feelings, above all" which turns it into a charade.
His points were valid in this case I think, drawing awareness to blindspots is a good thing. @Voidmatrix is by far one of the better posters and mods on here but is not immune.

 

[The Kraken]

This is really not the purpose of moderation though. Otherwise the entire enterprise becomes a little clique of "don't criticize or hurt the mods feelings, above all" which turns it into a charade.
His points were valid in this case I think, drawing awareness to blindspots is a good thing. @Voidmatrix is by far one of the better posters and mods on here but is not immune.

His criticism made no sense and that's because his feelings were hurt.

I do what I want.

Let's ask void if his feelings were hurt... I highly doubt it.

 

[Voidmatrix]

His points were valid in this case I think, drawing awareness to blindspots is a good thing. @Voidmatrix is by far one of the better posters and mods on here but is not immune.

First thank you. Very kind of you. Second, no, I'm not immune. But that leads to third, where is their criticism valid and/or what blindspot did I show? I merely stated why I don't normally watch that kind of content. And, again, I did not reference the OP's video, I was speaking broadly and generally.

What's more, all of that was just a preamble to joke with @TransistorBass so it seems like the point was missed totally on their part.

Their criticism tried to paint me as a hypocrite, but I didn't contradict my words with my actions, and so, I disagree with the validity of their criticism levied at me.

Let's ask void if his feelings were hurt.

And, no, not at all, but it was annoying. I was annoyed. But thats nothing new. I'm always kind of annoyed.

One love

 

[Panpsychic]

where is their criticism valid and/or what blindspot did I show? I merely stated why I don't normally watch that kind of content. And, again, I did not reference the OP's video, I was speaking broadly and generally.

Well, there was this back and forth

I tend to avoid stuff like this because there's often a lot of confirmation bias that really builds up the overall idea. They have an idea and instead of testing it's veracity they try to find arguments and evidence to force it to be true, neglecting to acknowledge contradictory information or ideas.

I didn't watch enough to speak on it. I am speaking broadly, and therefore not even talking about this guy really.

You are in fact demonstrating a bias in assuming its likely to be a bad video without testing the veracity of that belief by watching enough of it to comment on it, based on prior assumptions but still commenting on it anyway. That could be fine in deciding not to bother watching, but then considering somone posted the video because they thought it was good, just dismissing it based on assumptions would be both premature and somewhat disrespectful of the posters judgement. His crticism is in fact therefore accurate in this case.

No refutations from you? No evidence he didn't test the veracity?

Are you not doing Exactly what you're criticizing?

I'll say his channel is well researched. I'm into this kind of stuff and he's pretty right on imo.

It was not trying to paint you as 'a hypocrite' in general but pointing out that the above can in fact be seen as demonstarting the very bias you are arguing against as the poster pointed out.

Anyway, my main point was regardless of whether you agree (probably not since you have stated this already) it wouldn't be warranting a brief ban if mod capacities were used rightly in my view, just because he called out what he saw as a contradictory statement in dismissing something he posted without watching it based on such videos "usually demonstrating a confirmation bias".

 

[fink]

And, no, not at all, but it was annoying. I was annoyed. But thats nothing new. I'm always kind of annoyed.

One love

Well I guess that justifies potentially losing a new member then?

Between you and Kraken, this could easily read as 'We are right because this is our forum. Because you wouldn't accept that, you get banned for a day'

I'm not trying to start something Void/Kraken. Love you all in the nexus elite.

But this kind of behaviour may be misinterpreted as abuse of power when viewed from down here at street level among us regular members.

 

[Voidmatrix]

You are in fact demonstrating a bias in assuming its likely to be a bad video without testing the veracity of that belief by watching enough of it to comment on it, based on prior assumptions but still commenting on it anyway.

No, you are wrong here and this statement it false. You are assuming why I didn't watch the video. I didn't watch it because I am busy and filter the content I consume because I am busy. I NEVER said anything about this video in my original statement. And I said it that way that led to a damn joke.

So let's break it down again. Yes, I have a bias against this kind of content. But no, I didn't say anything about this guy or his video. So I didn't need to test the veracity of the content of the video because I wasn't talking about it.

It was not trying to paint you as 'a hypocrite' in general but pointing out that the above can in fact be seen as demonstarting the very bias you are arguing against as the poster pointed out.

Again, false. My comments are my observations of what others sometimes do when they have certain ideas. I am acknowledging a potential pattern. I do not go into watching these with some predicate idea that I feel I need to force to appear true.

Well I guess that justifies potentially losing a new member then?

Not sure how what you quoted applies to this statement.

But this kind of behaviour may be misinterpreted as abuse of power when viewed from down here at street level among us regular members.

I don't care how anyone views it. It's not up to them. It's up to me. I made a comment. It was meant as a joke overall because of what @TransistorBass said about the host's voice. Op wanted to approach me contentiously, taking my comment personally and applying to the video (same mistake at least one of you is making). I expanded on my thinking, and addressed their attitude. Then they f-up and found out.

Idk if this is too nuanced or what, but I am over it and going back to bed.

But last thing, if you feel there's an abuse of power you ought to say something to someone about it instead of just dangling it, because saying it without the necessary backing isn't something to work on me anymore.

One love

 

[stuartroelke]

Convinced a whole generation of the existence of machine elves and self dribbling basket balls!

It’s interesting that this was brought up in a discussion related to confirmation bias. I encountered “machine elves” before knowing Terrence existed. That was after smoking 80x Salvia divinorum (a substance I had no preconceived notions about at the age of eighteen). Two or three years after, a new friend had overheard me discussing my wildest trip—said it sounded like “a Terrence McKenna story.” What made this shared experience more apparent was eventually finding salvia-inspired art that resembles those entities (users commonly bond over “that salvia feeling”).

It could be a genetically programmed defense mechanism against madness, or a kernel of cosmic truth—who knows. Though, I do think this is a perfect example of how confirmation bias and truth are a delicate balance; people are free to discuss what they hypothesize to be truth, and others are free to think it’s bologna. That’s the beauty of living in a simulation!

Image: ‘Elves’ by Mark P. Maxwell

 

[Panpsychic]

No, you are wrong here and this statement it false. You are assuming why I didn't watch the video. I didn't watch it because I am busy and filter the content I consume because I am busy. I NEVER said anything about this video in my original statement. And I said it that way that led to a damn joke.

So let's break it down again. Yes, I have a bias against this kind of content. But no, I didn't say anything about this guy or his video. So I didn't need to test the veracity of the content of the video because I wasn't talking about it.

I think you are getting unnecessary defensive over this point being raised, which is maybe part of the issue and possibly unrelated to the thread but perhaps your own stuff which is why I said no one is immune and everyone has blind spots. That said, your above statement does not line up with your first and initial respone to the OP post, which was to broadly say this:

I tend to avoid stuff like this

"Stuff like this" is an assumption, grouping the video posted without watching it with other content. Your reasons for filtering what you consume may be related to time as it is with all of us. However that isn't what you said in your initial response.

because there's often a lot of confirmation bias that really builds up the overall idea. They have an idea and instead of testing it's veracity they try to find arguments and evidence to force it to be true, neglecting to acknowledge contradictory information or ideas. Using "facts" to doll up an idea rather than to actually substantiate it. Related to sophistry.

Again, this is just going further on the general assumptions about "stuff like this" which is disrespectful to the OP as I see it when you later said you hadn't listened to it. Thus his criticism was valid to an extent.
If you had said in your first post something more like

"I am busy so selective in what I watch and many of these types of videos have a confirmation bias"
then it would be more aligned with what you said in your explanation. Howver you instead immediatley went on the "stuff like this" assumption post as your initial response. Sorry void, but I don't see your side I am with the OP on this, but regardless its not a particularly big issue I don't think so don't let it keep you up maybe just go back to bed and agree to disagree.

 

[Voidmatrix]

I think you are getting unnecessary defensive over this point being raised, which is maybe part of the issue and possibly unrelated to the thread but perhaps your own stuff which is why I said no one is immune and everyone has blind spots.

Think what you want. I think this whole exchange has been unnecessary, but here I am still discussing it...

"Stuff like this" is an assumption, grouping the video posted without watching it with other content. Your reasons for filtering what you consume may be related to time as it is with all of us. However that isn't what you said in your initial response.

Titles give you an idea of what something is about or centered on. I didn't need anymore than the title in order to broadly categorize it: Theoretical/Historical basis/ideas around ancient psychedelic use and religion/other cultures.

Also, I said I tend. I'm not going to defend my sovereign tendencies after Ialready explained them. However, and tendency isn't ubiquitous.

Again, this is just going further on the general assumptions about "stuff like this" which is disrespectful to the OP as I see it when you later said you hadn't listened to it. Thus his criticism was valid to an extent.
If you had said in your first post something more like

I can talk about things or content the video is related without talking about the video for crying out loud. If they got their feelings hurt, they took it personally, which i advised them not to do. I wasn't insulting him, the video, or the videos creator. I gave my opinion based on my observations of "stuff like this." For all I know, this video is absolutely astute, rigorous and amazing. But I don't know, and that's why I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT THIS VIDEO.

"I am busy so selective in what I watch and many of these types of videos have a confirmation bias"
then it would be more aligned with what you said in your explanation. Howver you instead immediatley went on the "stuff like this" assumption post as your initial response. Sorry void, but I don't see your side I am with the OP on this, but regardless its not a particularly big issue I don't think so don't let it keep you up maybe just go back to bed and agree to disagree.

There's nothing wrong with my initial response and at the end of the day you're still misinterpreting the intent, which I already explained, and you've yet to acknowledge, so maybe that's why you brought this up and won't let it go.

I like you, but no, I'm not doing the agree to disagree. If it ain't that deep, why are we doing this? You opened the door to where things stand presently. You can either own that you shouldn't be correcting me, or we can keep dancing until I am bored, because you find my defensiveness unnecessary and I find this entire dance unnecessary. Reciprocity is a beautiful thing.

And this isn't keeping me up at night. I just don't sleep. Perks of PTSD.

One love

 

[fink]

I'd like to reiterate the above post. It's not a big deal. A public occurrence, commented on subjectively by us, the public.

I know we will always have a 'Bill Cipher' character, that in itself is a nuance of the Nexus. The Kraken may do what it wants without reproach. As stated above.


I just dont think, in this instance, the behaviour was fair or just.

Disagreement is not the issue. Liberal use of the ban hammer as a personal or group weapon.... just doesn't seem fair or just.

Stating that you 'don't care' and are 'always kind of annoyed' should be an indicator that you are in no fit shape to govern or discipline other humans.

You guys just banned a member for sticking up for himself in his own thread. But I guess you can just ban me too if you don't like this subjective viewpoint.

I'm telling you the truth as I see it because I am your friend. Friends do not support unfair behaviour.

This place is a sanctuary of understanding and intellectual discourse for many people. It hurts to see mods behaving like 4chan or Reddit dictators.

 

[Voidmatrix]

Looks like you and I are gonna butt heads again. Let's go!

Stating that you 'don't care' and are 'always kind of annoyed' should be and indicator that you are in no fit shape to govern or discipline other humans.

Really?!?!? OOOOOOOhhhhhh @The Traveler what are your thoughts?

You guys just banned a member for sticking up for himself in his own thread. But I guess you can just ban me too if you don't like this subjective viewpoint.

He was defending himself against air. There was nothing for them to defend themselves against.

This place is a sanctuary of understanding

Yeah, and I feel like I am the only one that understands what's going on here.


Love you too man, but you're off.

One love

 

[fink]

If you 'dont care' and are 'always annoyed' you should not be in charge of banning people.

Period.

I truly hope 1Cor619 can see past this and feel welcomed back as a contributing member.

I'll take a six month break from posting to save you the trouble of banning me. See you later, if I'm allowed back in July.

 

[dreamer042]

Well I did actually watch the video and I gotta say that I feel your intuitive analysis was on point.

They have an idea and instead of testing it's veracity they try to find arguments and evidence to force it to be true, neglecting to acknowledge contradictory information or ideas. Using "facts" to doll up an idea rather than to actually substantiate it. Related to sophistry.

It is absolutely yet another one of those 'stack together a bunch of disjointed and sometimes spurious facts: rat pineal glands, acacia is mentioned in ancient texts, therefore everything is DMT' videos that youtube is flooded with. It's not necessarily bad information, and it's interesting enough to watch (albeit the voice is a bit abrasive), but it's a lot of stretching connections and hyping too oft repeated half-truths as more valid and cohesive than may be borne out under critical examination. It feels really good to research DMT at the cursory level and connect all the obvious dots and feel like you've figured it all out, that's why there are thousands of youtube videos that do exactly that, but it just reads as "early to the DMT journey" because every person who figures this out decides they are qualified to make a youtube video and explain it to the world. It's basically a trope at this point, and yeah I don't think it was wrong to recognize it as "another one of *those* videos".

Granted per the rules, the Kraken does what the Kraken wants, but I also feel a ban was not justified in this instance, no rules were broken. The thread has devolved into an unproductive back and forth at this point, so I'm going to go ahead a lock it up and allow everyone to take a step back and pause the rapid fire reactionary replies.

 

[The Traveler]

Well I did actually watch the video and I gotta say that I feel your intuitive analysis was on point.


It is absolutely yet another one of those 'stack together a bunch of disjointed and sometimes spurious facts: rat pineal glands, acacia is mentioned in ancient texts, therefore everything is DMT' videos that youtube is flooded with. It's not necessarily bad information, and it's interesting enough to watch (albeit the voice is a bit abrasive), but it's a lot of stretching connections and hyping too oft repeated half-truths as more valid and cohesive than may be borne out under critical examination. It feels really good to research DMT at the cursory level and connect all the obvious dots and feel like you've figured it all out, that's why there are thousands of youtube videos that do exactly that, but it just reads as "early to the DMT journey" because every person who figures this out decides they are qualified to make a youtube video and explain it to the world. It's basically a trope at this point, and yeah I don't think it was wrong to recognize it as "another one of *those* videos".

Granted per the rules, the Kraken does what the Kraken wants, but I also feel a ban was not justified in this instance, no rules were broken. The thread has devolved into an unproductive back and forth at this point, so I'm going to go ahead a lock it up and allow everyone to take a step back and pause the rapid fire reactionary replies.

This exactly.

Let's discuss topics that are actually relevant towards understanding and not drivel.

And please no more posts in this topic.

Thank you @dreamer042.


Kind regards,

The Traveler