Which Public Personalities Are 4D STO Candidates?

[Ennio]

I agree with everything you've said.

That's why, as you say in the last paragraph, I commented on Beau's enthusiasm for that guy in the videos.

Not sure I follow you. When you say:

I don't see anywhere how this helps anyone.

It would be interesting to see what think the child in Africa watching the video on a mobile phone with his parents' income of 100 dollars a month.

It seems pretty at odds with trying to see how Beau's points could very well be good insights. Your tone seems less 'rigorous devil's advocate playing' and much more 'dismissive and overtly cynical'.

Regarding the idea that if there's nothing to say it's better to remain silent, I assure you all that I try, but damn it, sometimes I read something and think, "This is missing!"

But your tone suggests that because the information being presented doesn't quite fit all your frameworks, criteria, etc. - you give yourself justification, all too easily, for throwing out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. Also, being an STO candidate doesn't mean that the person in question is going to positively impact the lives of all people. Maybe that isn't quite what you were getting at, but can you see how what you wrote can be construed that way?

 

[Wandering Star]

Maybe that isn't quite what you were getting at, but can you see how what you wrote can be construed that way?

Yes.

Not sure I follow you. When you say

Displaying wealth and a life of enjoyment is an obvious catalyst for the 98 percent of the planet who cannot do that to feel the desire to achieve it, for which a lot of money is needed.

The rich and famous are tools that serve the status quo by displaying what no one else can have.

That's my point.

 

[Faca Fritz]

Yes, I suspect that being a good person is not enough to qualify as a 4D STO candidate (although it certainly helps a lot).

Learning the lessons and consciously choosing to act accordingly (something incredibly difficult).

So, people who enjoy fame and money, who are the ones we should choose according to the spirit of this thread, I think they can hardly qualify for 4D STO, given the established status quo It requires a toll to STS.

I suppose you know that very few people know the creators of this forum, for example.

Here, I assumed that I would not respond, comment, on your previous post, but in this one you encouraged me. Basically, I have the impression that your thoughts often result in a defensive attitude, as if you need to defend yourself from something. And in order for that to be purposeful, you gradually move, not into an attack literally, but into a possible defense against potential harm through critical thinking. Here, I am not your enemy, I just recognize my enemy in myself, in some moments of self-awareness. In this understanding, my wife, who spent her childhood in a Home for Uncared Children, helped me the most.
Croatia:
Evo, pretpostavljao sam da se neću oglasiti, komentirati, tvoj prethodni post, ali u ovom si me potakla. Uglavnom, imam dojam da tvoja razmišljanja često rezultiraju obrambenim stavom, kao da se od nečeg trebaš obraniti. A da bi to bilo svrshovito, pomalo prelaziš, ne u napad doslovce, nego u moguću obranu od potencijalne štete pomoću kritičkog razmišljnja. Eto, nisam tvoj neprijatelj, samo prepoznajem svog neprijatelja u samom sebi, u nekim trenucima samosvijesti. U tom shvaćanju, najviše mi je pomogla moja supruga koja je djetinjstvo provela u Domu za nezbrinutu djecu.

 

[Cosmos]

So, people who enjoy fame and money, who are the ones we should choose according to the spirit of this thread, I think they can hardly qualify for 4D STO, given the established status quo It requires a toll to STS.

The thread asks "Which Public Personalities Are 4D STO Candidates?" and then people have brought up POTENTIAL candidates, mostly based on a longer study of a person over time I think, from the people who brought up POTENTIAL candidates. Then people discussed, hopefully based on more than just a quick/superficial glance at a human being.

From all I can see, I think it is pretty unlikely that the following statement is true, and certainly not categorically so, quote: "I think they can hardly qualify for 4D STO, given the established status quo It requires a toll to STS."

Just because someone "enjoys fame and money" as you call it, doesn't have to mean at all that they can't be 4D STO candidates, quite the contrary in fact, IMO.

It seems pretty obvious to me that you have some rather fixed and inflexible ideas of what such a candidate might look like or how such a candidate should be and what he does or what he has. Quite a bit of a black and white way of looking at something like this, IMO. If you want, I think you could greatly benefit from reflecting on the feedback you have received, most especially on those portions that address how you seem to be judging the capacity of any human being to be such a candidate or not.

Here are just a couple of examples/points where a reflection on your own thinking could help you:

Hi Wandering Star, looking from the outside it does seem like Luke Nichols pushed some buttons of yours, hence the judgements and attack rhetoric. I think Beau is just reflecting that back to you.

I am curious about what Luke represents for you, what the motivation for making someone like him “wrong” is, and if there’s anything you see in him that you could also see in yourself?

I’m aware you don’t know him personally, but that doesn’t stop the mind from forming opinions, judgments and projections about people. We do that all the time, in milliseconds. It is that aspect of your experience of him that I was curious about. Don’t you have that curiosity yourself?

It’s these kinds of questions that let us see how our mind and perceptions really operate, so we can practice greater objectivity.

Being a father now myself, anyone out there promoting how to be a good father and raise children is doing some real good. And that should make him a good STO candidate. Who knows, he might me one of those experienced souls who have done and seen it all and just wanted to come back here and live a quite and good life, closer to the nature.

When we take a moment to reflect on what's being said, and how something might be true - maybe not as a definite, but as a possibility at least, we are doing much greater justice to the process of acquiring knowledge and widening our perceptions than we might do otherwise. And that is really one of the main focuses or reasons for having all kinds of discussions here.

We are also under no obligation to form any kind of set opinion immediately, never mind posting a hard and fast view on what's being said right away, as tempting as that may be sometimes when we just don't see what others are seeing necessarily.

And here's the other thing - particularly as it relates to your posts, Wandering Star: You DO bring up a few valid points. But you seem to do so to the exclusion of all the points Beau brought up and his honing in on this YouTuber's BEING as he, and others, understand it. In this way, its like your habit of 'thinking fast' becomes a limiting factor in what you're able to assimilate or, at least, consider.

I'm not even saying that Beau's 'right' here necessarily. These things can sometimes be hard to know without more data and assessment. But what I AM saying is that, at the very least, given the way he made his case, and the substance of his observations, I can certainly see why he chose to bring this person up here as a good possibility.

On that point, and for myself too, it was a good reminder that being a possible STO candidate can look somewhat different than what one might think of ordinarily. Especially when one considers all the many ways that one can be in service to the well-being and knowledge-sharing of all.

But your tone suggests that because the information being presented doesn't quite fit all your frameworks, criteria, etc. - you give yourself justification, all too easily, for throwing out the proverbial baby with the bathwater. Also, being an STO candidate doesn't mean that the person in question is going to positively impact the lives of all people. Maybe that isn't quite what you were getting at, but can you see how what you wrote can be construed that way?

 

[Wandering Star]

If you want, I think you could greatly benefit from reflecting on the feedback you have received, most especially on those portions that address how you seem to be judging the capacity of any human being to be such a candidate or not.

What I say or think about this topic doesn't matter, that's true.

The cow not will be asked about the politics of the livestock industry.

 

[Ennio]

What I say or think about this topic doesn't matter, that's true.

That wasn't the gist of what Cosmos was suggesting to you; that what you say or think doesn't matter here. It DOES matter. Or to be more specific, how you think matters - which is why we're giving you feedback about it. Please re-read what he wrote.

The cow not will be asked about the politics of the livestock industry.

I think you might benefit from reading Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow

From the blurb:

In his mega bestseller, Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, world-famous psychologist and winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, takes us on a groundbreaking tour of the mind and explains the two systems that drive the way we think.

System 1 is fast, intuitive, and emotional; System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and more logical. The impact of overconfidence on corporate strategies, the difficulties of predicting what will make us happy in the future, the profound effect of cognitive biases on everything from playing the stock market to planning our next vacation―each of these can be understood only by knowing how the two systems shape our judgments and decisions.

Engaging the reader in a lively conversation about how we think, Kahneman reveals where we can and cannot trust our intuitions and how we can tap into the benefits of slow thinking. He offers practical and enlightening insights into how choices are made in both our business and our personal lives―and how we can use different techniques to guard against the mental glitches that often get us into trouble. Topping bestseller lists for almost ten years, Thinking, Fast and Slow is a contemporary classic, an essential book that has changed the lives of millions of readers.