Information Warfare Education, Propaganda, and How to Tell the Difference



What is interesting is that what a conservative was 20 years ago, let alone 50 eyars ago is far and away what so-called conservatives are now. The Trump Conservatives are more like Regan Democrats. They want the government to solve all their problems, including religious ones. that is not at all anythig resembling what Conservatives were all about 1980-2000.

The difficulty now is actually finding an actual conservative. Most conservatives have lost their way under Trump.

I notice the article references a 2011 study, lol. That is ancient history in politics. That was when Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and John McCain were the face of Conservatism. Now they are called “RINOs” by the Republican party majority. Though even then bashit crazy and nonsense spewing Sara Palin was a harbinger of what Conservativism would transform into under Trump.


Yes, there are many moving, interconnected parts to factor in. I’ve assembled my main outline as best I can, which I will post shortly after tidying it up a bit. Not sure it will help, it’s difficult reading, difficult to condense into an easy-to -understand sound-bite, but that’s how it is.


Corey, before I can respond to your post, I should address some essential points that lie behind my assumptions. These are important because they are critical to understanding the role of the movements that began in the 60s, along with the sexual revolution, in the unravelling of contemporary culture:

  1. The neo-Darwinian, it’s-all-in-the-genes theory of biology, with its emphasis on bottom-up causation, is on its way out. Researchers are beginning to wake up, especially within the context of consciousness theory;
  2. A realistic interpretation of how consciousness works has huge implications for the relationship between personality and culture. The relationship between personality and culture is not obvious in the mainstream narrative in biology, where the emphasis is on bottom-up causation. Culture is the all-essential top-down causation that must also be factored in;
  3. Bodies wire neuroplastic brains. More precisely, the experiences intercepted by the body wire the neuroplastic brain. This is important within the context of gender roles in culture. Norman Doidge, in The Brain that Changes Itself, was among the pioneers who introduced the notion that culture wires the neuroplastic brain;
  4. The contraceptive pill has been a disaster for humanity. Why? Tampering with biology impacts on the choices that manifest in culture. See the preceding three points.

I will probably lose many of you at “The contraceptive pill has been a disaster for humanity.” But that’s ok. My duty is simply to relay what I know to be the truth, regardless of what others think. For those who continue reading… welcome aboard!

The contraceptive pill has introduced options for women that were never available before its inception. Liberated of the burden of inconveniently timed childbirth, women were freed to enter the workforce. Surely, that’s good news. Equal opportunity extended to embrace women? More good news.

More choices for women in the dating market? Good ne… um… Here things get a little more… how shall we say… “problematic.” Some people call it sexual agency as if it is, by default, a positive thing. Who can argue with sexual agency? Let us take a closer look.

It was only this past weekend that a popular youtube blogger, Torshaa, made the following comment:

There’s a dark side to female nature that I don’t even feel comfortable talking about. It’s like telling on the sisterhood. Ya know what I mean? But it’s not going to feel good to men. And that’s where I struggle.

What was she getting at? I’ve written before about women’s rape fantasies, in the context of the Diary of Anais Nin and the Story of O. And so, intrigued, I posted the following comment

New to this channel. Just as I was wondering if I was going to find what I was looking for, this: “There’s a dark side to female nature that I don’t even feel comfortable talking about. It’s like telling on the sisterhood … But it’s not going to feel good to men.” Tell us more. Women have a couple of dark sides. What were you thinking of? Diary of Anais Nin? Story of O (a frequent Roissy reference)? Yeah, sometimes women get off on fugly. A fugly brute with attitude can achieve rapey heights that a handsome, wealthy 10 never can. Thoughts?

I was clearly onto something, with my interpretation of what she was getting at.

Now to cut a long story short, this dark dimension of women’s sexuality needs to be factored into the relationship between personality and culture. In the first instance, the contraceptive pill has physiological effects that impact on women’s choices in men (see, for example, Shannen Michaela), and that’s perhaps secondary to my main point. More important is the role of the pill in the cultural narrative that women incorporate into their view of the world. Given women’s aforementioned “dark side”, is there any aspect of this dark side that plays out in the choices that women actualize? I say there is, and these options can have tragic consequences, turning young lives filled with promise and possibility into train-wrecks of adult despair and confusion.

Liberated of the consequences of childbirth, a woman can “experiment” with the full spectrum of men that hit on her, from the alphas, chads and winners, to the desperates, degenerates and losers. But are there wider consequences on the narratives that become cultural reality? At least before the pill, a woman had to think twice before taking up with the “fugly brute with attitude” that was making her head spin, her pulse race and her breathing quicken.

The contraceptive pill, within the context of its social and cultural implications, is complicated. The topic is controversial, and rather than waste further time explaining my perspective to a possibly hostile audience, I’ll just let some ladies tell you in their own words:

Emily Wilson
(Emily gets it - tampering with biology has consequences at the cultural level)

Shannen Michaela

Louise Perry

Here you will find further links to Louise Perry’s other talks:

(While Louise Perry is very critical of feminism, she is not as critical of the pill as I am. She does, however, correctly realize that the pill’s implementation needs to be managed properly)

How might we decide between the politics of liberalism versus conservatism (@raybennett’s contention that this divide is simplistic, notwithstanding)? If, in this slice of the universe that humans inhabit, it seems that human history across every continent has covered all possibilities, think again. The universe is a big place - 200 billion galaxies big, at last count. There are possibilities that have never been conceived before, possibilities that cannot be conceived by the puny human mind-body. This liberal/conservative duality and its variant recombinations, which we assume addresses all possibilities, is but a miniscule drop in the ocean. If one part of culture is broken in a fundamental way, it is not unreasonable to question whether the whole thing is a shambles. If the conservatism preceding the 60s was broken, then the post-60s “fixes” to it, without properly addressing the cultural narratives on which it is founded, might also be broken.

Have I lost anyone? Let’s put it into a nutshell. A culture that is dysfunctional from the start will remain dysfunctional no matter what you do to fix it, if you fail to properly address the narratives that constitute its foundation. That’s where we are at. This is basically the point that Robert Pirsig was making in his book, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

Having addressed possible suggestions that I be cancelled as just another Trump-worshiping MAGA troglodyte with predictable misogynistic views, let those of us who have chosen to remain in this conversation, if any, now go on to Corey’s objections.


It’s a narrative that says everything and everyone everywhere is broken

The entire culture is broken.

and only Donald Trump has the intellectual, moral, and ethical compass to fix it.

Donald Trump is a part of the cultural narrative that might unroll the current madness to an earlier, arguably saner, state. Either that, or precipitate more division and polarisation. If not, then the future is clear; we are indeed at the precipice of unprecedented cultural collapse and a new Dark Age.

Meanwhile, objective reality shows that Trump has a history of defrauding people,

This is quite irrelevant to Trump’s alleged criminality. He was not charged with any crime, ever. You can argue that he’s not a nice person, but that’s an opinion that carries zero weight in a court of law.

cheating on his wife with a porn star right after his child was born

He’s not a nice person. This is a moral judgement that might have carried more weight in conservative times, but in this era of child-sniffing Joe Biden and cocaine-addicted, prostitute-indulging Hunter Biden, it’s irrelevant.

of putting his own children in positions of power (and allowing them to make billions in profit from their positions),

I agree. I’ve said before that I object to his nepotism. Though on a positive note, none of the Trump children are cocaine addicts or prostitute johns.

of attempting to overthrow a democratic election and conspiring to send fake electors to DC with zero court evidence.

He believes, with certainty, that the election was stolen. @raybennett suggests he’s insane, and therefore belongs in a psych ward. You believe that he’s a liar. He’s not lying, because he believes it, how could that possibly be lying? As a believer, he feels a duty to stand up for what he believes in. Only time will tell whether he’s a hero who belongs on Mount Rushmore or fraud that belongs in jail.

He has surrounded himself with criminals and con men from the very beginning, from Manafort to Stone to Flynn.

A lot of unsupported value judgements here. I don’t know who among them has a criminal record. The Deep Swamp that Trump had to rely on to source his people was always a mixed bag of unknowns. A system that is broken is not to be trusted, I don’t care if they lock Sister Tereza away as a criminal. It’s just not relevant when a system has become a joke.

Our news feeds are dominated by reactionaries reacting to reactionaries, which only makes the extremes louder and more prone to violence. Trump represents one of those extremes. I am anti-Trump, because I am anti-extremism.

And puppet Biden doing the anonymous oligarchy’s every bidding, with his cocaine-addicted, prostitute-hiring son in secret deals with China on behalf of the Big Guy is another extreme. Your point?

Gaining sexual agency and autonomy is a big deal. All of these are genuine accomplishments of feminism, reducing the restrictive inertias in the public sphere from previous eras.

As should be clear by now, from my previous post, I disagree with you. Feminism is an epic failure that seriously hurts women in the darkest of ways.

Because we placed so much emphasis on equality in the public sphere, we’ve ignored equality in the private sphere, and I think many men (and women!) are acutely feeling that pain.

Just to be clear. Equal outcome is not equal opportunity. All too often, equal outcome gets conflated for equal opportunity, and the manipulations required to achieve equal outcome are anti-democratic. The fairest mechanism is the free market. Let the free market decide, let men focus on their careers, let women choose the men that provide for them.

My theory is, just as the industrial revolution shifted women into the public sphere for the first time, which solved old problems and created new problems, the information/automation revolution will do something similar for men, expanding their identity and roles enough to allow them to share the caretaking of the private sphere.

Sticky problems. They don’t always have easy solutions. People who think they do, are the stuff of which totalitarians are made.

As Warren Farrell often points out, traditionally men have been forced to show love for their family by staying away from their family, working themselves to the bone in order to support their loved ones. Which, to me, feels like oppression (and is fortunately an oppression I have not had to endure, as I am able to work from home and raise my daughter alongside my wife every day, because my surrounding techno-economic base in the LR now allows for that. And I appreciate the fact that I am likely only a fraction of a percent of all men who have ever lived who are able to do so.)

Good points.

You can’t ignore the lies from the Bush administration that led to countless dead civilians and the longest war in US history.

Ugh, the neocons are a disgrace.

You can’t ignore the fact that the last two Republican presidents have left the economy in tatters when they left office.

Yup, neocons.

You can’t ignore that conservatives have fought every expansion of human rights in modern history, including recent things like gay marriage or eliminating pre-existing conditions and lifetime caps from our insurance systems. You can’t ignore that Trump directly expanded the “swamp” by putting industry leaders in charge of regulating their own industries, known as regulatory capture.

A broken system with broken narratives is not sustainable across all levels. It is destined to unravel.

You can’t ignore that there is simply no analog on the left to something like Qanon

Not this fringe conspiracy Qanon thing again? Why is this a thing?

And on the other side, you can’t ignore the real successes of the Biden administration. Medicaid can now negotiate medicine costs. Injured veterans can now get the medical support they need after being injured by burn pits. We are now placing critical investments in clean energy. We finally have real investment in our crumbling infrastructure, something Trump could never accomplish.

Oh dear. Too much here to respond to. Where do I begin?

Does that mean the left is all good and the right is all bad? Of course not. There are extremists on both sides, and there are times when the left’s extremists bother me even more than the right’s — but I’m also not blind that these extremists are creating each other.

We agree on something! :grinning:

And yes, saying that Biden is “the most corrupt administration the US has ever seen” — after Trump tried to burn the Constitutiom based on his own unsubstantiated “beliefs” — is a product of extremism.

Time will tell, if either of them goes down in history a hero or a felon.

As I said before, Trump tried to undermine the election, and this resulted in the first non-peaceful transfer of power in modern history. That is a fact.

Time will be the ultimate judge, depending on whether he becomes a hero or a felon.

He also stole confidential documents and hid them at Maralago (which even he admits, you can’t say the FBI and DOJ are making this up)

I don’t care what an FBI stasi doing the bidding of a corrupt administration allege. It’s irrelevant.


@steljarkos I found this information and your dialogs fascinating. Sadly most opinions shared here are all stuck in the mud of their own view(s). Closed up tight in this never-ending propaganda dialog string.

In our biological nature we’re only moving forward … so much intellectual energy is metaphorically wasted on rearranging the chairs on the decks of the Titanic. The “unravelling of contemporary culture” is a systemic pattern that perpetually repeats itself.

The progressive thinkers within societies become emotionally engaged as devotees of change. They become so powerful in their influence that in due course they become the conservative defenders of the new culture they’ve created.

Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radical’s” was so powerful at taking down the contemporary power-structures that they won it all. His only tactics are leveraging chaos and fear, we now have that in abundance. “Never let a crisis go to waste” or better yet create a crisis to divert and confuse the opposition. Who is the chaos and fear creator of our day? Trump!

He is the man of the future and the leader of the new progressive movement within society. Whether he wins or loses he is the current truth of our world politics. Trump is still dominating the minds of @corey-devos and @raybennett they cannot get past this guy. He stimulates all our conversations and our thinking … the whole of humanity knows that “He’s the guy”.

He alone is validating all of our deepest fears about a totalitarian tyrant unraveling our system. To the true progressive’s he is the savior, the Saul Alinsky of our day. Trump alone is running on the idea that He’s ready to go in and unravel the perceived cultural corruption within the system.

Few on either side are open-minded enough to see or understand the other side. This is the civil war in America and it’s the future of the Western world and our dominant role of ruling the planet. Who wins … who knows?

Like Lincoln before him, hated by many Americans, went on in history as one of our greatest hero’s. This drama of our day will unfold with a victory and a defeat. It will be recorded in the history books by the winners … as the saving of our world.

Despite one’s personal preferences, in the end Trump will be a super-hero of history or another failed tyrant. It’s happening right now in front of our eyes. The puny voices of ideologues, in support or in descent, are stuck in their ideologies and they will be traumatized again. Those of us beyond the political BS and propaganda of politically correct beliefs will avoid the suffering that is on the horizon for one side or the other.


It sure seems that way, doesn’t it.

I signed up with Integral years ago anticipating bigger things, but sadly it seems that they too will be subsumed within the collective of the politically correct.


It’s the wrestler in Corey that keeps attempting to unbalance, destabilize, so he can then get the take-down.

These most delusional batshit crazy “cancel” stuff that the Far Leftists pull is trying to tie anyone that won’t agree with the Far Leftists agenda as part of the Qanon Conspiracy.

Hell, I LIVE at Qanon ground zero, Qanon Heartland if you will, am a perfect recruit, and have friends what would be even better for Corey’s Boogieman Conspiracy, “Emperor Trump’s Army” of White Christian Nationalists YET NONE OF US CAN FIND this Qanon Boogieman Army that Corey hears going thump in the night, scraping on the door to get out, rustling in the forest always just out of sight that is scaring the shitsizzle out of him.

What I do see is Corey’s Leftist party has MAJORITY CONTROL of our Federal Government and is spending $TRILLIONS on Collectivist/Centralized Authority initiatives to be run by 100,000’s of carefully selected Leftists and yet it’s still not enough “Progress”. And if you don’t like it, well you’re and Extremist, A Radical, A Threat to Democracy. LOL


Maybe a quick look in the mirror of your comment might reveal something bigger and brighter about you @corey-devos and how political your forum has become?

Forgive me, but what I see here is a narrative, a mythology, one that is cherry-picking reality in order to confirm a pre-existing anti-trump bias (which we might call “TDS”). It’s a narrative that says everything and everyone everywhere is threatened because of Donald Trump and his intellectual, moral, and ethical compass that is set to break everything.

You do understand that this is exactly how a every powerful human ruler in history has changed things. It’s their narcissistic cult of personality that ignores everyone else who sees them as wrong. This is how they come to power. They corral the weak and voiceless peasants and stand as their fearless leader to take down the system that oppresses them.

It is a self-serving myth, because there is a nasty circular reasoning baked right in — anyone who questions Trump’s guilt or dares to accept the findings in the Mueller report are labeled cult-followers and deplorable idiots. These “deep state” loyalists whether it’s the left, the media, the FBI, the DOJ, the SC, or even RHINO Republicans are constantly criticizing him and his weak peasant followers as wrong. This is some North Korea level shit right here, like if you don’t support the current existing system watch your back they’ll be coming for you too.

I could go all the way through your biased, politically closed-minded, insensitive comment but hopefully you get the point. Sorry but this guy Trump owns you … full-blown TDS that is killing this forum! Sadly this undermines you personally over and over again with the very people we seek to liberate with an integral world-view.


I would throw this right back at you and @steljarkos

@FermentedAgave and I were having a nice discussion about Religion and we were actually agreeing on a few topics. If you didn’t notice then you chose to not see it, and that is about you not Corey.

Then for some reason @steljarkos brought up Sam Harris and I have yet to get a clear answer why?
He was the one who shifted the topic to Trump, so it’s pretty blindly hypocritical of you two to throw that stone at me from you own glass houses. I was having a discussion of Religion with @FermentedAgave and we were not even mentioning Trump!

@steljarkos suddenly mentions Trump 5 times in a discussion not about Trump and where Trump is not being mentioned.
Good God - what a couple of sanctimonious ass hats @excecutive and @steljarkos are, lol. @steljarkos keeps talking about Trump and then you guys accuse me of being obsessed with Trump.

And the reason I’m name calling is because this isn’t the first time you’ve tried this. I’ll curse, too - it’s your fucking go-to strategy to be offended by a topic you being up and project all your worst qualities onto others. :joy::joy::joy:

Even here, @FermentedAgave and I found some common ground:

@FermentedAgave and I were trying to discuss topics other than Trump

Now my next topic I will try to discuss @steljarkos other non-Trump topic.
Lets see if he is able to stay off the Trump topic or if he will hypocritically keep bringing him bac to the center.


This is what you guys are doing here. Classic bait and switch and projection.
If you don;t want to talk about Trump, simply don’t talk about him.
Again, this whole Trump Discussion started this time with the whole Sam Harris interview @steljarkos brought into the discussion.


“I could go all the way through your biased, politically closed-minded, insensitive comment but hopefully you get the point.”

Sorry Excecutive, but I think you are way out of line here.

a) I wrote nothing insensitive or offensive in my comment, unlike yours (and others above) which I think are deliberately trying to wound. I never personally insulted anyone, I am only responding to the 3rd-person arguments themselves, not the 1st-person qualities of people in this forum, unlike your comment. I pointed out the pieces I agree with, and the pieces I disagree with, and described why I disagree with them. I even followed it up with a comment reminding us that it’s okay to disagree, and we should not allow our political biases be the primary filter we see each other through.

B) Your mirrored version of my post doesn’t reveal anything for me. Those aren’t my shadows. For example, I would never say “anyone who questions the Mueller findings are deplorable idiots”. Because, guess what — you can be critical of Trump, and not have “TDS”, just like you can be critical of Biden and not have “BDS”. Sorry man, but I am actively doing shadow work whenever I have conversations like these, so I can do my best to keep myself “clean”. This is why I don’t resort to the sort of character attacks and conflating innuendo that, say, Fermented often uses with me (“Corey’s leftist party”, etc.) As far as I can tell, mine is the only comment that does not contain any ad hominem attacks against other forum members, unlike yours, Agave’s, and even Steljarkos’s.

c) My use of “LDS” was a counter to the repeated personal accusations folks have made against me in this thread of my supposed “TDS” — an accusation you just repeated. My intention was to point out that this entire “DS” frame is bogus, a form of absolutism, and it’s only use is to shut down conversations.

D) Being “integral” doesn’t mean I have to take a 50/50 view of everything. There are still better-thans and worse-thans. Judgment and discernment don’t suddenly vanish, and integral thinking doesn’t mean we have to accept every golden mean fallacy that comes our way.

e) As I said earlier, we had a very real attempted takeover of our democracy. There was a violent transfer of power, there was conspiracy to have Pence “throw the election”, there was an attempt to send “fake electors” to Congress so Trump could declare himself winner of an election he objectively lost. Sorry, I am not willing to simply write this off, and caring about this very real threat to democracy does not mean I have “TDS”, regardless of whether you want to insult me by saying I am “closed-minded”.

As I also said, these facts only leave two options: either Trump was justified in his attempt to declare himself winner, or he was not, and is therefore a criminal. I am simply insisting that “belief” — or even “believes with certainty” — is not enough to exonerate his actions.

You can say this perspective “undermines” me all you want, but I don’t buy it. Want to criticize the excesses of the left? I’m here for it, and have a number of episodes I’ve produced that do exactly this. Want to talk about how conservative intellectuals tend to swim circles around progressive intellectuals? I’m here for it, I think the left is more or less intellectually blind these days. Want to talk about the conservative values and structures that we are truly missing in this culture, and how we need to resurrect them in order to keep our civilization healthy? Let’s do it. Hell, I’ve already done it.

But if you want to talk about how every possible criticism of Trump’s flaws (and possible criminal activity) is the result of Deep State conspiracy and TDS? That the entirety of our justice system (including Trump-picked judges across all 50 states), FBI, DOJ, media, Democrats, and even fellow Republicans are all conspiring together against Trump, and therefore we can only take Trump at his word? Sorry, that’s a bridge too far — in fact, it’s full on aperspectival madness mixed with a dose of absolutism and nihilism*, where anyone who has any legitimacy whatsoever to hold corrupt politicians to account are instantly labelled part of the conspiracy, where Trump’s lack of evidence only proves him right, where subjective beliefs are given more weight than objective evidence. We do not have a belief-based justice system, we have an evidence-based justice system, which means that if you are going to try to undermine a federal election and declare yourself winner, you better damn well have the receipts, and those receipts better damn well survive the scrutiny of the courts. If not, you are a criminal. Period. You can call me closed-minded if you want, but that’s just basic due process right there.

  • aperspectival madness = “There are no authorities we can trust! No one has any more legitimacy than anyone else.”

  • absolutism = “You’re either pro-Trump or you have TDS.”

  • nihilism = “Everyone everywhere is corrupt (except my guy, of course), ‘truth’ is just a belief, nothing can be trusted.”

This is a narcissist’s playground right here :wink:


The problem with your interpretation of this is that you don’t go deep enough down the rabbit hole. You don’t look deep enough into the deep dark corners of the human psyche, particularly the American male psyche.

1 - The corollary of women having a “dark side” is men having a complimentary dark side. While women women may have a desire to be grabbed, men have a desire to grab. Even darker, there is a rape fantasy and worse deep in the subconscious of both genders. I will go even one further, that there is also deeply rooted in the American subconscious a desire to swap roles - for men to be raped and for women to dominate.
2 - These are more prevalent in certain cultures including American Cultures and less so in other cultures. Part of the reason is suppression over hundreds of years.
3 - The answer isn’t to go back, but to subsume and go to the next level. There are many ways to go about this, and all of them pass through Green. Two ways that I personally know are the spiritual and the physical. By spiritual I do not mean religion - but an actual spirituality that has very little to do with religion, or only coincidentally. The physical way is to act out suppressed urges in a controlled and consensual environment. We can call this “consensual nonconsent” where for a time one person gives the other permission to act out certain fetishes according to strict rules. A third solution may be social, where if one partner is incapable of fulfilling all roles, we go beyond monogamy and have multiple partners who each give us an aspect of what is desired.

The answer surely is not to outlaw the pill or anything similar. The planet is too crowded already and humanity simply cannot survive if every woman again has 5 or more children.

My views on this have nothing to do with Republican or Democrat. I’ve never heard anyone ask if a person if they were Republican or Democrat or Conservative or Liberal in a BDSM dungeon nor in any truly spiritual environment.

American culture is broken, but the answer is not to double down on what broke it and think that will fix the problems it created.
The answer is to subsume and transcend. In order to transcend you must subsume, and that includes yes, whatever dark fantasies the women in your life may have, but also your own and making conscious decisions every moment of every day if you will subsume through what I call the physical or the spiritual.


Just because. Because the topic was timely and relevant. I had originally intended to start an independent new thread on the Sam Harris rant, but decided against that, so here we all are. My mention of Trump 5 times relates to the Harris discussion, and you’d know that if you were paying attention. Of course it is your right to not pay attention if the topic doesn’t interest you, but making it into a problem when it is you who chose to not pay attention is kinda dumb.

Yes, I noticed. Reminded me of an earlier bromantic exchange between you two. It made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.


My problem with the pill is that it’s an artificial intervention. It takes millennia of evolution at the biological and cultural levels, to arrive at a fine balance between sex and gender roles. Tampering with that fine balance, by way of an artificial intervention like the pill, is not sustainable and has serious consequences.

There is only one way to address the sexual tensions between men and women, and that’s the old-fashioned way. Those tensions are integral to maintaining cultural unity. Artificial intervention by way of the contraceptive pill will eliminate those tensions, replacing them with unnatural, more perverse ones, and that’s when we can expect cultural collapse. Why are these sexual tensions necessary? It’s the dynamic between the cultural known and the unknown at the edge of culture.

But my perspective is from a different paradigm that rejects a solely bottom-up (genetic causation) interpretation. It is necessary to also factor in top-down causation coming from culture.

This rabbit hole might go deeper than you are used to.


Let me see if I can reply without hurting your feelings Corey. The 3rd Person Omniscient language you love to shift into seems a bit dismissive and disingenuous compared to your stated “got all my shadows on a short leash, got all the facts straight, so let me banish your confusions .”

Are you convinced you are honestly trying to take a 3rd Person Omniscient viewpoint, or are you simply using 3rd Person Omniscient languaging to “win” your arguments? Perhaps you use 3rd Person Omniscient language to drive home your own personal biases, as @excecutive has said?


I also think this is a bogus accusation, @excecutive.

Let’s take a look at the most recent forum topics, the majority of which I started. I can’t help if more people are engaging with this particular thread, largely because @FermentedAgave is constantly adding more fodder to keep it alive.

We’ve got discussions about art, about psychology, about the “meta-crisis”, music, introducing people to integral for the first time, etc. Keep scrolling, and you will see that every piece of content I publish (the majority of which are not political) has a corresponding thread that people can use to discuss the topic.

But you want to blame me for this thread still being alive, and for the forum as a whole being too “political”? I am not driving this thread, I am simply participating with it and sharing my views as appropriate.

You are ignoring all my efforts to try to uplevel the discourse, to remind us that we don’t need to see each other primarily through a political lens. You ignore my efforts to seed any number of non-political discussions we can use to find more shared reality.

And when it comes to political issues, you ignore the thoughtful contributions I’ve consistently tried to make around topics as complex as:

Gun control

Race and racism


Et cetera, and any of which you are free to disagree with. But don’t pretend that I am deliberately trying to offer some narrow partisan “TDS” view in these discussions, because I demonstrably am not.


Oh look, another passive aggressive ad hom insult.

The 3rd Person Omniscient language you love to shift into seems a bit dismissive and disingenuous compared to your stated “got all my shadows on a short leash, got all the facts straight, so let me banish your confusions .”

I never claimed to be offering a “3rd-person omniscient” perspective. I am offering my 1st-person view of people’s 3rd-person arguments. What I am not doing, is offering my 1st-person view about the quality of your 1st-person interiors, as you continue to do. I am engaging with the ideas and the arguments themselves, as presented. That’s what I mean by “3rd-person”.


Hey Corey,

I don’t think that anyone sees you as “cause of” the political problems in the world or even on here.

Why don’t you just pin your threads to the top so they stay front and center for everyone? Those that orbit at the Integral Noosphere level will have nice clean orbits to Integral in.

Meanwhile, here in the Disinformation thread we can try to build a bridge between “the world of existential crises that is crushing the soul of humanity and killing the planet” and the “Integral Noosphere”. Think of it threads for all altitudes - in the muck to 500 ft to 20,000 ft to outside Pluto to infinity altitude levels.


You might be right. Now I’ll have to study up on all this Psycho 3rd Person babble stuff more than I have so I can point out your debate tactics :rofl:. I do appreciate the insight into what I consider “elite Leftist” thinking - and I mean that sincerely.


Ah, see, I read Excecutive’s statement as an accusation.

“Maybe a quick look in the mirror of your comment might reveal something bigger and brighter about you @corey-devos and how political your forum has become?”

In other words, if I look in the mirror and do some shadow work, I will see how this forum has gotten so politicized. I reject that accusation, because I purposely avoid turning Integral Life into yet another political op-ed site. We can do some of that, and it’s fun to do some of that, but the integral vision is so, so much bigger than politics alone. And yet, this thread continues to dominate. Which is fine, it’s a fun thread!

Why don’t you just pin your threads to the top so they stay front and center for everyone?

Because this would feel a bit self-serving. My perspectives get enough daylight in this forum, I think, simply due to the frequency with which I am producing and releasing content on any number of topics. It just happens that much of the activity in this forum naturally self-organizes around political discourse — in no small way because you, as the community’s most active participant, continue to throw new logs on the fire. And of course these political discussions can get raucous, because we all have different modes of sense-making (and different sets of biases) that we use to sort through the billion points of data I referenced above.

Now I’ll have to study up on all this Psycho 3rd Person babble stuff more than I have so I can point out your debate tactics

It’s not “psychobabble” as much as it’s the actual ingredients of the integral view as expressed by Ken Wilber. When applied to forums such as these, it’s fairly basic. As it says in our road rules:

Integral Life is a community that honors diversity and breadth of opinion and experience in all manifestations. Community interaction at all levels of experience is not only necessary, but also inevitable. Therefore, there might be times that arise when the dialogue between two or more members escalates in intensity. Even during these times Integral Life strives to hold a safe container that recognizes and respects the myriad views that we all hold. However intense the interactions may be, we ask that members refrain from personal attacks, defamations of character, and trolling, baiting, or flaming other members. For a great guideline to community interaction that is held here in high regard, check out the above Community Guidelines.

Or, as the cliche goes, “Small minds discuss people, average minds discuss events, great minds discuss ideas.” Integral minds, I would add, find a way to discuss all three, but without resorting to personal attacks, shadow projections, or making objects out of other participants’ subjects.

“I do appreciate the insight into what I consider “elite Leftist” thinking - and I mean that sincerely.”

That is not how I characterize my own sense-making, but I will take your comment at face value. As I have told you several times in the past, I get a great deal out of our interactions, considerably more so than when I am discussing these things with people who agree with me. And many of our interactions have directly informed my ongoing work at Integral Life. As I’ve said, I hope you decide to become a member of Integral Life so you can stay in this members-only community and continue to share your views.

However, it does bother me when you make passive-aggressive attacks or misrepresent my interiors, and then try to diagnose those interiors based on these misrepresentations. Not because I’m as fragile as you seem to accuse me of being, and not because it’s in direct violation of our road rules, but also because it’s just a bad way to do the whole interpersonal “relating” thing.