prophecy: Chris Letheby Will Turn, Repent, and Convert to Metaphysical Cybernetic Eternalism
ought to, he is smart , intelligent, not like certain derby bananas 🍌🛼
Be turned, renounce “God is a delusion, and metaphysical epiphany is a hallucination”
to do: timestamp where Letheby (still in his sin) utters these blasphemies
WystanTBS yt ch
he says, scattered spots eg -44:22, -38:03 “metaphysical epiphany is hallucination”
he says “there is no god, no gods” at:
i found some quotes
here is vid im thinking of at -45:30
why the hell does it show me remaining time, aggh yt broken
https://youtu.be/HEXfsils1hM –
i thought its the first thing he says in a video – in previous vid w 1 host guy.
As I remember it, Letheby in the above vid said all at once, happily,
my position is standard Naturalism …; belief in God is delusion, there’s no God; there are no gods; your metaphysical epiphany is a hallucination, …
Chris Letheby
He definitely says these things, across his videos, and quotes Michael Pollan 🤨 casually saying hardcore atheist shiite like this while reciting various positions
he quotes Epistemology / Metaphysics writers debating analytically in what ways to deny and disparage and insult beliefs or views or positions.
Letheby’s Critique of MEQ
He proposes splitting MEQ into:
bad kind: a high mysticism effects (= delusion, hallucination, supernatural mysticism, as if exoteric thinking) vs.
good kind: low mystm “spiritual unity experience” as if that is rational, sort of esoteric, sound, true mystic ie rational naturalistic spirituality. incl “a changed sense of self” per Metzinger
Stunted Psychedelic “Mysticism”
The Egodeath theory; the Theory of Psychedelic Cybernetic Eternalism effects mental worldmodel transformation of SELF AND WORLD, specifically from possibilism to eternalism, while connecting to & leveraging religious myth.
Metzinger then Letheby are striving to deliver stunted, beginner “mysticism” reduced to “refreshing the mental model of the self”.
There is exoteric junk to filter out, but must replace by good substance.
Letheby imagines that he’s dividing into two different mystical experience questionnaires, where one is all delusional supernaturalism, which he calls the kind of Mysticism which William James and Walter Stace expect.
And then he (applauded by Matthew Johnson) is trying to create a new definition: naturalistic type of spirituality, which removes everything supernatural, and “therefore” constitutes genuine authentic spirituality that is physical, material, naturalistic, and is all about “changing the mental model of the self” ;
that’s what they say: “changed mental model of the self”
vague and directionless. Their version of Mysticism they are engineering it’s neither this nor that it just
it’s not gonna go anywhere
it “could ” eventually go somewhere I guess;
can could might & also may
This is all distorted this is all beginner stunted dead end — it’s good that it’s not supernatural i guess: no it is not exoteric(?) but that does not mean that it is authentically esoteric either,
and they would hate and reject anything esoteric
they are right to get rid of exoteric supernatural magical thinking OK that’s good but this does not mean that they’re left with anything that has a clue and deserves to be called mystic.
they give us stunted version of naturalistic spirituality , and say it is a “change of the mental model of the self ” — which really adds up to nothing. Yaldabaoth . and malformed, unstable.
yes today’s psychedelic mysticism is bad and limited, but deleting the supernatural isn’t really going to solve anything; you just end up with stunted pseudo spirituality. 🤷♂️
Messenger and then Chris B after Matthew Johnson
Man this is a great idea for a whole dedicated posting
I’m really feeling resonant resonating
(Voice dictation not so much)
I agree that there is lower beginner mystic experiencing and advanced mystic experiencing
for example,
Unity nondual is beginner mystic experiencing
and so all of the explanations about ego dissolutions so called and Neuroplasticity , that’s all beginner-level mystic stuff, it’s all beginner. 🤷♂️
Metzinger’s Theory of “Changed Model of Self” Is as Far Beneath the Egodeath theory as Shanon’s Cog Phen’y
I reviewed and read the antipodes of the mind when it came out, and I was glad to see, as if to say that “the children are learning, taking their first fumbling steps in the right direction — good for them!”
This is their level of praise and endorsement that I do for Metzinger’s book. “i’m glad to see the beginner dipping their little toe in the water and beginning to look in the correct direction”
but I doubt that I thoroughly read his book.
why would I thoroughly read his book?
my work is light years ahead of him,
well I would read it in the same way–
I have read Ego Tunnel book in the same way that I read guitar equipment books:
let’s see what percentage that they’re leaving out:
is Metzinger leaving out 80% of basic Transcendent Knowledge?
are they leaving out 90% of the knowledge in this book?
it is highly insulting to me that if anyone were suggest or to suggest that I am obliged to cite Metzinger
what is the philosophy of citing people
he is not a writer before me
if I write something today, then yes he wrote his half-baked book before my current publication
I am the one who’s a head
I’m the leader re content potency
I was writing in 1996 more insightful treatment then he wrote in 2003 — check the years of his two books
together with my 1997 spec
When I point to guitar equipment books it it does not imply that I got my ideas from them; it’s really the reverse ; they read my website ( but poorly)
it gives the wrong impression that he is before me when in fact merely–
it gives the wrong impression that he is before me when in fact merely
his particular publication is before my present publication but I — as a theorist — am before Metzinger, by far.
Is the PhD dissertation supposed to cite the third grader’s article that was written last year? I guess I feel that messenger is too close to me I have no problem siding Brown I have no problem siding summer any but why it bothers me citing the Sterling mediocrity of Thomas Metzinger
his stupid ego tunnel, what a dumb limited idea UNLESS you read it as preexisting blk univ control- worldline.
this review pretty well expresses the limits of Metzinger’s message: http://www.words-and-dirt.com/words/review-thomas-metzingers-the-ego-tunnel/
sterling mediocrity that repeats commonplace ideas of the day & goes nowhere.
he partly overlaps the Egodeath theory
a decent start 🫤
not bad… not great. typical book 🤷♂️
nothing particularly valuable or insight-adding — had no impact on me (same as Shanon)
I applaud the antipodes of the mind; a much welcome cognitive approach , but no I didn’t get anything out of it ; it did not add anything to my knowledge
crop: include God sending message; scroll says LETHEBY BE TURNED & REPENT
The Egodeath theory 