Wednesday 2/4 at 11:00 AM CT
Kainos host Alexander Beiner exploring cultural sensemaking around psychedelics, popular culture, philosophy, psychology, alternative economics, and spirituality.
authentic expression. hello, i'm glad to be here. i'd like to know what is important and meaningful to the people reading this, and so that would start with me going first.
i did an exercise to uncover my authentic code, four words that capture my core values and soul essence: creativity, connection, freedom, growth.
my theme for this year is sovereignty, which to me is about self-authorship and responsibility and empowerment. i feel like a deeply rooted tree at times. there's a certainty that no matter what is happening externally, i am okay. "the world can do what it want, whenever it want, i don't mind." during a call with a friend today about sovereignty, a desire for ease came up. ease is present when i can flow along with whatever life is asking of me.
i've been devouring books by wayne dyer. his ideas are profound and simple. while listening to one of his books i understood how much authority i have over all of my habits, actions, words, and even my thoughts. i can give more attention to whatever serves me and discard whatever does not. i can change the action or let the thought pass.
i'm currently reading the untethered soul by michael singer. from this book i love the idea of the witness, an aware presence underneath all of my other human stuff, all of my experiences and emotions and thoughts. the idea of two or more witnesses all seeing each other and connecting on that level is deeply moving to me.
health and fitness are important to me. last fall i did a program with a lot of intense yang energy called 75 hard, and i've incorporated many of its lessons and habits into more relaxed and sustainable rhythms that work for me. i jokingly call it 75% hard :^)
i'm very online. i love to make things and share them with whoever will lend me their attention. i tend to be scattered creatively so i've chosen to focus on making a word puzzle game called word sleuth - i finished the prototype this week. many of the other things i've made are available via my website.
Tarot. Hi everyone! I will be posting my tarot readings and horoscope. Is anyone else into that here?
Are spiritual teachers more narcissistic on average? Our best guess at infant phenomenology is that we come out of the womb experiencing a pre-differentiated oneness. As babies, we assume the world revolves around us because for all we can tell, the world is us. We have no way to empathize bc we canât take another perspective. This theory underpins a lot of psychological claims, like âwe internalized our parentsâ fighting, assuming it was about us when it really wasnât.âÂ
I claim this isnât an elevated spiritual state, because we havenât developed individuality yet. We need to have something before we can transcend it. Ego collapse and ego-transcendence both involve a different sense of self from the adult norm, so theyâre easy to confuse without a developmental distinction. Both provide a sense of certainty, and rely on non-linguistic knowing, making it harder to recognize the distinctions.
To the extent this is true, it makes me wonder: Are spiritual teachers more narcissistic on average?? (some evidence points that way, but no rigorous studies exist). Can they differentiate between the state of pre-differentiated and post-differentiated union? And if they canât, how often are experiences labeled âunion,â or ânondualityâ actually literal infantile regressions? If so, wouldnât these teachers exhibit the same self-centered orientation of an infant?
Plus, selection effects: narcissistic individuals are drawn to roles with authority, attention, and reduced accountability structures. Communities where charisma is more relevant than independent reviews of competence (versus accounting or Nascar), and states of attainment are categorically unverifiable by the students (versus massage or writing fiction).
Â
Distinguishing infant oneness from transcendence
This doesnât mean all spiritual teachers or leaders are ânarcissisticâ even in a colloquial sense, just higher risk. And itâs an inherent epistemological risk in finding someone whoâs better than you at something you haven't accessed, using frameworks you haven't developed, verified by experiences you can't reproduce (yet).
So best to encourage critical thinking, and introspect on some of the checks I have for myself (and others) about myself and anyone I look to for guidance: Is my spiritual practice increasing my need for special treatment, entitlement, surrounding me with people that never challenge my views? Am I always turning criticism aroundâsaying it's âyour karma,â âyour projection,â âyour lessonâ, âyour drama triangle stuffâ?â Am I telling others whatâs true about them without acknowledging my projection (ironically), justifying boundary violations since itâs all illusory, calling my emotional reactivity "authenticity," calling othersâ reactivity attachment?
Or do I laugh at myself, and the inevitable foibles I engage to maintain the sense of self Iâm laughing at? Can I laugh at any so-called âspiritual attainmentâ? Do I truly not need special treatmentâdo I wipe the toilets and empty the trash like everyone else? Am I able to hold many different perspectives at once, including âunityâ and my uniqueness? Do I maintain appropriate boundaries while experiencing interconnection? Is my ethical behavior consistent across contexts?
Are spiritual teachers more narcissistic on average? Our best guess at infant phenomenology is that we come out of the womb experiencing a pre-differentiated oneness. As babies, we assume the world revolves around us because for all we can tell, the world is us. We have no way to empathize bc we canât take another perspective. This theory underpins a lot of psychological claims, like âwe internalized our parentsâ fighting, assuming it was about us when it really wasnât.âÂ
I claim this isnât an elevated spiritual state, because we havenât developed individuality yet. We need to have something before we can transcend it. Ego collapse and ego-transcendence both involve a different sense of self from the adult norm, so theyâre easy to confuse without a developmental distinction. Both provide a sense of certainty, and rely on non-linguistic knowing, making it harder to recognize the distinctions.
To the extent this is true, it makes me wonder: Are spiritual teachers more narcissistic on average?? (some evidence points that way, but no rigorous studies exist). Can they differentiate between the state of pre-differentiated and post-differentiated union? And if they canât, how often are experiences labeled âunion,â or ânondualityâ actually literal infantile regressions? If so, wouldnât these teachers exhibit the same self-centered orientation of an infant?
Plus, selection effects: narcissistic individuals are drawn to roles with authority, attention, and reduced accountability structures. Communities where charisma is more relevant than independent reviews of competence (versus accounting or Nascar), and states of attainment are categorically unverifiable by the students (versus massage or writing fiction).
Â
Distinguishing infant oneness from transcendence
This doesnât mean all spiritual teachers or leaders are ânarcissisticâ even in a colloquial sense, just higher risk. And itâs an inherent epistemological risk in finding someone whoâs better than you at something you haven't accessed, using frameworks you haven't developed, verified by experiences you can't reproduce (yet).
So best to encourage critical thinking, and introspect on some of the checks I have for myself (and others) about myself and anyone I look to for guidance: Is my spiritual practice increasing my need for special treatment, entitlement, surrounding me with people that never challenge my views? Am I always turning criticism aroundâsaying it's âyour karma,â âyour projection,â âyour lessonâ, âyour drama triangle stuffâ?â Am I telling others whatâs true about them without acknowledging my projection (ironically), justifying boundary violations since itâs all illusory, calling my emotional reactivity "authenticity," calling othersâ reactivity attachment?
Or do I laugh at myself, and the inevitable foibles I engage to maintain the sense of self Iâm laughing at? Can I laugh at any so-called âspiritual attainmentâ? Do I truly not need special treatmentâdo I wipe the toilets and empty the trash like everyone else? Am I able to hold many different perspectives at once, including âunityâ and my uniqueness? Do I maintain appropriate boundaries while experiencing interconnection? Is my ethical behavior consistent across contexts?