Don't talk to "Me" about Normalcy!

The truth is the worst thing you can tell anybody. Most people can't identify what the truth actually is so it's culture shock the rare occurrence they hear it.

Normalcy is defined through status quo driven delusions. Then perception of normal becomes intentionality. People demand you are what they want you to be; their arbitrary definition of normal.

What is your definition of normal?

I don't have one. I use the rest of the world's definition of normal but I acknowledge that it's utter horseshit. I know what people mean when they say normal, typically; a state that I want nothing to do with.

Those who bend to the intentionality of the delusional majority are nothing but cowardly conformists and/or fake as fuck enablers. (should we be what people want us to be just because that's what people have always done for the sake of social survival?) sounds like logical fallacy braided with cognitive bias to the point of delusional to me.

What is your perception of reality? What is it that you tell yourself you are? Do you have an identity? Do you think that whatever that "identity" is, produces cognitive bias? Where did it come from? When do we let go of that identity? Are most of our actions just to support this fill in the blanks identity we've chosen to aspire to?(Scary thoughts to chew on but it's what we all must face.)

I don't know what I am. I don't know what reality is. I don't pretend. I perceive what can be perceived. I accept what is physically accurate. I focus on structure and cause and effect. A tremendous amount that can be observed. So much so that it can be difficult to make sense it all. Given enough time and then right combination of other circumstances and we do indeed make sense of it. It doesn't mean we're going to find answers in regards to what we are, meaning or purpose but we are going to know a good deal more then where we started.

Now what about when we label others? If our identity is nothing but a sham then how can we ever think that our labels of others could be accurate? (I'm applying this generally to the majority and their haphazard, primitive and delusional labeling of others which, usually, only serves to make their sense of self feel more secure.)

Then when we extrapolate this in regards to what people do with their lives and what they think needs to be done in the world observe more of this tangled corruption. They're intentionality in regards to what they perceive themselves to be and what they demand the rest of the world pretend to be are directly connected.

This is why I don't like politics above all other reasons. It's all related to some delusional self-affirmation. I'm a this, I'm a that, Republican, Democrat, communist, socialist blah blah blah blah blah. Then they think that somehow their identity is an answer for the world's problems. (fascinating that voice-to-text software capitalizes Republican and Democrat but communist and socialist are lowercase. There's much to extrapolate there but I'm not going to get into that.)

In regards to biology, the biosphere and evolution in regards to survival. Survival of the fittest is not who is the strongest but rather who is the most adaptable. The delusional perceptual Paradigm of excessive individualism and the desperate need to be validated in regards to that concept of self and then all the corrupting facets of political identity are preventing change. It makes every political person a conservative because they're trying to hold on to identities that don't exist and archaic systems that can no longer support the complexities that have emerged in physical reality.

It's time to adapt or die.

That leads me to the old. Old people are refusing to change, refusing to let go of their identities and get out of the way of progress. Change is inevitable and revolutions are typically bloody for this very reason, that the old don't want to relinquish power in regards to they're intentionality. if the old don't identify that it's time to throw out most of everything they thought was reasonable and start to support the next generation that knows this change needs to occur and has a pretty good idea of what to do and how to do it then eventually the emergent complexity becomes a closed system under pressure of which eventually explodes or a bubble popping if you'd rather.

Culture wars are really an argument over perception of reality and intentionality. When a large percentage of the population refuses to pretend to be what the majority labels them as we have building pressures and eventually violence.

For most of so-called human existence we live to be an average of 40 years old. This out with the old and in with the new cycle allowed us to adapt quicker. Now that we live so much longer, the old retain their positions of power and they want things to stay the same in regards to our systems, our perception and our culture because that's what they've specialized for and they fill niches in that system. If the system changes too much then the old no longer have value. Now, when we connect all of that to economics or identity it becomes an intensely corrupting motive.

It's time for a massive paradigm shift in all of our systems and our perception of reality. The only real value of the way things used to be or how we used to do things is as a roadmap of most of what we should not do or what won't work any longer because of the increasing complexity.

We don't really own anything. Impermanence proves the logic in that statement. (Old Indian proverb: we do not own this world but rather we borrow it from our children.)

Not enough of the old acknowledge that.

Then we, (but more so the older and established life forms) end up with cognitive bias in regards to perceptions of intelligence leading to overly inflated senses of confidence because of positive feedback received from the environment of which validates said forms with economic rewards, winning popularity contest or other perceived successes.

The majority of the population do not study the study of intelligence, neurology, psychology or sociology. The majority have some extremely biased misconceptions about what intelligence actually is among other misconceptions.

There is nuance to be observed.

There is a difference between intelligence and virtuous abilities. Someone can be of superior intellect but that doesn't mean that the right about everything and it certainly doesn't mean that someone else can't be more virtuous in a certain intellectual regard while not being of equal overall intelligence to those that are superior.

There are different kinds of geniuses and or virtuosos. There is significant difference in regards to what we are applying intelligence to. A mathematical genius is not as useful when applied to psychology/sociology/geopolitics as a psychological genius or virtuoso would be. (keep in mind that I perceive all of these labels as oversimplifications but I'm just trying to use the language the majority understand)

Someone can be retarded and yet still be virtuous at math. (I'm referring to some news I read recently that makes the statement a reality rather than a hypothetical)

I regularly come across people, (especially prevalent with the old) that say to me, "what have you done? You haven't done anything. You don't have a degree. You're not a successful business person. Etc etc.)... As if, somehow, they have just proven that I'm not intelligent, don't know what I'm talking about and/or that I certainly don't know better than them.

Then all of this is corrupted further by misconceptions about insanity and/or mental disorders. Very frequently I observe people recklessly inserting labels of crazy as ad hominems or defensive measures because of their insecurities and the fact that their perception of what normal is, is so very far from reasonable.

Someone will call me condescending, egotistical or a narcissist just because I've told them the wrong about something and they don't know what they're talking about and that I do know what the right answer is and know what I'm talking about. That's just weaponized psychological ad hominem because they are triggered.

The reality of the matter is that I am "the man", whether I like it or not. Whatever the fuck that means anyway. 😉😋😎🤓😆👣🛫👽👊✌🖖

Again, using the language that the majority understand while they actually don't understand shit,.. if I am forced to describe some arbitrary concept of "myself" in order to give people a label so they feel safe and they can pretend they know what I am; then I would tell them that I am a perceptual savant, a psychological virtuoso as well as an inference genius. (Again, I point out that the majority don't know what the word genius actually means because they don't study the study of intelligence or neurology so they're definition of the word genius is usually substantially misperceived.)

Some forms of intelligence are substantially more complicated then our overly simplistic misconceptions what we think intelligence is and we don't have reliable ways of quantifying it. (As excessive individualism does not have all that much value there is not much to motivate "me" to be validated either. As was pointed out above; tremendous corruption comes from the app of the unattainable self that the majority of our forms attempts to maintain in an act if childish futility.)

I am merely trying to get the majority to a point of understanding in regards to this form, of which you call "Adam Beatty" and what it is doing. What it is turning into as well.

Challenging to say the least.

Instead of accepting the state of the brilliance that's being displayed, it's easier for the majority to weaponize psychology and the concept of normalcy to trivialize what they think I am so that their concept of self can feel safe again than it is to allow the concept of self to face its weaknesses common insecurities or that it doesn't even exist.

You need some more labels for me?

I'm a red pill machine gun. A walking existential crisis trigger. Very likely, the only real person you've ever met in your entire life.

Do not wallow in the trough of awareness when we can surf the crest of the wave of consciousness.