I’d like to hear about people’s most successful approaches or styles (even if unconventional), that helped them to overcome or at least get their various struggles under control.

So for example, Sinclair Method (naltrexone) [baclofen adjuvant] --> problem drinking.

    • @Potatos_are_not_friends
      6•1 year ago

      Yeah, there was a lot to unpack and I definitely had a bunch of eyebrow raising moments. But if it works for our Lemmy pal up above, I’m not going to shake that tree.

    • @[email protected]
      -1•1 year ago

      Science: the ruthlessly-objective, systematic, progressive annihilation of both direct & indirect ignorance, no matter what that does to one’s worldview.

      THE keystone book in understanding this, is Douglas Hofstadter’s brilliant “Godel Escher Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid”, which hammers that if one remains within a self-consistent formal-system-of-knowing, then it ISN’T POSSIBLE for one to be knowing Universe-complete, and that is mathematical fact.

      Journalism, real journalism, is the essence of science, just without the hard-rigor.

      Anybody who isn’t competent in understanding what Hofstadter’s book means, isn’t competent in philosophy.

      https://www.amazon.com/Gödel-Escher-Bach-Eternal-Golden/dp/0465026567/

      https://www.amazon.com/Elements-Journalism-Revised-Updated-4th-ebook/dp/B08ZXRQLZT/

      “That which isn’t matter, DOESN’T EXIST.”

      That is materialism.

      “God: The Failed Hypothesis”, by Victor Stenger, iirc, was the book that made me see what the fundamentalist materialists were saying.

      Unreadable gaslighting, materialist dogma is.

      The whole “The Hard Problem” of Consciousness is produced by the definition of “real” to be identical-with “matter”.

      Artifact-of-the-view.

      aka prejudice.

      You deem it delusion that the Soul-memories of some of its other-lives/incarnations nuked my Catholic upbringing?

      lol

      I changed my worldview as a direct result of evidence, and that took years, because the smashing-of-assumptions was sooo profound…

      … and you are gloriously certain that it is only my delusion, because it is axiomatic that That Cannot Validly Be,

      and you deem me incompetent in Science?

      That is funny.

      I’ve proven unable to put my proper, revised, with systematic links to things, including a scientific paper proving that Western Medicine has been gaslighting an entire category of patients, up, and I’ve downvoted my comment that you replied-to, to make it no-longer-significant on this discussion,

      but I’m leaving it up, so that all the denigration can be visible, and everybody, for all time, can laugh at the “defective” that I am, who wrote a spur-of-the-moment 1000-word comment, and didn’t get it hammered-out perfectly-clearly.

      Feel free to denigrate my replacement comment, which had to be posted in 2 parts, because of some kind of character-limit, possibly at 10k chars.

      Wishing you well, but your contempt for my understanding is insulting, and your presumption that knowing-of-previous-lives-of-one’s-continuum is delusion axiomatically, is also insulting.

      Awareness is simultaneously immaterial AND real.

      All “science” which ignores/denies that, isn’t science, it is ideological-addiction/prejudice, and gaslighting.

      At population-scale, so long as you don’t have either a population primed with materialist prejudice, or with anti-subtle-awareness-habits like eating pork or eggs, it is entirely possible to test whether reincarnation is real,

      and there are multiple books on the scientific testing of such, as with documenting a child’s remembering of some previous-life, and then going to that part of the world & doing the history-research to discover that what that kid said, was true.

      Don’t do the research, if it’d violate your assumption-river/religion, though, obviously: devout materialism is comforting for you, then remain in it, if you want, and glory in the amassed Authority which contempts my empiricism & objectivity.

      “The Boy Who Knew Too Much”, is, iirc, 1 of the available options, though there is another book which is, apparently, a huge & dry scientific work, yellowish cover, iirc.

      Salut, Namaste, & Kaizen, but I hope we never meet:

      The intersection of Empiricist-Objectivity & Kaizen is the ONLY TRUE assumption-river/religion, in my eyes, and whatever cosmology works most-completely, not most-self-consistently, but most-completely, is what I need to hold to,

      …and that you have already deemed axiomatically to be only delusion.

      Good.

      Honour your path.