| Andreessen's criticism of introspection, and Musk's criticism of empathy, are projections of their fear of being disconnected from spirit (primarily the notion that we're all one). Some of us eventually find ourselves in situations that defy logical explanation. I've witnessed my own thoughts and plans rippling out into the world and causing external events to unfold. To the point that now, I'm not sure that someone could present evidence to me to prove that our inner and outer worlds aren't connected. It's almost as hard of a problem as science trying to solve how consciousness works, which is why it has nothing to say about it and leaves it to theologians. The closest metaphysical explanation I have found is that consciousness exists as a field that transcends 4D timespace, so our thoughts shift our awareness into the physical reality of the multiverse that supports its existence. Where one 4D reality is deterministic without free will, 5D reality is stochastic and may only exist because of free will. And this happens for everyone at all times, so that our individuality can be thought of as drops condensed out of the same ocean of consciousness. One spirit fragmented into countless vantage points to subjectively experience reality in separation so as to not be alone. Meaning that one soul hoarding wealth likely increases its own suffering in its next life. That realization is at odds with stuff like western religion and capitalism, so the wealthy reject it to protect their ego. Without knowing that (or denying that) ego death can be a crucial part of the ascension process. My great frustration with this is the power imbalance. Most of us spend the entirety of our lives treading water, sacrificing some part of our prosperity for others. We have trouble stepping back from that and accepting the level of risk and/or ruthlessness required to take from others to give to ourselves. We lose financially due to our own altruism, or more accurately the taking advantage of that altruism by people acting amorally. Meanwhile those people win financially and pull up the ladder behind them. They have countless ways, means and opportunities to reduce suffering for others, but choose not to. The embrace or rejection of altruism shouldn't be what determines financial security, but that's the reality we find ourselves in. Nobility become its opposite. That's what concepts like taxing the rich are about. In late-stage capitalism, a small number of financial elites eventually rig the game so that others can't win, or arguably even play. It's the economic expression of the paradox of tolerance. So the question is, how much more of this are we willing to tolerate before the elites reach the endgame and see the world burn? |