In your case

In the unregulated, non-standardized market of coaching, consciousness and wisdom teachings, or spiritual alternative culture — where I consciously position myself — there's a clear tendency to "hype" certain terms, especially on social media.

It creates the impression that everyone has read the same book at the same time and steps forward with insights that become purported "facts" solely through the frequency of mention.

This resembles astrology: Though here coherent mathematical models can be applied, they tend to be interpreted more or less uniformly, often with a positive bias or promises of sustainable change and turning points.

Unfortunately, some of these sensible terms and their functions get used and abused inflationarily.

Their true etymological meaning drowns in a sea of speculation about what they might actually signify. Often, the creators of such terms display significant knowledge gaps, or the topic simply belongs to an entirely different field. Frequently, it revolves around the realm of "infinite possibilities," accessible only to an exclusive, initiated circle — or to you, for an upcharge.

Aspects exploited in many places to suggest false notions and hopes, thereby generating dependencies anew — ones that burden you, the very ones you seek to shed.

These effects intensify through clever pre- and suffix variants of hyped terms, implying a spurious scientificity.

Which, quite simply, usually isn't present.

​

​

Delineating this, knowledge or even wisdom need have nothing to do with age or education. Everyone has their own experiences and accesses, used in their way — and if via a business model, preferably traceable; that's precisely what I do here. I've simply taken a different path — nothing more, nothing less.

Still, offers and their underlying theoretical constructs should at minimum be plausible and consistent.

I too cannot guarantee 100% evidence always — no one can. It's impossible because the universe itself is of emergent nature, constantly self-altering.

but

Everything presented to us should at least not insult our intellect and, on inquiry, be traceable in simple terms for healthy common sense.

This works readily through imagination or metaphors.

If something matters, a way exists.

The same applies to school medicine approaches and assumptions! Factually, the entire field rests on weak evidence levels (proofs of effect) and increasingly resists critical examination — thus claimable falsifiability. Another symptom of our time to sustainably immunize against genuine progress. Just like the trend of retroactively altering thresholds to suggest enduring urgency and simply preserve sales markets.

This isn't general critique. Rather, it's a pointer to what's increasingly observable: an invitation not to believe everything always, to occasionally look closer, and now and then question plausibility. Simultaneously, it forms part of my access prerequisites for forming a knowledge alliance with me.

You should know & will.

Ultimately, freely after one of the last century's greatest thinkers:

We conjecture only until someone disproves it.

Put differently, it's precisely the moment of failure and defeat where we contact reality, truly touch it, and gain a vision of what's possible.

Usually we suppress that as unpleasant and goalless — but exactly the opposite holds. You've added a valuable link to your knowledge chain. That's the essence: functional knowledge and how — above all why — it works interdisciplinarily for you.

You've added a valuable link to your knowledge chain.

That's it:

Functional knowledge

&

how and why interdisciplinary is effective for you.

​