While the notion of reducing the theory of the human mind to stimulus/response is moot it seems like so many people realize so much less than their potential that they do become less than self aware. even for those who try hard to be different, there are usually precious few moments in any given day when we are able to or even remember to rise above monotonous thinking.
That's likely true - but it's hard to know what to compare to. Do you have any people in particular that you look to as good examples of rising above repetitive mundane thinking?
You were discussing sexuality some months back referred to being aware of your mental pleasure/reward structure and perhaps intentionally changing it. Not that i want to turn this into a sex thread but what caught my attention there was the casual discussion of such a bold notion as reprogramming your own mind. people do change and discuss changing but so often it is only in the most shallow way possible and even that kind of change is extremely difficult. deeper and willful alteration of your own psyche is quite daring i think.
Thanks.
I don't mind if this gets turned into a sex thread, there's plenty to discuss there too. And I don't think it's likely to get too badly sidetracked. (There's the whole rest of the forum for that.
)
You've done your own share of reprogramming after you quit the electro-play, if I'm remembering that story right. Has it been successful?
Agreed that deep change is difficult, but it's more possible than people sometimes think. If you've done any research on trauma responses you've probably seen plenty of the inventive ways the mind adapts to circumstances when it believes there's no alternative. If you can trick your mind into thinking the alternatives are too horrible to contemplate, then you can draw on that energy to drive a change. I think innocence is also an important factor - the younger you are, the more plastic a sense you have of the way the world works, and the easier it is to believe in the ability to change. Self-fulfilling prophecy is a big part of the equation so you want it to work in your favor.
i read of a study showing how the portions of the brain engaged in composing verbal responses during debates with ideological opponents were the same portions active during physical combat. those neurons probably don't do such a good job at objective analysis of the other person's position.
Interesting. I've seen similar studies where people were shown photos and asked to read the arguments of two people, one from their own political party and one from an opposing party. There was a strong bias towards rating the people from their own party higher on metrics that were completely unrelated to the argument, such as physical appearance. People were also more likely to accept the arguments from their own party as sound, and miss the logical flaws. Not to mention all the analysis that's been done of sales techniques and how susceptible people are to emotional appeals.
But the thing is that the generalization and stereotyping that humans naturally do is actually evolutionarily sound, because it allows for split-second decisions and intuitive leaps that are necessary in survival situations. Objective analysis alone isn't enough to solve the problem, or our current AI would be much more capable of "living" and not just solving the highly specialized problems we pose to them now.
the trick for me personally is carefully choosing to adopt the proper collection of existing patterns that provide me with the most rich life experience.
What patterns have you picked? It's easy to talk about this stuff theoretically, but harder to keep it sound in the mess of everyday life.
however, i'm a bit of a rebel too and refuse to build myself entirely out of stock components lest i become more of a model number and less of an individual.
Agreed - and if you try to take conscious control of the entire process, you lose a vital part of creativity and uniqueness. From what I've seen, it's a balancing act.
