Why are you, you?

[spooky3]

The last report more readily satisfies my experiences (and beliefs) i'd say.

 

Without doubt I can anticipate (and see in others, even up to 10 seconds), you could say use the force, e.g. blindfolded punch bag training.

 

Just from historical learning we will see / expect / test patterns and be pre-emptive.

 

Funny thing is i'd like to devise a test where there is no test, it's a sort of Schrödinger's cat thing, just the fact that it is a test pre-empts a response, e.g. "get ready", for which I liked the respond to the tone if you want to bit, but it still doesn't negate it.

 

Basically you need a room encompassing MRI scanner and then let big brother move in... Well, no not big brother but say a business which deals with the public.

[Phanerothyme]

I think it will end up as a game of chasing shadows.

 

The progenitor of the Palm and Handspring computing platforms Jeff Hawkins has returned to neuroscience here -

 

(great talk here worth watching for everyone, it's 7 years old, but mostly current)

 

He talks about brain theory, i.e. a complete theory of how the brain works rather than just its components - the sum being far, far greater than all the parts into which the study of brains is now split.

[Phanerothyme]

The last report more readily satisfies my experiences (and beliefs) i'd say.

 

Yeah.

 

I was disappointed, as I liked the mishief making possibilities of Libet's primary conclusions. But like Jaynes, being wrong doesn't mean the ideas aren't good, it just means they aren't currently correct.

[Cyclone]

'evidence', i think, is so sublective that in the end it's just a word banded about by anyone who wants to support any point of view really. an abused woman sees her husband's raging jealousy as 'evidence' he loves her. the same goes for most forms of 'fact'. in the ned i think belief, in whatever, should be what counts the most and whether or not people can be reasoned into 'better' belief systems is debatable.

my own personal view is that we know so little about anything really that it's still too early to dismiss any belief, scientific or otherwise.

 

So you'll be saying a prayer to his noodly goodness this morning will you.

 

After all we shouldn't dismiss the belief that a spaghetti monster created the universe, we know so little...

[espadrille]

In my attempt to bring this thread back on track, I wanted to share with you some quotes that I have found.They might have some meaning to you , and offer a different way of looking at why you are you.

 

http://www.manifestyourpotential.com/self_discovery/0_start_journey_self_discovery/being_unique/quotes_about_being_unique_inspirational.htm

 

My favourite is the 2nd one by Henry David Thoreau

[spooky3]

In my attempt to bring this thread back on track, I wanted to share with you some quotes that I have found.They might have some meaning to you , and offer a different way of looking at why you are you.

 

http://www.manifestyourpotential.com/self_discovery/0_start_journey_self_discovery/being_unique/quotes_about_being_unique_inspirational.htm

 

My favourite is the 2nd one by Henry David Thoreau

 

 

To be nobody but yourself in a world doing its best to make you everybody else means to fight the hardest battle any human can ever fight and never stop fighting.

 

- e. e. cummings

 

Not that I really really like it, I can sort of associate with it at times...

 

 

TBH, I personally feel that the one by Henry David Thoreau sort of defeats itself, by saying be individual but dance to someone else's drum. It also allows for you to be anything, including the next Hitler.

[donkey]

On the question of being 'unique' or remaining 'true to yourself' it is important to remember that this is a complex issue. A well educated person from a comfortable background, who has been brought up without serious adversity by loving parents, is more likely to feel pride in 'remaining true to themselves' than someone who was abandoned as a child in a third world country and survived to adulthood through doing whatever they had to.

 

In this respect, these concepts are a luxury, and nobody can really say they have passed the test of 'staying true to themselves' unless they have been sorely tested. Adaptation is an essential part of human survival strategy, so the degree which people 'stay true to themselves' is probably more connected to the degree they have been forced to adapt to survive, than any innate moral strength.

[Kaimani]

So you'll be saying a prayer to his noodly goodness this morning will you.

 

After all we shouldn't dismiss the belief that a spaghetti monster created the universe, we know so little...

 

you speak of the spaghetti monster so, perhaps it is you who should be praying to his noodly goodness.

 

anyway, the thread seems to have gone back on track so let it be...

[Kaimani]

On the question of being 'unique' or remaining 'true to yourself' it is important to remember that this is a complex issue. A well educated person from a comfortable background, who has been brought up without serious adversity by loving parents, is more likely to feel pride in 'remaining true to themselves' than someone who was abandoned as a child in a third world country and survived to adulthood through doing whatever they had to.

 

In this respect, these concepts are a luxury, and nobody can really say they have passed the test of 'staying true to themselves' unless they have been sorely tested. Adaptation is an essential part of human survival strategy, so the degree which people 'stay true to themselves' is probably more connected to the degree they have been forced to adapt to survive, than any innate moral strength.

 

this might be a slightly side issue, but i think it ties with what you have said: a 16 year old in some third world country for example who has had to go days with no food sometimes, war etc on the one hand

and a 16 year old here in the uk who has, say, anorexia on the other. there are only enough resources( doctors etc) to help one. which one would you help?

[johncocker]

I did answer you, don't you understand my interpretation of self and the way I conduct myself?

 

As to the constituent parts, I have stated those many times in this thread already.

 

 

 

As to forms of hypnosis (possession as you call it) I agree is possible. But to do it to 'bodies' in the past I don't!

 

If you believe in voodoo then you are more susceptible to be possessed, if not even desiring it. If your drinking rum and smoking opium, well, you probably stand no chance of withstanding being abused!

 

 

 

Next you'll be telling me "The Teaching Of Carlos Castineda" (wiki) weren't the ramblings of some tripper!

 

 

first theres no reason to be a smart arse I was'nt with you .I asked you to define your concept of self .you said it was irrelevent to your self?I found that a bit strange.... as in relation to the op .

 

IN relation to hypnosis (I never called it possession only an idiot would say that)I belive as I told you on another thread ..on hypnosis, it is a very good thing and I used it to stop smoking years ago (self hypnosis that is) if you read your own threads you'll find its you who said do you think its possible Take over over the minds of dead people :loopy:so I told you its" hollywood fiction "for neurotics like you .so don't be an idiot and twist it round and say its me who belives it, how you arrive at me beliveing in voodoo I don't know:huh:I explained to you how it works read the post!! If your are a manic depressive as you state, are you taking your medication?.well if you are its not working :)maybe try rum and opium :hihi:on second thoughts I don't think you could handle it .and If you've been reading castaneda it explains a lot:loopy: