The Psychology Thread, I Guess...

[zlemflolia]

Does the phrase "don't think about an elephant" have any implications on free will?

[chim]

Does the phrase "don't think about an elephant" have any implications on free will?

This probably is more of a philosophy question than psychology, but I'll bite. No, but it has a big implication on communication and linguistic limits. As for the question of what constitutes free will, I think it's foolish to deconstruct the subject and try to delineate some kind of objective free will over a deterministic universe. The appearance of free will is free will. The fact that there are numerous ways to "cheat" it only means that we don't live in an isolated void.

[LimpyLoo]

If you wanna determine if you have free will, you first have to determine what you mean by 'you' and what you mean by 'free will.' (and the answer will differ depending on how you define them)

[zlemflolia]

 

Does the phrase "don't think about an elephant" have any implications on free will?

This probably is more of a philosophy question than psychology, but I'll bite. No, but it has a big implication on communication and linguistic limits. As for the question of what constitutes free will, I think it's foolish to deconstruct the subject and try to delineate some kind of objective free will over a deterministic universe. The appearance of free will is free will. The fact that there are numerous ways to "cheat" it only means that we don't live in an isolated void.

 

 

I think you're right, and upon looking at it more closely, really the only thing the individual has done is read the question.  The act of thinking of an elephant is required to fully comprehend the command to begin with, so the phrase is equivalent to "Don't not read this sentence" or "Don't read this sentence" forcing us to have already chosen whether to perform the command before we fully read the question.  The act of choosing to read the question was the choice - we're left with no more free will regarding that command alone because it was already used up.  

 

They were tricked basically into freely making the wrong decision, so to speak.  Similar to them saying "I will never kill myself" and they push a button not realizing it was going to explode and kill them.  Which still lets us have free will over our own actions but not the external environment.  The external environment is the phrase which tricked us into "killing ourselves" by accidentally comprehending the question and therefore failing the command.  Okay I'll stop this autistic over-analysis which is probably obvious anyway

[Leon Sumbitches]

I guess you could say this thread's getting a bit...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[usagi]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ksAzEJFlQg

[LimpyLoo]

What are the first 10 words he says? I can only make out the end...

[Real Human Bean]

What are the first 10 words he says? I can only make out the end...

He says "Well my good man, to be quite honest you'll have to come back to me when you've defeated the dragons that dwell within your own soul before attempting to do battle with me. Now off with you! Stop wasting my time!"

[LimpyLoo]

Zeff, many of the philosophical questions that plagued humanity for hundreds of years were solved/dissolved all at once by Linguistic Philosophy.

 

It turns out that (to use a trite-ass example) whether or not a tree makes a sound in the forest with no-one around wasn't actually a philosophical problem, it was a problem of the word "sound" having multiple meanings to the people pondering it. (i.e. "Will the tree vibrate air molecules?" vs. "Will the tree induce an auditory experience?")

 

So how do you stop chasing your tail and dissolve a philosophical problem?

Clearly define the terms you're using.

[goDel]

Zeff, many of the philosophical questions that plagued humanity for hundreds of years were solved/dissolved all at once by Linguistic Philosophy.

Ehm, no!? That's like saying that philosophical questions are only about syntax and semantics and nothing else. It's questionable, or arbitrary, to argue the tree in the forrest thing is a linguistic issue. I'd argue it's an existential issue. And solving existential issues with a linguistic solution is either misunderstanding the issue, or just unsatisfactory. It's like making a painting with a hammer instead of a brush. Sure you can paint with a hammer, but you'll get very specific results.

[cwmbrancity]

There was a nice Between The Ears on Radio 3 last year (nearly said 'earlier this year') about how certain frequencies impact upon the brain, ties in a wee bit to the stuff Limpy was posting at the top of the page: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0739ndm

 

ta for this, thinking of a career change with music therapy later this year and after months of books/journals/texts, its sweet to actually hear these correlations

[LimpyLoo]

 

Zeff, many of the philosophical questions that plagued humanity for hundreds of years were solved/dissolved all at once by Linguistic Philosophy.

Ehm, no!? That's like saying that philosophical questions are only about syntax and semantics and nothing else. It's questionable, or arbitrary, to argue the tree in the forrest thing is a linguistic issue. I'd argue it's an existential issue. And solving existential issues with a linguistic solution is either misunderstanding the issue, or just unsatisfactory. It's like making a painting with a hammer instead of a brush. Sure you can paint with a hammer, but you'll get very specific results.

I know you like to contradict me, but you're actually just contradicting Putnam, Searle, Rorty, Wittgenstein, etc...

 

(2:30 onwards)

https://youtube.com/watch?v=jOlJZabio3g

[LimpyLoo]

Also, I would say Existentialism is concerned with how things are and what to do about it.

 

I can't bend my brain to even imagine how trees making a sound or not has anything to do with Existentialism.

[zlemflolia]

I'm on goDel's side here even though I understand your point completely and I think it has wide-reaching implications

 

But I think that this particular question is deeper and it relates to concepts like the importance of direct observation by sentient beings, the relevance of intermediate states between given inputs and outputs of a system, and other things.  Though maybe I'm still wrong.

[watmmisdead]

limpyloo, you think too much.

[watmmisdead]

1) Believe the hype about the transformative power of psychedelics. The reason its healing effects (e.g. on stress-induced mental illness) are a bit foggy from a scientific perspective is because our current model(s) of mental illness--and really the whole spectrum of sub-clinical psychopathology exhibited (to varying degrees) by every person on the planet--are outmoded.

And they're more outmoded than they need to be, mostly because Western scientists tend to be 'greedy reductionists' (i.e. like bean-counters trying to solve Xeno's Paradox).

 

 

ime, psychedelics gives tons of insight, but most if not all of it is lost once back to sober. it can gives insights into how you could feel and experiene reality and what you should really try to attain (inner peace, love, serenity, satisfaction) but it really gives no indication or method in how to train yourself on how exactly to be able to feel that way WITHOUT the psychedelic drug. 

[Real Human Bean]

You can definitely attain insight and clarity that stays with you.

Everything takes a bit of effort though :) That's this life of ours 'ey? You're not going to feel forever peaceful/loving/serene if you take shrooms once and then don't even try to remember and live by the wisdom you gained.

It becomes stronger with repetition, weaker with neglect.

It's a massive shame that coming-of-age (maturity) ceremonies and use of psychedelics in rituals are mostly lost in 'modern' culture.

[LimpyLoo]

 

1) Believe the hype about the transformative power of psychedelics. The reason its healing effects (e.g. on stress-induced mental illness) are a bit foggy from a scientific perspective is because our current model(s) of mental illness--and really the whole spectrum of sub-clinical psychopathology exhibited (to varying degrees) by every person on the planet--are outmoded.

And they're more outmoded than they need to be, mostly because Western scientists tend to be 'greedy reductionists' (i.e. like bean-counters trying to solve Xeno's Paradox).

 

 

ime, psychedelics gives tons of insight, but most if not all of it is lost once back to sober. it can gives insights into how you could feel and experiene reality and what you should really try to attain (inner peace, love, serenity, satisfaction) but it really gives no indication or method in how to train yourself on how exactly to be able to feel that way WITHOUT the psychedelic drug.

You've seen the studies on psychedelics given to terminal cancer patients, right? Those dying people don't seem to think the effects are lost 'once back to sober'...

[chim]

They are not the benchmark of normality. They are in an extreme situation.

[LimpyLoo]

They are human beings who are going to die

Who learned not to flinch away from their death

Only thing 'extreme' is their timeframe

[LimpyLoo]

limpyloo, you think too much.

Don't you believe in levitation and quantum crystal healing etc?

 

Maybe you should think too much too

[zlemflolia]

You can definitely attain insight and clarity that stays with you.

 

Everything takes a bit of effort though :) That's this life of ours 'ey? You're not going to feel forever peaceful/loving/serene if you take shrooms once and then don't even try to remember and live by the wisdom you gained.

 

It becomes stronger with repetition, weaker with neglect.

 

It's a massive shame that coming-of-age (maturity) ceremonies and use of psychedelics in rituals are mostly lost in 'modern' culture.

 

I COMPLETELY agree

 

Furthermore I think all of main the insights come from the empathogenic properties of psychedelics.

[cwmbrancity]

think you'll find most terminal cancer patients offered psychedelics havent previously taken psychedelics, its one of the prerequisites rarely mentioned in this field

 

the same results/insights are apparent through Guided Imagery & Music/art psychotherapy programs in palliative care, just through a different medium, even if that medium is through sound & imagery rather than a specific drug induced state

 

i'm not really interested in arbitrary pointers and certain semantics between the differences in psychology & philosophy, rather the process of healing in itself and what effects change @ ground zero

 

processes like EMDR, GIM therapy & art psychotherapy can engage at levels certain pharmacologies cant and vice-versa, diagnosis is half the problem & even then that process can vary enormously depending on what health services you have access to

 

the more i read Carl Jung, explore the visual worlds of Max Ernst, Leonora Carrington & Paul Nash, the more the shift away from dry academic positions appeals

 

art can heal as well as any science (*in certain circumstances of course)

[watmmisdead]

You can definitely attain insight and clarity that stays with you.

 

Everything takes a bit of effort though :) That's this life of ours 'ey? You're not going to feel forever peaceful/loving/serene if you take shrooms once and then don't even try to remember and live by the wisdom you gained.

 

It becomes stronger with repetition, weaker with neglect.

 

It's a massive shame that coming-of-age (maturity) ceremonies and use of psychedelics in rituals are mostly lost in 'modern' culture.

I take psy at least every other month.

but still when I get sober its hard to change the habits I see are wrong when im on the drugs. it definitely changed my life. One of my DMT breakthrough definitely changed my whole outlook on life and what really matters.

 

 

limpyloo, you think too much.

Don't you believe in levitation and quantum crystal healing etc?

 

Maybe you should think too much too

 

no I dont believe in levitation or quantum crystal healing. learn what Theravada Buddhism is, its much more logical and practical then you probably think. traingin your mind to stop the thinking process is very special.

 

I find you very interesting though  sorry if I insulted you.

[watmmisdead]

 

 

1) Believe the hype about the transformative power of psychedelics. The reason its healing effects (e.g. on stress-induced mental illness) are a bit foggy from a scientific perspective is because our current model(s) of mental illness--and really the whole spectrum of sub-clinical psychopathology exhibited (to varying degrees) by every person on the planet--are outmoded.

And they're more outmoded than they need to be, mostly because Western scientists tend to be 'greedy reductionists' (i.e. like bean-counters trying to solve Xeno's Paradox).

 

ime, psychedelics gives tons of insight, but most if not all of it is lost once back to sober. it can gives insights into how you could feel and experiene reality and what you should really try to attain (inner peace, love, serenity, satisfaction) but it really gives no indication or method in how to train yourself on how exactly to be able to feel that way WITHOUT the psychedelic drug.

You've seen the studies on psychedelics given to terminal cancer patients, right? Those dying people don't seem to think the effects are lost 'once back to sober'...

 

yes ive seen the studies.

 

 I guess we'd have to determine what exactly insight means? 

 

what I mean by i often feel I loose the insights I gain on psychedelics is real for me. I cannot say for the dying people.

 

what cwmbrancity says is important

 

think you'll find most terminal cancer patients offered psychedelics havent previously taken psychedelics, its one of the prerequisites rarely mentioned in this field

 

 

the first couple of psychedelics experience definitely changed my life in a certain way. repeating the experience is indeed less dramatic. hence the famous quote about psychedelics by alan watts: "once you get the message hang up the phone"