Thought Insertion

Referring to the first post: https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/26600887/fpart/1/vc/1

Though to me it seems like learning I guess? I mean unless they suggest we are better off as feral children (from what I saw they don’t grow up well). But looking at the definition of Thought Insertion:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5257266/

“‘Thought insertion’ in schizophrenia involves somehow experiencing one’s own thoughts as someone else’s.”

Unless they are also referring to what you learn from other people as not “yours” which I guess is “technically” true, but kind of leaves me with a “so what?” A lot of things I have learned aren’t “mine” but I’m not sure what the point is being made here.

Then again later on the poster thinks that neuroscience is “false” (from what I gather) and that neurons don’t exist so I would take all of it with a grain of salt.

"The world is abstract. I've walked into wonderland perfectly "sober" - actually I was pretty high,"
Okay, next.

 

Have I got a book you’ll be able to eat up, Donald Hoffman’s “The Case Against Reality.” Although you’ll quite possibly come out of the read (or listen) knowing less than you do now, and being more confused than ever. But if a senseless confusion about reality is what you are after, he’ll help you find that place.

Hey Xain. Hope your summer was good.

If a blog post or article makes no sense, ignore it.

There are enough intelligible ones out there that you don’t have to waste any time on the unintelligible ones.

If a blog post or article makes no sense, ignore it.
Just because it makes no sense, doesn't mean that it is nonsensical. A lot about reality makes no sense; and yet, we inquire into it until it makes sense even if based on a theory.

There is a lot we don’t know about consciousness. Bizzare experiences of distortion, in reality, have been attested to by those who experimented with psychedelic substances. It’s the scientific inquiry into the nature of consciousness that is most intriguing.

Donald Hoffman’s theory about a truth behind reality is questionable. He contends that our perception of the world is an interface, an iconic representation of the true nature of existence. Instead of hunting for the bells and whistles behind the interface, Hoffman needs to examine the nature of the interface itself: objective reality.

 

Sree: "Just because it makes no sense, doesn’t mean that it is nonsensical. A lot about reality makes no sense; and yet, we inquire into it until it makes sense even if based on a theory."
Xain has a history of obsessing over poorly written new-agey articles with no value , so I am advising him to ignore it and search for something that is profoundly meaningful to him as it is written. There is way way too much valuable stuff on the internet to waste days dissecting every deepity.

I would also advise him to ignore gravel when surrounded by gold nuggets.

Except I haven’t seen how this is nonsense. Just because you don’t get it doesn’t mean much at all. I mean how do you know this is gravel?

Xain: Except I haven’t seen how this is nonsense. Just because you don’t get it doesn’t mean much at all. I mean how do you know this is gravel?"
There are lots of things I have started to read that I don't understand at all. I usually stop reading them since it's a waste of time and I find something I can understand. The more things I read that I understand, the more I understand, which allows me to read more things.

You want to jump to the top and read the most confusing things around.

Find a website that is written for people like us so you can understand it. There are literally millions of great articles on any topic imaginable that you can sit and read and understand. Find them!!! Stop beating your head against the wall with all these confusing articles that we could spend weeks puzzling over and still be confused.

I wouldn’t waste my time on that article. I’d look for different articles that I do understand and maybe after reading a bunch of them and learning a bit more each time I’d be able to go back and read this one.

 

@3point14rat

Xain has a history of obsessing over poorly written new-agey articles with no value , so I am advising him to ignore it and search for something that is profoundly meaningful to him as it is written. There is way way too much valuable stuff on the internet to waste days dissecting every deepity.
On the one hand, your concern for Xain's intellectual development could be viewed as nurturing; one the other, it's shockingly unAmerican. Granted, the freedom to read whatever we like is not a universal value and you have every right to pass judgment on Xain as you deem fit.

Sree, I’m not American.

And it’s sad that caring for someone else is unAmerican. Seeing who you vote to lead you, it doesn’t surprise me, but it is sad.

 

Sree, you’re on a roll. Drinking again?

First, you say, there is no truth, you can alter your mind to find truth, we can’t know everything, therefore we should consider everything as equally possible and all things are plausible. Geez, how can you keep that one up for so long? Go start a cult somewhere else.

Second, you say, expressing your opinion is unAmerican and equate speaking with “passing judgment”, on a forum specifically designed to share ideas and get feedback. It’s in the name.

And it’s sad that caring for someone else is unAmerican.
I am an American and capable of caring for others too. But what is your role in relationship with Xain and others in a public forum? What is the social context here that transforms you into a caregiver and Xain as a recipient of your care?

Ironically, the US Government is as characteristically unAmerican as you. Appointing itself as humanity’s caregiver, it has given care to other countries all over the world to their detriment. We all want to care for others because we are driven by our morals. This well-meaning impulse has to be governed by ethics.

Sree, Xain has asked for help many times. I think I see some small part of his problem and I try to help. My frustration usually gets the better of me after a while (I’m not a professional so don’t have all the skills required to provide the best help), but I do care for him since he’s a person in pain, so I do what I can. If someone asks for help I tend to offer it.

If you have no interest in helping people, don’t.

To be honest the articles on sites like this are so banal,they don’t really challenge any sort of understanding of the world or our place in it.

"To be honest the articles on sites like this are so banal,they don’t really challenge any sort of understanding of the world or our place in it."
Yes! I agree 100%. And there are lots of them out there.

Luckily there are plenty of other articles that touch me with their message. They can teach me something or make me happy with their message. Unless an article does one or both of those things, I ignore it. I encourage you to pass those articles by and find ones that speak to you in ways that make you better and happier.

Why don’t you post a link to an article that makes you happy? I don’t care if it’s a good news story about a kid raising money for orphans or a science article that taught you the scale of the universe. Any article that you were glad you read will do.

So in other words you pick articles the allow you to live in ignorance and confirmation bias rather than challenge your held assumptions? I thought this was the center for inquiry.

Like the thought insertion one and how everything is thought insertion. I mean technically books are ideas of other people so the act of reading itself can be seen as thought insertion since your head is being filled with ideas that aren’t yours. Even talking like the guy says does the same thing, filling you with thoughts that aren’t yours.

"So in other words you pick articles the allow you to live in ignorance and confirmation bias rather than challenge your held assumptions?"
I said I read articles that "can teach me something." When have I ever even hinted that I only read what I already agree with? Does that sound like something I'd do? Really?

You can carry on without me if you insist on pretending to not understand me. If you think I’m an idiot just let me know and I’ll leave you alone.

But if you want, I am here for you. No one else is here talking to you, so please be serious if you are honest and want honest responses to your posts.

I understand what you are saying but it still sounds just like confirmation bias. I mean you still haven’t addressed the thought insertion argument and you haven’t even read the original link.

you haven’t even read the original link. -- snow
Given how you have responded to feedback in the past, can you blame anyone for not taking the time? I'm not sure he didn't read it, but really, think about that question.

I did think about it but they didn’t address the part I mentioned in regards to thought insertion. I mean the wiki definition is like someone LITERALLY invading your mind with their thoughts. But I wonder if they mean that whenever you read or talk to someone else and their thoughts run through your mind via memory.