Beliefs and Perceptions Determine Experience

[sakoz]

What is the "grist" for therapy and self-help?  'Thoughts'; specifically "believed" thoughts. When a therapist and client talk, they convey and exchange thoughts via language. Language is the 'vehicle' for thought. When a self-help book is read, the authors written words convey his/her thoughts, ( the words have to be interpreted, hopefully the interpretations 'match' the authors intent.)
After being 'believed', thoughts 'seem' immutable, so before believing are options open. "Believing" is commitment to the thought believed; virtually a pledge of allegience to some thought, ( not overtly but covertly when 'believing' is conditioned to be done by habit). We know some thoughts are false, so 'instant' believing is risky and a liability. Doesn't that indicate we can't "trust" our own thoughts if some are false?
If we don't recognize whether we are reacting to a "belief-perception" or to "environmental fact", we are at a disadvantage caused by our own functioning, (dare we call it dysfunction/malfunction?)

Remember the old T.V. show, 'The Incredible Hulk'?  The guy 'morphs' into a strong guy. "Believing" has the same effect on thought. A 'believed' thought is powerful/formidable compared to a not-believed thought.  Wouldn't you like to know 'which' thoughts you make so powerful/influential it causes your experience? Simply by 'believing'.

[sakoz]

Where's Waldo? Sometimes it takes a while to find Waldo. It's in a chilrens book, a game of finding Waldo.
I read a example similar, only the 'finding' is inside each of us, in the form of a schema or understanding.
"Persons A and B stared at a rock ledge. A said, " There's a rock formation up there shaped like a bull dog- head, tail and all." "I don't see it" said B. " The head is at the left about twenty feet from those tress and the tail is at the very end of the rocks where the white rock is." Etc. you get the picture. I see/experience a insight/understanding that I've been trying to share and all the readers are like B in the story, no one admits to seeing what I tried to point out, my delivery may be a big factor; but like A in the story, he kept telling B what to look for,( finally B did see the * bull dog* on the ledge,which actually was a schema in each of the observers.) I will no longer attempt to repeat where to look within your own experience.
I said we have innate intelligence/wisdom, the only evidence I used was when we 'receive' a insight/aha/ureka that didn't help anyone to understand. There's no way to actually point out or at our innate wisdom. We all agree we have memory, but what can you point to or visualize? You can't, we only know the effect of memory, that is we can access specifics from memory but we can't see/feel the whole all at once, even though we have a word for the whole, "memory". The same with 'wisdom', except we don't access wisdom, 'it' gives us thoughts in the form of insights, understanding. We get few and far between such insights and understanding.
What do I have to offer? I have been critcized here. But look at enigma's #4 reply in my thread ; "Is the problem misperception", the man has writing talent,( I suggest you read it if you haven't already.)
He had images in his mind when he wrote that, reading his words elicits images in our minds, if I 'operated' from conditioning, imagine what I might reply. But because I choose not to react to images others evoke in me, I'm not a victim or slave to conditioning. I can admire his writing talent. If you would like to be able to "regulate" your conditioning, read my posts. Ask me questions, because I been cautioned not to repeat myself.

[S. Earl Martin]

Sakoz: The ability to react or not is possible for everyone. I understand that you chose to not be goaded to react and that is good. It is good to not be a slave to conditioning in some ways, but in others it can alienate you from society. Being to original can make you look crazy. It also can make your way of thinking and acting so foreign to others they can't understand you. I understand what you are saying about false thoughts and information influencing people in a negative way. I understand that miscommunication can cause hurt and unnecessary emotional pain. These things are true. The problem is due to our imperfect state we can only do so much to correct that problem. We are not machines.  Where we can put in new software and become more effecient. We are imperfect beings in an imperfect world. Unless you can deduce a methodology to somehow correct this, that isn't already in use? Your point has been made. 

[sakoz]

S. Earl Martin: You make a good case for the consensus and tradition. You wrote we are "imperfect beings", I'm sure you sincerely believe that. Doesn't your belief imply being 'flawed/defective"?
We make mistakes, does that mean we are flawed/defective or is it possible we can 'malfunction'? I don't share your premise of being born 'flawed/defective". I believe we learn to make mistakes by 'believing false to facts thoughts'. In therapy, for example, clients learn to correct thoughts or use new ones and get different results/experiences. (They overcome flaw? not if the flaws are structural/built in.) Can you and I get 'beyond' or 'around' our different premises? I'm not sure because we all 'operate' from the thoughts we believe; true or false. Nobody admits to or recognizes believing false thoughts. We only recognize our false beliefs when the facts don't support them; or when we "bend" the facts to 'fit' our beliefs. ( That called "spin"?)
So, as I see it , we both have to make a case for our premises to see if one or the other is more 'workable', or leave the field, if we both 'cling' to what we believe as if gospel/absolute.
"We are not machines. Where we can put in new software and become more efficient." Again we differ. "We are not machines". How about animals , hard-wired and can't vary their 'programs'?
To me, "beliefs' are new software so that we can be flexible, innovative, inventive, etc. The reason we make mistakes, is we don't 'have the hang of it yet.' Therapy changes people does it not? We do behave differently after (successful) therapy, and what is changed?  Thoughts that were believed, I think SWM will agree that peoples behavior changes when their beliefs change. Isn't that the point of therapy?

[S. Earl Martin]

Example. Babies are completely helpless. They puke and poop and someone has to deal with that. If they were born perfect that all would be taken care of automatically. You don't think you are imperfect? If you were perfect there would be no need for all this on and on. You would know the answer to every question that exists. You don't so that is proof you are imperfect. We don't learn to be imperfect. It is our state of being. For everyone. No one is perfect. Peoples behaviors can change when their beliefs change. It is a possibility it isn't a requirement. Animals can vary their programs. Have you ever taught a dog a trick. Or moved their food dish from one place to another. There is a big difference between a slight change of behavior in anything human or animal and being perfect. You say no one admits to having false thoughts. That is wrong. I just told you that I am imperfect. I freely admit to having false thoughts from very minor ones to some big ones. With my condition some days I have trouble remembering a lot of stuff correctly. I might think I put my car keys on my dresser. Nope they are on the table. Or I might show up at an appointment on the wrong day because I forgot what day it is. Stuff happens. We all make mistakes. Call them false thoughts if you want, but I guarantee you have them and will have them and there is nothing you can do to stop them completely.

[sakoz]

"Babies are completely helpless". Yes. "They puke and poop and someone has to deal with that." Yes. When is pooping not "natural"? Especially when helpless and have not yet learned the rules of civilization? We are born without knowing how to talk, does that make us 'imperfect'? I won't continue to demolish your 'straw men".
Let's find premises we both share and talk about that.
I read a long time ago, forgot who wrote it,( that makes my memory 'imperfect', guilty as charged).
"A man convinced against his will , is of the same opinion still."  ( I like it, maybe that why i remembered it.)

After considering "evolution", which is "improvement". Is it striving for 'perfection'? If so then it's intelligent and has a plan. I can say I don't completely disagree with you, but with qualifiers,(lol)
What say we try to imitate/emulate 'evolution' and strive for improvement rather than perfection?

[S. Earl Martin]

There is a difference between improvement, evolution and perfection. We can do the first two. The third is impossible for humans in our current state. Now in a great number of years if we don't destroy our selves. We might achieve perfection.

Here is the main problem with your process Sakoz. In order to make it even remotely useful you would need to adopt a scientific quanitative approach. Statistical analysis, quantitative measurements. Logic, reason, factuality. Your not doing that.

You are taking what I have said out of context in an attempt to discredit me and make me look bad. While I am attempting to help you. See this is the main reason people don't want to deal with you. I find it interesting how you apparently are the only peron hard science hasn't attacked.

Anyway I am tired of trying to help someone who refuses to take constructive advice and thinks they know everything. Good Luck with hard science. I think you both are delusional and I have watched delusional people sit and talk nonsense to each other for hours on end.

[sakoz]

hard science: you take exception to "evolution improves, not perfects". Views are relative. there's a philosophy that says everthing is perfect just the way it is. ( I agree)
A old philisophicl question is; " Why is there anything instead of nothing?" ( Just before the bing bang 'nothing';- after the big bang something.) Very mysterious.
I agree with you, each moment is perfect as is and what is; but change is constant ,so from perfection to perfection. Terminalogy can confuse us; we can agree but the way we express thoughts might indicate we do not, such is language use, imperfect. I didn't move on, I was banned for nine days.

[sakoz]

S. Earl Martin: Methodology? You want methodology? There ain't no methodology: not for wisdom/insights. Insights come from wisdom of innate intelligence of the body: that makes it 'subconscious'; not in consciousness. I said, (maybe too often) insight/aha/eureka come INTO consciousness ,( from subconscious).
Physical healing is in the body, so is psychological healing/resiliency. We don't consciously DO wisdom, we TRUST insights will occur. Insights occur, that is manifest/emerge spontaneously, not accessed like memory.
Did you know that Eskimos have a natural/intuitive knack for keeping their  outboard motors operational? Like savants, they have that talent/gift without going to be" factory-trained-mechanics'.
Why? Because their life and livelyhood depends on it. ( That may have changed with new generation) They have cell phones and maybe now they do call for a mechanic and tell they are stranded way out at sea.  Indigenous people track and hunt, etc. in ways beyond our comprehension. We too are born with innate intelligence but we opted to rely on  'conscious methodology', rather than balance both. We hardly use wisdom , it may 'seem' non-existent, but the occassional  insight gets through to us, few and far between.
Just as conditioning works automatically, so does wisdom, but with one difference, you have to TRUST wisdom. Notice the parallel between TRUSTING our wisdom and PRAYING to God. Those who pray to God expect a response-, trusting your wisdom has a better chance of getting a response.
Your icon looks like a angel, are you religious or secular? If religious you have a "edge" on trusting your wisdom than secular folks. ( You already know the drill, only the source differs.)
I came to this site a year ago, asking for collaboration/cooperation on investigating, understanding the "anatomy and function of 'believing'"  'Trust' is believing; believing makes experience 'happen'. Is anyone interested in "believing"? We all do so much of it. Do you misuse it sometimes? How can you tell when you misuse "believing"? By the effects, which usually are; Emotional suffering, dysfunctional behavior, mistakes, stress.. That's the price of not understanding "believing".
You can't change for the better without using beliefs; that is WHICH thoughts to believe. ( There is another way, which is to 'transcend' your belief system, but that's another 'story'.)
( Believing you are imperfect, can be used as a cop-out for not taking responsibilty for what one believes, Earl I know you don't do that, but don't you think some readers may do just that?)

[sakoz]

hard science; my personal e-mail is available under my user name; send me yours. I won't write anything controversial here on line.

[sakoz]

Unrecognized Believed Assumptions Are Reacted To As Perceptions:-  Could it be any other way, given our structure? All creatures are involuntarily responsive to perceptions in order to survive, adapt, etc.  We have the unique ability to "make/customize" perceptions. Unfortunately most people don't recognize doing so. (yet). Language makes communicating possible ;about referents not present or even non-existant, like mermaids. By unwittingly believing our thought-images are real, our involuntary reacts to them, even if there's no factual referent to match the image.
When I used examples, anecdotes, analogies, metaphors, etc. I was not understood; so S. Earl Martin; if i may, I will use your "unrecognized believed assumptions" from your #2 above.
Before doing so, we can use a "scale, spectrum, continuum, 1 to 10; for the probability of any assumptions "truthfullness"; from "low" to "high" probability of 'matching' facts. From # 2 reply;-
1."The ability to react or not is possible for everyone". 100% correct, but "possible" also means 'potential'; do all people exercise that? Not those who go for therapy or read self-help books.
2. ", but in others it can alienate you from society'" 'Can" is a guess/prediction, your in the 'realm' of predicting; what's your track-record for accuracy?
3."Being too original can make you look crazy."  There's your "predictive" 'can' again. (maybe yes maybe no).
4."It can also make your way of thinking and acting so foreign to others they can't understand you."  Fortune telling? How's you record of accuracy?
5."The problem is due to our imperfect state....". Is that a proven fact or a belief based on judgement; even if only a evaluation, some are accurate, but recognize its origin.
6."....we can only do so much to correct that problem." How much? X number? Can we add doing one more thing beyond your limit of trials?
7."We are imperfect beings in an imperfect world."  Is that a religious edict or a scientific proclamation?
We are compelled to make guesses/assumptions; the issue is to be aware of doing so, so we can see if they are 'valid' etc. Earl you sincerely believe your assumptions; but you also freely say to others, "That's your opinion". Thoughts are the "currency" of our interactions, let's not use counterfeit/false beliefs either with others or ourselves.
When you don 't recognize believing false thoughts, you give them a 'certainty' that's not warranted.
I've been criticized for attempting to facilitate readers to their own empowerment. "Think" what you will, I only say try to make them accurate as possible to fit the facts of the world; Is that a "bad" thing to promote? Then I'm guilty of trying to ease and relieve "needless, self-imposed" suffering. ( Could it be true;-"Some people can't handle the truth." It appears so.)

[S. Earl Martin]

Can is not in the realm of predicting. Can allows for multiple possibilities. Predictions are diffinitive and allow for only one possibilty. Reread your posts where you assume things as true with out an evidence to support your beliefs. You assumed I drink. I don't You assumed I use google. I don't. I could refer to more, but I think that will suffice. You are the one doing the predicting. The problem is you are always wrong. 
Human imperfection is a scientfic fact. Believeing you are perfect is delusional.
#7 Physician heal thy self. Your advice only applies to you and to a degree sakoz.
I will tell you the samething I have been telling Sakoz. Without scientific validation and a practical application? Weather this is true or not it is useless.

[SWM]

"Can" linguistically  is a Modal Operator of Possibility. Cognitively it is a generalization.

[sakoz]

SWM; Thanks.
S.Earl Martin: Excuse me, but it appears to me, that your reply is to two people, to hard science and me, it would help me if you prefaced what you say to me with my user name,"sakoz".
Rodney King said; "Can't we just get along"? Isn't some posts detracting from cooperating/collaboration?

[S. Earl Martin]

Can't we just get along"? Isn't some posts detracting from cooperating/collaboration
Not Mine!!! You and hard science are the ones who use derision and malic instead of facts and logic.

The response was directed at hard science. I didn't read yours until after the fact, but because it contained mainly the same statements I didn't edit it. Further as I have said I believe Sakoz's and Hard Science are both just trying to keep this going so they can have a stage and people will notice them. Your getting your feelings hurt because I didn't address you by name is evidance of this.

And still you do not address the problem of scientific validation and practical application. If you could achieve this the purported new information might have actual value other than taking up space on a forum. Since hard science at first was attempting to offer proof of his statements I hoped he might be the one to assist you? Instead he has turned it into a personal attack on nearly everyone on the sight. What a waste.

[SWM]

@sakoz have you noticed if i ever said that i agree with the concept that you are here to talk about?

[sakoz]

SWM, yes you said you agreed with the concept, but agreeing consciously is not unconsciously practicing the concept.
Have you read the article I suggested to all readers?  "On Being Sane In Insane Places". If both you and S.Earl Martin read it, could we agree to make a 'new start", with that article as our starting premise?? Maybe you could write a short version,'synopsis' of it for posting here? I would very much like us to "get back on track".( a form of amnesty?).

[SWM]

SWM, yes you said you agreed with the concept, but agreeing consciously is not unconsciously practicing the concept.

@sakoz how do you know i never practice the concept unconsciously?
do you practice the concept unconsciously at all times?

if it is something that must be practiced unconsciously how do you know that you are practicing it?

[sakoz]

SWM; " how do you know i never practice the concept unconsciously?" Thanks for using the word 'never". I did not say you "never" did, ok I was,a bit 'general', but we both know when we feel we are in a "good mood" indicates well-being /mental health. We also both know that even patients in mental institutions have  occasional "good moods" too. Need i say more?

"if it is something that must be practiced unconsciously how do YOU know you are practicing it".  The same way i know when I'm not practicing it, by the EFFECTS, which are emotional suffering,etc. A most recent example is my unconscious NOT being goaded by Earl's remarks

I believe I answered both your questions to your satisfaction.  Let's have more such interactions. ( Did i leave anything out?)

(opps, I missed answering ,"do you practice the concept unconsciously at all times?'" No i don't and you will never find anyone who does, even Jesus lost his temper with the money-changers in the temple. But I'm happy to report it occurs more frequently, it's a sharp contrast for when i used to be 'ruled' by conditioned reactions, and so when I do 'slip up' I recoup sooner/faster then before.

[sakoz]

S.Earl Martin: "Your getting your feelings hurt because I didn't address you by name is evidence of this". ( I went to great lengths to point out 7 such examples, this is your #8. Reading those 7 did not help you avoid #8). As I read the first 4or 5 sentences, they appeared to be to me , then "off-the-wall" you say I assumed,you drank, that i assumed you used google. I DID NOT ASSUME SUCH THINGS about you. Wouldn't any one be 'bumped off track' be such narration? Those assumptions were not mine, isn't it 'common courtesy' to let someone know your suddenly talking to someone else? You understood when enigma could not 'goad' me into a involuntary conditioned reaction, what makes you 'think' you can?

[S. Earl Martin]

I call them like I see them. If you got your feelings hurt again then that is still making my point. Sorry though if you took offense.
Yes you left something out a practical application.

Practicing it unconsciously? So you see cause and effect. That would make it conscious. I still don't get how this is supposed to work? How is this supposed to actually help someone deal with "false beliefs or thoughts or whatever"? Don't give me some vague, lame example that is just an evasion. I am tired of that. Spell it out in real life terms. What is the fundemental mechinsim at work. This does this so that this happens. If there is not a A+B= C it is all a bunch of smoke and mirrors. 

[S. Earl Martin]

You were using terminology that hard science has been using and I had someone talking to me at the same time I posted that. I thought it was from hard science so that part was addressed to him. I guess that is just evidance of my human imperfection.
SO EXCUSE ME!

[sakoz]

Earl; we got that cleared up, thanks. You can see how that 'change of pace' was unexpected while reading,

[sakoz]

S.Earl Martin:"you left something out".    "spell it out.    "If there is  not A+B=C then....."
Is the rope A + B the image of snake, =C the feeling of fear? Please see the role of involuntary reactions are not spelled out as 'practical applications".
There's more to it than meets the eye, some of this you have to experience as insight, a realization, understanding, something that comes from WITHIN you.
Your used to a very different way of learning, so i understand your frustration, but is that frustration caused by me?

[S. Earl Martin]

Cause and effect applies in all situations. Involuntary or not. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Actually A rope + B image of snake in mind = feeling of fear is a good example. If you take your premises and use discriptions like this. ( By the way these are not my discriptions) they are how scientific therom is derived. Then your ideas will have more credence. It will allow a standard of measurement. It will allow them to be proved. This is how formulas are written. Now this is a very basic example and in order to make it meet scientific critea you will need to make it more all inclusive. Something that can be applied to a number of situations equally. Like the action reaction example. This a practical application although it is like I said a very basic one. I hope we are getting somewhere? 

[sakoz]

S.Earl Martin: I too hope we are getting somewhere,-   "cause and effect applies in all situations". Subliminal/unrecognized beliefs are "cause" of 'experienced effects'. Unrecognized causes are not easily changed, how can they if you don't,know what they are.? Scientific Method "ferrets" such believed thoughts out into the 'light of awareness'.
When SWM and i were talking about the work of Benjamin Libet et al; did you 'follow'? You seem to completely ignore those 'works'.
Do you really think "analytical mind" is superior to "unconscious"? Your analytical mind did not function before you learned language; did it even exist or only in 'potential'? Just as we are born without talking but we are born with the 'equipment' to be able to talk soon as we "aquire" a language, any language. You seem to insist your analytical mind will find the answer, if there is one.
That in itself too is a 'belief'. We can get 'stuck' IN a belief like in a hampster wheel. ( remember, self-concept/ego is a subset IN thought-system).
If you can calm down/relax 'analyitical mind' and experience a insight, that insight would enable you to calm down even more. That is, your insight would have the effect on your 'conditioning' the way parasympathetic has on, and can 'check' our sympathic. Without insight from wisdom, it's not likely 'analytic mind' can do it. Look how many hundreds of years our race has tried to "subdue' our involuntary reactions into 'submission'. Your way is not the way.  "Unless ye become as little children......." See the 'shift' required?
In order to understand 'beliefs'; what is the relation between understanding and beliefs? Isn't 'understanding' another word for "witnessing"? Understanding is the meta-perspective required.
If it was as simple as you expect, as expeditious as following  a 'recipe', it would be a different world and society by now.
Are you going to attempt to "render" this information down so as to be "palpable grist" for your 'analytical mind'? You literally do  not see where your 'coming from' because your IN the thought-system that needs to be observed.   It's a catch-22, what wants to 'get out' and look back, is what 'stays put' and is to be looked at from meta-perspective. (don 't take this personally, it's the 'plight' of everyone, until they 'escape'.) Until then, everyone acts/reacts in accordance to their conditioning; isn't that what conditioing is about? You "signed up" for it when you learned language. Conditioning won't help you escape from it's 'cluches', we need our wisdom for that.

[S. Earl Martin]

sakoz. I have three main problems with what you are saying and they are personal not from you. With the risk of giving hard science more information to twist out of context to try and use against me I will explain.
1. I am not a professional psycholigist and don't want to be one. So the information is only so useful to me. On the other hand it is useful to you and as I have said you need scientific validity.The information you quote is a method to achieve that goal. Building on other peoples research is part of the process.

2. As a whole I only understand what you are saying to a limited degree because the ideas are yours and I have a limited understanding of what you are saying.

3. My condition has returned and I am getting very sick again. This effects my ability to think clearly and to function for long periods of time. The reason I misread the post before, was I was confused due to fatigue. The conversation I was having was with my care taker reminding me to rest, take my medicine and eat. She could see my hands were shaking and I was showing symptoms of exhaustion. I feel this is important to do what I do,  I really care about the people on this sight who need help and I feel it is part of my mission in life to try and help them before I go. That includes you. So I am not the one to consult about technical or professional information. Again that is why I hoped hard science might be able to assist you because he at first appeared to be knowledgable. Now I am not so sure. I think it might just be a load of crap.

Earl

[sakoz]

S. Earl Martin: I'm sorry about your condition. My wife and i are both past the life expectancy charts. We often talk about which one of us might go first. We joke about being on "bonus" time,or borrowed time. I hope i go first; she takes care of all the banking and bill paying, etc. I can imagine how poorly I would eat if she happens to go first.  Such is life.
I don't think i need help, I like "where I am psychologically". I just wanted to share how it feels to be in charge of thinking. (.Terrific) I gather you mean I need help in "pointing" other people in the direction of "finding" or "reconnecting" to their 'innate intelligence/wisdom". It really seems like a cruel joke for people to seek so earnestly 'outside' for what is already "inside". Jesus said; " The Kindom of Heaven Is Within." We only believe him when we too find or reconnect. Bless you Earl, I hope you reconnect before you depart.

Steve

[S. Earl Martin]

I understand were you are coming from. I was diagonsed a number of years ago. I have been told several times I would be dead by now, but this time unless something changes they might be right. So I to am living on borrowed time. I also expected to go before my wife. Like yours, mine did the bills etc. and when she went it was a shock.
When I posted that information it was not to elicit sympathy. It was because you had asked me about some of the information you quoted. I was avoiding responding, but when it became clear you were becomeing frusrated because I wasn't reading it I felt it nessacary to explain.

I also try to help in what ever way I can, but if I am outside of my field of expertise? I have no problem telling people I am not comfortable answering them and will refer them to someone I think would be more appropriate. I am a realist.

[sakoz]

Earl:  "outside your field of expertise?" Speak from your heart and experience; and wisdom. I don't see wisdom as 'hierarchical'; I see it as "level playing field" for us all.