"Thought" as electricity? (Merely a metaphor?)

[sakoz]

Think of a image that disturbs you. That 'disturbance' is emotion, a visceral reaction to 'thought'
When you 'get' the punch line of a joke, you laugh. Laughter is also visceral reaction to thought.
"Thoughts cause physiological/visceral reactions /experience in human organisms." What is that analogous to? Electricity.
Electricity is USED to operate machinery,appliances, etc. (I understand some eels USE 'electricity'.)
Have you ever thought that you "use thought" in lieu of electricity to 'operate' your body to 'experience'? Before you take voluntary action, don't you think a thought as to what that action will be?
(seizures/epilepsy involve "electrical activity" out of control.) If you 'take charge' of your thoughts, that's like being in charge of turning electricity on or off at your discrection.
Panic attacks and lesser anxiety are the effects of 'thoughts' out of control, on auto pilot,etc. Wouldn't it be 'weird' if your body reacted to thoughts your not aware of?
In the old days they called that "being possessed", but then, in the old days they also believed the earth was flat.
We know that "thinking" is our "operating system" but too often we act like we forgot the role of thought. Even when we 'take thinking for granted' it's being 'used' and 'working'.

[slinkysally]

Think of a image that disturbs you. That 'disturbance' is emotion, a visceral reaction to 'thought'
When you 'get' the punch line of a joke, you laugh. Laughter is also visceral reaction to thought.
"Thoughts cause physiological/visceral reactions /experience in human organisms." What is that analogous to? Electricity.
Electricity is USED to operate machinery,appliances, etc. (I understand some eels USE 'electricity'.)
Have you ever thought that you "use thought" in lieu of electricity to 'operate' your body to 'experience'? Before you take voluntary action, don't you think a thought as to what that action will be?
(seizures/epilepsy involve "electrical activity" out of control.) If you 'take charge' of your thoughts, that's like being in charge of turning electricity on or off at your discrection.
Panic attacks and lesser anxiety are the effects of 'thoughts' out of control, on auto pilot,etc. Wouldn't it be 'weird' if your body reacted to thoughts your not aware of?
In the old days they called that "being possessed", but then, in the old days they also believed the earth was flat.
We know that "thinking" is our "operating system" but too often we act like we forgot the role of thought. Even when we 'take thinking for granted' it's being 'used' and 'working'.

It would certainly make sense to me to consider the mind as some sort of energy field, generated by the workings of the brain and the body that support it. We're just chemicals and energy and all that fun stuff anyway. 

[sakoz]

slinkysally; thank you for your reply. "...energy field...". Thought images are 'like' holographic images, they look 'real' enough in some contexts to be mistaken for real; that's exactly what we do with 'thought-images' when we believe they are real.  Holographic images are like 'movie images', we react to the them with laughter or tears, knowing full well they are merely images on a screen and the plot is acting. Yet when we "make" movies in our 'minds', we involuntarily react to them because we don't recognize their ours, they seem so real. Have you read some of my posts  where I elaborate on that "hoax"?
I read your reply to 'Re:Metaphysics'. I like your approach; you know more than 'you let on', so I will ask you what I wanted to know by coming to this site months ago.
"We think thoughts *, some we believe, some we don't. We see the effects the believed thoughts have (experience: emotional suffering and/or dysfunctional behavior)."
* Benjamin Libet et al have shown that our body/brain/nervous system starts to react BEFORE we make the conscious decision to act/react. We (self-concept/ego) take credit for thinking; we may be the  recipients of thoughts from/by our brain for which we take credit. We can't 'take credit' for 'beliving' most of the time because we have been conditioned/indoctrinated to do 'believing' by habit.
"Believing" is 'best' if done by conscious choice, not by default.

[slinkysally]

I haven't come across these other posts of yours as of yet. If there's one in particular you'd like to link me up to, that'd be great.

"We think thoughts *, some we believe, some we don't. We see the effects the believed thoughts have (experience: emotional suffering and/or dysfunctional behavior)."
* Benjamin Libet et al have shown that our body/brain/nervous system starts to react BEFORE we make the conscious decision to act/react. We (self-concept/ego) take credit for thinking; we may be the  recipients of thoughts from/by our brain for which we take credit. We can't 'take credit' for 'beliving' most of the time because we have been conditioned/indoctrinated to do 'believing' by habit.
"Believing" is 'best' if done by conscious choice, not by default.

I'm not quite sure what to make of the studies you mention, which I've heard of before, since I don't know very much regarding the neuroscience of it all. I do know though that I typically find people who define their identity strictly in terms of their consciousness and for me this isn't where to draw the line at all. Meaning, in this example, even if the person consciously experienced the choice-making after the physical reaction starts to happen, I think they are still making the decision, just that the conscious experience of the decision-making is delayed. In this sense consciousness would be more of a presence produced by an individual that already carries out all of these processes regardless of the experience of consciousness, and consciousness wouldn't be the individual themselves.

[sakoz]

Interesting: "Even if the person consciously experienced the choice-making AFTER the physical reaction starts to happen, I think they are still making the decision, just that the conscious experience of the decision is delayed."
"I think they are still making  the decision...". Would that be subliminally made decision? That's not far fetched. We 'subliminally believe' before we can consciously evaluate if a thought is true/valid/ reliable. That's why so many false thoughts are reacted to. (antithesis of scientific method).
I'm intersted in 'subception', subception used as a means of denial to awareness. Subception, hopefully, can be used in other ways?
Your last sentence is very interesting also; I will just address the last part (for now).
"...and consciousness WOULDN'T be the individual themselves."  Then "what" would be the individual themselves? ( The word "what', in this context is a misnomer, to me, it implies 'observable'.)
I don't consider self-concept/ego/persona  as primary 'self' but rather as secondary, a artifact for consciousness. The artifact is animated by consciousness,(as I see it). We are born conscious, but self-concept/ego/persona are learned/constructed via language/thinking.

(added note) Perception after the fact. Is noticable in change, some 'process' (usually thinking) changes and only then can we perceive the new effects.