Spiro

Anti-christ · Post by **Anti-christ** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:26 pm

Godis perfectionism?

Rationalize this for me. Do inividuals seek comfort in the unconsciousness? I keep stumbling into cubs trying to find a way to communicate my works of art.

I was sturdy in telling you this message but all things unbalanced around me came [for comfort]. Traditionally we start by setting a pace for thought, then glance at the outcome of such a meaningful prizm. Whether I am awake or asleep, x+y=ymc2

Warp · Post by **Warp** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:40 pm

I hear it all the time "there's gotta be something supernatural out there". I think our sub-concious is the resource of religion. "We can't figure it out so their must be some all- knowing being that already has." There are those of us who yearn for the knowledge we "can't obtain" and then there are those who accept what they don't know. I think acception leads to the comfort around us. I just joined the forum and I am a bit premature in my wisdom so I'm open to criticism.

Matt Gregory · Post by **Matt Gregory** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 1:14 pm

Hi Warp,

I hear it all the time "there's gotta be something supernatural out there". I think our sub-concious is the resource of religion.

You mean the source of religion? Do you think religion is a good thing?

"We can't figure it out so their must be some all- knowing being that already has." There are those of us who yearn for the knowledge we "can't obtain" and then there are those who accept what they don't know. I think acception

acceptance

I think acception leads to the comfort around us. I just joined the forum and I am a bit premature in my wisdom so I'm open to criticism.

Do you think wisdom thrives in comfort and happiness or discomfort and unhappiness? And why?

Warp · Post by **Warp** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:03 pm

Matt Gregory wrote:Hi Warp,

I hear it all the time "there's gotta be something supernatural out there". I think our sub-concious is the resource of religion.
You mean the source of religion? Do you think religion is a good thing?

"We can't figure it out so their must be some all- knowing being that already has." There are those of us who yearn for the knowledge we "can't obtain" and then there are those who accept what they don't know. I think acception
acceptance

I think acception leads to the comfort around us. I just joined the forum and I am a bit premature in my wisdom so I'm open to criticism.
Do you think wisdom thrives in comfort and happiness or discomfort and unhappiness? And why?

Ha, sorry about those mistakes. Source, acceptance, late school night is causing my mind to forget simple words. Anyways, pertaining to your question: I would say wisdom is the ultimate result from a life of discomfort. Wisdom encompasses mostly learning, and we learn best from our mistakes. On a different note: in a way religion IS a good thing, it provides us with morals and gives hope that if we lead a good life we will receive salvation while those that have wronged us are damned. Religion's authority on mistakes is simply repenting to God. A non-religious way of doing this would be to correct the mistake in the future. After making a minor to grave mistake, do you ever want that situation to arrise again so that you can "repent" for your past although you can't change it?

Jamesh · Post by **Jamesh** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:11 pm

I think this fellow has found some sort of net software tool that spits out fake questions/comments based on a large set of keywords.

Probably someone religious, but doubting, who refuses to accept that the doubt is rational.

Trevor Salyzyn · Post by **Trevor Salyzyn** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:13 pm

It might be the caffeine talking, but James is the only person on this thread that has made any sense so far.

Warp · Post by **Warp** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:16 pm

im not sure if you mean me or matt

Matt Gregory · Post by **Matt Gregory** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 3:27 pm

Warp,

Anyways, pertaining to your question: I would say wisdom is the ultimate result from a life of discomfort. Wisdom encompasses mostly learning, and we learn best from our mistakes.

So would you say that wisdom is the knowledge of how to live a good life?

On a different note: in a way religion IS a good thing, it provides us with morals and gives hope that if we lead a good life we will receive salvation while those that have wronged us are damned.

If religion didn't provide us with morals, do you think we wouldn't have any morals?

You say religion gives us hope, but what does hope give us? If we got hope from some other source, would it be legitimate to then abandon religion?

What is salvation? Going to heaven after you die?

Is it good that the people who have wronged you are damned? Does that mean you should be damned yourself for wronging other people?

Religion's authority on mistakes is simply repenting to God.

So you believe in God? What is God?

A non-religious way of doing this would be to correct the mistake in the future.

Gotcha.

After making a minor to grave mistake, do you ever want that situation to arrise again so that you can "repent" for your past although you can't change it?

I don't understand the question . . . could you rephrase it?

Warp · Post by **Warp** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:23 am

Sorry I didn't explain myself properly. I was merely regurgitating the force-fed theology I had to endure during my childhood. I don't exactly believe in the theology of religion rather I advocate what it does for many people's lives. It does provide a uniformity among humans, concerning morals. Religion, in all it's popularity, is entirely too definite: those who commit good go to heaven and those who sin go to hell. Religion is just one of the answers to our 'great questions' we have yet to answer ourselfs. Instead we almost expect our 'god' to know and answer these questions. Faith simplifies our lives, blinding many from questioning reality and facts instilled in the reality we created.
Hope in itself is contrasting, to say one has no hope is saying he has given up (atleast how our society reacts). Hope is associated usually with an object. It can embody an individual who is hope itself. If someone gives hope they are promising others. And yet, we can 'lose' hope as if we are able to find it in the first place. Promise, all pertains to belief. Since a promise is usually an oral pact made by two parties: the party who is being promised cannot do anything but believe the other party will fulfill the agreement. Reverting back to having hope, to have hope can also mean to believe and have faith. Everyone has or had faith in something one time or another. Whether it be a god, a promise, or a new tricycle on your third birthday. Hope can lift and destroy. If the promise in hope is fulfilled we are extatic with ourselves for being faithful and yielding to hope's will. Yet, if hope is 'taken away' or it falls short then we are crushed and seem to never be able to have faith again. In all i think hope is necessary in order to achieve wisdom. As we fill and drain ourselves of hope, we learn to invest hope in certain subjects. Our faith becomes more precious as we grow older, it is our carefully guarded fortune that must not be taken for granted but must be collected sooner or later.
I have problems with organizing my thoughts so if any of this is out of order or confusing please tell me.

Matt Gregory · Post by **Matt Gregory** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:22 pm

So, what do you think wisdom is? Do you think it's the same for everybody or does each person have their own unique wisdom? Do you think wisdom can be learned or taught? Is it the same or different from intelligence?

Anti-christ · Post by **Anti-christ** » Sat Mar 24, 2007 5:02 am

Wisdom is a closed door. I forget, what is thee reality of thought? Do we honestly need the use of our brains???

I've come to an understanding that the brain is useless without the heart. So, I lost my brain years ago through a storm between my mother and I. Wisdom is the unconsciousness to know thought/ before improving thought////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Warp · Post by **Warp** » Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:14 am

Wisdom falls under another IQ. Since our definition of IQ provides an unchanging idea, then we must look at wisdom as if there is another intellegence: experience. Many of us refer to common sense. If someone has an adept skill at mathematics and someone else has an equal amount of skill in their common sense what makes one smarter than the other? Intelligence relies on what your born with, while wisdom is what you learn. Wisdom merely catagorizes the learning experience. It's how you learn something, not what you learn that separates intelligence from wisdom. Wisdom is something you HAVE to learn on your own, not from a textbook, etc. You are your own teacher, and over the years, you collect quotes, experiences, people: your life. As you collect these ideas they form into your own textbook that you may reference whenever needed. So in answer to the question, what you learn is different from everyone else, but how you learn it is universally the same.

ApeX · Post by **ApeX** » Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:20 am

Wisdom falls under another IQ. Since our definition of IQ provides an unchanging idea, then we must look at wisdom as if there is another intellegence: experience. Many of us refer to common sense. If someone has an adept skill at mathematics and someone else has an equal amount of skill in their common sense what makes one smarter than the other? Intelligence relies on what your born with, while wisdom is what you learn. Wisdom merely catagorizes the learning experience. It's how you learn something, not what you learn that separates intelligence from wisdom. Wisdom is something you HAVE to learn on your own, not from a textbook, etc. You are your own teacher, and over the years, you collect quotes, experiences, people: your life. As you collect these ideas they form into your own textbook that you may reference whenever needed. So in answer to the question, what you learn is different from everyone else, but how you learn it is universally the same.

Warp,

Could you explain belief in tandem with wisdom?

I am just curious.

Nordicvs · Post by **Nordicvs** » Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:09 am

Warp wrote:Wisdom falls under another IQ. Since our definition of IQ provides an unchanging idea, then we must look at wisdom as if there is another intellegence: experience. Many of us refer to common sense. If someone has an adept skill at mathematics and someone else has an equal amount of skill in their common sense what makes one smarter than the other? Intelligence relies on what your born with, while wisdom is what you learn. Wisdom merely catagorizes the learning experience. It's how you learn something, not what you learn that separates intelligence from wisdom. Wisdom is something you HAVE to learn on your own, not from a textbook, etc. You are your own teacher, and over the years, you collect quotes, experiences, people: your life. As you collect these ideas they form into your own textbook that you may reference whenever needed. So in answer to the question, what you learn is different from everyone else, but how you learn it is universally the same.

I'd say you put it well.

Each hemisphere of the brain goes about intelligence differently, and people governed by one half more than the other have recognizable tendencies towards this---evidenced by how they learn. Some people learn better through motionless instruction, listening and reading (like most people; sitting in classrooms and devouring information, systematic memorization) and some people learn better non-verbally, experientially, with images and symbols or directly by doing (right-brainers like Einstein and Da Vinci are a couple of notable examples here).

Like you say, the accumulation of data is not wisdom---most left-brainers can have immense repositories of facts and figures, quotations and equations and details, yet know not how or when or where to use them, especially not in any creative way; right-brainers know intuitively where it all fits together, and how and why and where and when, but since they are non-verbal (left hemisphere handles language and speech) they need their left side to translate it, put it into bite-sized pieces that others can understand; so it's often difficult to express and mistakes are common (misinterpretations by the left). Einstein was called dumb in school, but was he? Of course not---he knew the answers before he could express it in the slow, logical, tedious venue of formulations. His right brain figured it out faster than his left brain could think it through. He always knew the answers but couldn't "show his work." (Of course that changed once he quit school and was home-schooled, in a different environment and in a totally different way.)

So, further than "what you know" as far as wisdom goes, and more than how you learn it, I'd say it's "what you do with what you know." Application of that knowledge, and that requires both hemispheres. Left-heavy will rationalize and ultimately mimic, copy, reflect, what it figures is wise; right-heavy will be hard-pressed to describe why it knows what it does, or explain in which way what it's doing or saying is wise, and might not even be able to identify that as wisdom at all (that's a word the left side knows). So, in fact, the right is far wiser yet doesn't have the detailed focus of perception to really deem it so as well as expound it, while the left has that narrow focus but not the experience, and frequently takes credit for what the right knew all along.

Mind games forever...

Shahrazad · Post by **Shahrazad** » Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:55 pm

Nordicus,

Some people learn better through motionless instruction, listening and reading (like most people; sitting in classrooms and devouring information, systematic memorization) and some people learn better non-verbally, experientially, with images and symbols or directly by doing (right-brainers like Einstein and Da Vinci are a couple of notable examples here).

Just to be clear, would you say that the former are better with their left brain, and the latter with their right brain?

As a side note, I read a study decades ago that showed that math processing is done with the left brain, as if math symbols are decoded by the brain as a language.
.

Nordicvs · Post by **Nordicvs** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:09 am

Shahrazad wrote: Just to be clear, would you say that the former are better with their left brain, and the latter with their right brain?

Yes, that's right (correct).

Shahrazad wrote:As a side note, I read a study decades ago that showed that math processing is done with the left brain, as if math symbols are decoded by the brain as a language.
.

Yeah, sounds about right (correct); basic math processing is done by the left and is a type of language; every abstract and three-dimensional aspect of math, or any symbol (creative arrangements of letters, words---poetry, for example), is handled by the right.

Shahrazad · Post by **Shahrazad** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:13 am

In that case, I must basically be left-brained: good at languages and at math, and not good at philosophical thought.

Nordicvs · Post by **Nordicvs** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 3:02 pm

Shahrazad wrote:In that case, I must basically be left-brained: good at languages and at math, and not good at philosophical thought.

Most people are---females far more often.

You're not hopeless though. Some old spiritual Hindu guys used to meditate and practice breathing exercises to get deeper into their right brains (even though they had no idea that it was the right hemisphere---instinct, intuition again, they just knew it, which is what this is about). They would focus on breathing through the left nostril (the brain coordinates left-right usage largely through breathing: it changes this up naturally, according to what's needed most---mostly left-brain, of course---and left-nostril breathing sticks you in your right brain, since each hemisphere controls the opposite half of the body). And then they'd concentrate on breathing through both at once for a more balanced state of mind, but most meditation is via the right hemisphere.

It takes a lot of patience and self-control, self-discipline, years of it---but directly plugging the right nostril is an easier, immediate way of getting in there (where a bottomless, ancient consciousness of mostly unused perception and intuition and creativity await). You can experiment on both and clearly see/feel the difference in hemispheric dominance. (The first time I tried it, I got anxious, fretful, and talkative, until I discovered I had plugged the wrong one---and was actually further in my left half.) Apparently there are eye exercises which accomplish the same thing, but my left eye is screwed, so I never bothered with those, gave me nasty headaches.

This also increases the size of the corpus callosum over time (the flap of tissue that connects both hemispheres); studies of Einstein's brain revealed that not only were his "math areas" much larger than an average person's (in each hemisphere), also his corpus callosum was huge, allowing faster transfers of information and processing. So, it's not "hocus pocus," as left-brainers seem to dismiss it or anything that isn't practical and literal. It works.

The more active you are (and less verbal), too, the more 'in' your right brain you'll be naturally. Another thing that works is marijuana, an entirely right-brained experience, with most of the left side distorted or hampered sufficiently, allowing a person to dive deeply into one's imagination and allow one's perception to thrive and expand. (I guess some other hallucinogens like mescaline work, too, but I haven't tried those and wouldn't vouch for them.) Breathing exercises combined with marijuana 'intoxication' is just beyond description. Some people I've known hated smoking pot for this reason (losing control---plus the shock of self-honesty; makes sense---here's where the conscience gets a workout); also, the deeper feelings there, so used to all those shallow, easily-named emotions on the left.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:04 pm

I used to enjoy getting high all the time, never experiencing any paranoia or anxiety. I used to smoke marijuana regularly from when I was about 15 years old to 19 years old until I was arrested for posession and part of my punishment was a year of random drug testing. So when my drug testing was over I decided to get high again, only this time it was different. I could no longer let myself go and achieve the same high I used to be able to. I'd get really anxious, a little bit of paranoia, and it felt as if my heart was about to pound out of my chest. I've only been able to achieve an enjoyable high a few times since I quit for a year. The good highs were usually achieved with high quality marijana, hydroponically grown types. I've tried finding out why I can't get a good high consistently like I used to but there doesn't seem to be anything out there on it. Although I did talk to this one guy who said he has experienced the same thing as me after having to quit for a year because of drug testing.

Nordicvs · Post by **Nordicvs** » Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:11 pm

Nick Treklis wrote:I used to enjoy getting high all the time, never experiencing any paranoia or anxiety. I used to smoke marijuana regularly from when I was about 15 years old to 19 years old until I was arrested for posession and part of my punishment was a year of random drug testing. So when my drug testing was over I decided to get high again, only this time it was different. I could no longer let myself go and achieve the same high I used to be able to. I'd get really anxious, a little bit of paranoia, and it felt as if my heart was about to pound out of my chest. I've only been able to achieve an enjoyable high a few times since I quit for a year. The good highs were usually achieved with high quality marijana, hydroponically grown types. I've tried finding out why I can't get a good high consistently like I used to but there doesn't seem to be anything out there on it. Although I did talk to this one guy who said he has experienced the same thing as me after having to quit for a year because of drug testing.

Interesting. Generally speaking, that paranoia is simply perception mistranslated (it's got various modifiers, but that's it in essence); although it's known that certain varities of cannabis tend to produce more of that than others, what's not widely known is that this is just varying degrees of perception, from different types, depths, according to whatever species it is and how it's grown. Even high you'll still use the left hemisphere, since it's needed to translate everything on the right side into words, certain symbols, et cetera---like when you're not high and you jump to conclusions about something: this is because your right brain sensed, perceived it and the left side immediately went about translating, interpreting, and rationalizing, which is what it does, countless times each day as it constructs one's reality. When you get it all wrong, one of two things happened: (a) the perception was faulty or incomplete or (b) it was accurate but the left side mucked up the translation and fabricated a crock of shit regarding it (for any number of reasons). Or both happened (it was faulty and misinterpretted).

So, paranoia is similar but vastly more intense, since the perceptions are so magnified (and, as I'm sure you know, it doesn't necessarily mean you're incorrect about it---hence: "Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they're not after you"). Overall consciousness gets expanded, too, so you're far more aware of what's going on---yet not regarding details---and people who either don't smoke it much, or are more inwardly focused, tend to get much more self-conscious---about which their left brains begin to put together scenarios to figure it out why (rationalize). Roughly: the more left-brained, the greater the paranoia. (Those who depend greatly on logic and reasoning are at a loss when it's gone all funky on them---almost like a kid who lost his security blanket.)

I was the same way, rarely experienced paranoia in youth when I toked, but that changed after not doing it for years and starting up again in my 20s; it seemed to happen only when I was around other people, so I started doing it alone, using it for writing or art. A few years ago I began to do it socially again here and there, since I no longer "party" or anything, and didn't experience paranoia at all. I can't really recall the last time I did.

I think it might have something to do with experiences, as well, and how comfortable one is with him/her-self. After some years and greater knowledge of what people do (how many plot and scheme and such), these memories must come into play---I think it's connected as well to how manipulative one has been as well, so it might be experiences with other people's motivations and a warped projection of one's own motivations. Maybe some combination. Still not sure, though.

In your case, do you think it might have been related to increased nervousness because you'd been caught already, perhaps retranslated into other scenarios?

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:17 am

I don't think it has anything directly to do with me being arrested for it. I do think it has something to do with my consciousness expanding between my late teens and early twentys (I'm 22). I am an overall more aware person now than I was compared when I was 16. Looking back on those years I see just how oblivious and ignorant I was to so many things. Being that I was already so disconnected from cold hard reality it was easier for me to let go and just ride the high, so to speak. Now I have a much more enhanced awareness of reality and everything within it, making it much harder to drift off into the drug induced mental state. Keep in mind though I still can achieve a good high occasionally, which I think depends on the type of marijuana I smoke.

Another thing that might play a factor in this is how much I used to smoke compared to now. In my mid to late teens I would smoke as much as 3 joints daly, sometimes more. Nowadays I might smoke when it's around me, which doesn't happen very often. The last time I smoked was about three months ago.

Warp · Post by **Warp** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 6:47 am

Nordicvs, based on what you've said, is the right brain merely the source of all thought while the left is the 'strainer'? Or does each side of the brain perform an equal amount of original thought and translating?

Nordicvs · Post by **Nordicvs** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 4:03 pm

Nick Treklis wrote:I don't think it has anything directly to do with me being arrested for it. I do think it has something to do with my consciousness expanding between my late teens and early twentys (I'm 22). I am an overall more aware person now than I was compared when I was 16. Looking back on those years I see just how oblivious and ignorant I was to so many things. Being that I was already so disconnected from cold hard reality it was easier for me to let go and just ride the high, so to speak. Now I have a much more enhanced awareness of reality and everything within it, making it much harder to drift off into the drug induced mental state. Keep in mind though I still can achieve a good high occasionally, which I think depends on the type of marijuana I smoke.

That makes sense.

Nick Treklis wrote: Another thing that might play a factor in this is how much I used to smoke compared to now. In my mid to late teens I would smoke as much as 3 joints daly, sometimes more. Nowadays I might smoke when it's around me, which doesn't happen very often. The last time I smoked was about three months ago.

Yeah, that's probably a factor too. "Chronics" don't usually suffer much paranoia. Fits for me; while I wouldn't exactly call myself chronic, I have over the last couple of years gone through about an ounce a month, several joints a day, with no paranoia or tolerance building up if the species of marijuana is changed regularly.

(It's sort of an on-going experiment into not only expanding the right-brain's overall "consciousness" but also to add difficulty to overall thinking; figuring things out is far, far easier and faster for me now when unstoned, after so much struggling, to focus, to recall things, to organize thought into coherent bits and patterns, and to make sense of all the perceptual stimulus flooding in when stoned. Like working out with weights and adding pounds to build muscle tissue, the brain works in a similar way---and of course goes flabby when unused. Some people try to use alcohol in a similar fashion, but of course that's ultimately self-defeating because, unlike weed, it destroys brain cells. They might as well just smash themselves in the head with a hammer and save their money, liver, and time spent puking.)

Warp wrote:Nordicvs, based on what you've said, is the right brain merely the source of all thought while the left is the 'strainer'? Or does each side of the brain perform an equal amount of original thought and translating?

Neuroanatomy indicates that both sides "think" and reason, but in different ways (up until the 1960s, we weren't too sure what the right brain did in the way of thought---many figured it was quite useless except for motor skills---and still there are "mysterious" areas there that do "stuff," but we're not sure what; it's been suggested that dreaming itself occurs in the right hemisphere, that this is where the subconscious mind might reside---makes sense: I've never had a logical dream). The two ways to discover which side does what is to either numb one half of the brain with some anaesthetic and test the subject or else use the 'split-brain experiment.'

When one hemisphere is incapacitated, the other will eventually start to compensate; normally, they divide things up, switch back and forth at lightening speeds with one used far more often in most people, usually the left---the left brain is therefore capable of perception, but only in a narrow, detailed way (the right brain's perception is like the sun, able to see the entire planet; the left is like a candle, able to see the cracks and contours and texture up close, in one small area, which the right cannot see; this is the same with things like intuition).

Alternatively, the right hemisphere has been observed to handle some basic, rudimentary speech, language, but it's rare and needs symbols (such as moving Scrabble letters around) to adequately express itself (and this is where "dual-consciousness theory" originated, each half able to express different thoughts, feelings-emotions, and desires). Always the left translates, which explains how ignored the right has been for so long---the left got all the credit for what the right was doing. It's my opinion that genuis, creativity, imagination, innovation, is all on the right side; overwhelmingly; the left is good at organizing what's there, tracing and copying, "talent," but it's too practical, rationalistic, and formulaic to actually invent something, come up with something original.

In a way the right is like an idiot savant; a pure genius who's mute and slightly oddball, and he has a little Spock-like translator with him, on the left, to tell others what he means (and tells him where to go and what to do--like a master blaster thing, if you've seen Mad Max 3, except the big oaf is a lot more than muscle, more like a Da Vinci really).

Here's some beginner's stuff on the split brain experiment if you're interested.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Wed Mar 28, 2007 7:00 pm

Nordicvs wrote:(It's sort of an on-going experiment into not only expanding the right-brain's overall "consciousness" but also to add difficulty to overall thinking; figuring things out is far, far easier and faster for me now when unstoned, after so much struggling, to focus, to recall things, to organize thought into coherent bits and patterns, and to make sense of all the perceptual stimulus flooding in when stoned. Like working out with weights and adding pounds to build muscle tissue, the brain works in a similar way---and of course goes flabby when unused. Some people try to use alcohol in a similar fashion, but of course that's ultimately self-defeating because, unlike weed, it destroys brain cells. They might as well just smash themselves in the head with a hammer and save their money, liver, and time spent puking.)

Interesting experiment, what type of herbs do you use most?

Using alcohol in a simliar fashion that you are describing by using marijuana would be impossible, basically for the reasons you stated. It would be like commiting a slow suicide.