Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck, Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576027 -

RationalEgo said:
Show me the study. In my experience (and throughout history) people who let their emotions guide their reasoning are usually brutish, immature and unstable.


Quote:
Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio studied people who had received brain injuries that had had one specific effect: to damage that part of the brain where emotions are generated. In all other respects they seemed normal - they just lost the ability to feel emotions.

The interesting thing he found was that their ability to make decisions was seriously impaired. They could logically describe what they should be doing, in practice they found it very difficult to make decisions about where to live, what to eat, etc.

In particular, many decisions have pros and cons on both sides. Shall I have the fish or the beef? With no rational way to decide, they were unable to make the decision.




http://changingminds.org/explanations/emotions/emotion_decision.htm

RationalEgo said:
Ughh No! She was an extreme advocate of reason. Nice try though.


Advocating something doesn't necessarily mean that you are that thing. Most people that advocate something are hypocrites, and the man Ayn Rand was dreaming about, he would never have been interested in her if he existed.

Edited by Zanthius (06/26/09 12:36 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576051 -

Quote:
Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio studied people who had received brain injuries that had had one specific effect: to damage that part of the brain where emotions are generated. In all other respects they seemed normal - they just lost the ability to feel emotions.

The interesting thing he found was that their ability to make decisions was seriously impaired. They could logically describe what they should be doing, in practice they found it very difficult to make decisions about where to live, what to eat, etc.

In particular, many decisions have pros and cons on both sides. Shall I have the fish or the beef? With no rational way to decide, they were unable to make the decision.


I'm not sure how this advocates emotion over reason. It just states that emotions are useful for decision making. I'm not denying that emotions are useful, I am arguing that reason needs to be in the driving seat. If emotion is in the driving seat reason is no longer reasonable. Emotions are only rational with reason in the driving seat.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576064 -

Well, I'm not as cynical as you and using my own judgement when I read her works and watch her interviews, I don't get the impression that she was hypocritical. Also I would not care even if she were hypocritical. It would not negate the validity of her ideas.

Edited by RationalEgo (06/26/09 12:45 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576070 -

RationalEgo said:
I'm not sure how this advocates emotion over reason. It just states that emotions are useful for decision making. I'm not denying that emotions are useful, I am arguing that reason needs to be in the driving seat. If emotion is in the driving seat reason is no longer reasonable. Emotions are only rational with reason in the driving seat.


It shouldn't necessarily be anyone of them dominating. Rather reason should be deeply integrated with emotion.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576090 -

Zanthius said:
RationalEgo said:
I'm not sure how this advocates emotion over reason. It just states that emotions are useful for decision making. I'm not denying that emotions are useful, I am arguing that reason needs to be in the driving seat. If emotion is in the driving seat reason is no longer reasonable. Emotions are only rational with reason in the driving seat.


It shouldn't necessarily be anyone of them dominating. Rather reason should be deeply integrated with emotion.


Id say that reason does need to be the guiding principle. A feeling or an emotion is not an appropriate tool for understanding reality. Emotions are reactions to values, but reason is the means to ascertain and choose what is of value.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576117 -

RationalEgo said:
Id say that reason does need to be the guiding principle. A feeling or an emotion is not an appropriate tool for understanding reality. Emotions are reactions to values, but reason is the means to ascertain what is of value.


Obviously it seems to be like that in the fractured way you are perceiving your brain. My brain isn't necessarily fractured into emotions and reason. Perhaps I just have one thing called emoreason, and perhaps that thing is what dominates my brain.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576136 -

Zanthius said:
RationalEgo said:
Id say that reason does need to be the guiding principle. A feeling or an emotion is not an appropriate tool for understanding reality. Emotions are reactions to values, but reason is the means to ascertain what is of value.


Obviously it seems to be like that in the fractured way you are perceiving your brain. My brain isn't necessarily fractured into emotions and reason. Perhaps I just have one thing called emoreason, and perhaps that thing is what dominates by brain.



Emotion and reason are separate faculties. Emoreason sounds like big brother doublespeak. Lets hope it doesn't catch on.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576141 -

:lol:
emoreason


--------------------
Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction?
Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Kickle]
    #10576146 -


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576156 -

RationalEgo said:
Emotion and reason are separate faculties. Emoreason sounds like big brother doublespeak. Lets hope it doesn't catch on.


Well, well, I have millions ( or billions ) of axons connecting the emotional faculties of my brain with the rational faculties of my brain, which makes it really hard to separate those faculties. Perhaps you are separating the rational faculty of your brain from the emotional faculty of your brain, merely because you have less axons connecting those faculties to each other.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576168 -

Zanthius said:
RationalEgo said:
Emotion and reason are separate faculties. Emoreason sounds like big brother doublespeak. Lets hope it doesn't catch on.


Well, well, I have millions of axons connecting the emotional faculties of my brain with the rational faculties of my brain, which makes it really hard to separate those faculties.

Perhaps you are separating the rational faculty of your brain from the emotional faculty of your brain, merely because you have less axons connecting those faculties to each other.


Or perhaps they are actually separate 'faculties' and I 'choose' on principle to use reason as the guiding one.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576189 -

RationalEgo said:
Or perhaps they are actually separate 'faculties' and I 'choose' on principle to use reason as the guiding one.


What you call a separate faculty is arbitrary. Your brain is an interconnected whole, although there might be clusters of neurons that are more interconnected, than connected to the rest of your neural net. Such a cluster could be defined as a separate faculty, but the brain is really an interconnected whole.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576206 -

We have free will. If you have a properly functioning brain you can 'choose' thinking or feeling as your predominant mode of cognition. The difference being if you choose feeling, it will impair your thinking, but if you choose thinking, your feelings are not impaired, unless of course, you 'choose to suppress them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Middleman]
    #10576235 -


"Mysticism is the awakening to and cultivation of transcendental consciousness. It is unitive awareness. All forms of mystical wisdom are unitive, that is, non-dual. They contribute to a deeper appreciation of the mystery of being. This is a significant point of convergence among the religions themselves. To say that mystical consciousness is unitive, non-dual, or integrative, is simply to suggest that it points to an unusual state of awareness in which the person is united with God, Ultimate Reality, or for the Buddhists, the person achieves absolute realization, an inner process of awakening to non-dual consciousness in which a changeless wisdom is activated.

In mystical consciousness, the transcendent is touched, or is reached, and it touches, embraces us. Mystical consciousness means integration with it and to know it directly with certainty, although it defies description. It can be experienced but not comprehended with any clarity, indeed not comprehended at all! We know but we do not fully grasp the Divine mystery. Encountering the transcendent reality confers on us a degree of knowledge, the knowledge that it is, that it exists, and a kind of wisdom that has a practical utility for our spiritual life. Mystical experience, however, is fleeting, and yet its fruits are lasting, often permanent. Some of the effects include: wisdom, deep peace or tranquillity, joy, compassion, patience, gentleness, selflessness and simplicity." - A. Article


While ultimately I don't know if there is anything to this mystical shit and I doubt it, your above quote leaves the door open to saying and believing any amount of contradictory nonsense which is of course what we see here constantly.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576244 -

RationalEgo said:
We have free will. If you have a properly functioning brain you can 'choose' thinking or feeling as your predominant mode of cognition. The difference being if you choose feeling, it will impair your thinking, but if you choose thinking, your feelings are not impaired, unless of course, you 'choose to suppress them.


We are perceiving ourselves so differently that I can barely understand the meaning of what you are saying. Thoughts and feelings, those things cannot necessarily be separate in my mind. I have emotional thoughts, but not necessarily thoughts without emotion, or emotions without thoughts. Just like all particles have wave properties, all my thoughts have emotional properties.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576260 -

Thinking requires an active mind pursuing the truth, whilst just 'having thoughts' can be on the level of whim and emotion. Thinking is a different concept to just 'having thoughts'. Thinking requires reasoning, having thoughts requires no reason at all.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576291 -

RationalEgo said:
Thinking requires an active mind pursuing the truth, whilst just 'having thoughts' can be on the level of whim and emotion. Thinking is a different concept to just 'having thoughts'. Thinking requires reasoning, having thoughts requires no volition at all.


Obviously I am not generating thoughts at all without effort. It requires effort to generate any form of thought, so again I am having difficulties understanding your dualistic concept of reality.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576301 -

Random thoughts can float in and out without effort. Any meditater or sleeper can tell you.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: Zanthius]
    #10576304 -

Quote:
Obviously I am not generating thoughts at all without effort. All my thoughts require effort, so again I have difficulties understanding your dualistic concept of reality.


I don't think all thoughts require effort. I have many thoughts based on whim like 'I fancy a cup of coffee right now' that require no effort at all. But say I had a choice between tea and coffee, I would have to put some effort into thinking weighing up the pro's and con's of choosing either tea and coffee.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The mystical nature of the mystical [Re: RationalEgo]
    #10576345 -

RationalEgo said:
I don't think all thoughts require effort.


So you have like a bot inside of you, that you can set to generate thoughts automatically, without any of your own effort required. Interesting.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |  [ show all ]

Shop: MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck, Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags by Magic Bag   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Inducing mystical experiences
( 1 2 all )		 Metasyn 4,539 29 03/15/17 12:00 AM
by beforethedawn
* Mystical Experience?
( 1 2 all )		 Swami 3,471 25 07/15/03 07:25 PM
by Grav
* Reality vs. the mushroom
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 AbstractSoul 11,140 64 02/18/02 05:36 PM
by AbstractSoul
* If you think you will find enlightenment in a drug...
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Scarfmeister 8,803 65 06/19/03 05:14 PM
by Grav
* ESSAY:Psychedelic induced mystical experiences by Alan Watts tekramrepus 3,070 6 03/21/03 01:43 PM
by pattern
* Contact Experiment
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 ShroomismM 14,324 106 09/15/02 11:08 PM
by Swami
* Is mysticism as flawed as religion? mirror_saw 1,717 17 08/21/02 08:11 PM
by Sclorch
* Mysticism exsane 577 1 07/01/02 06:25 AM
by MarkostheGnostic

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
5,019 topic views. 0 members, 76 guests and 18 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.03 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 16 queries.