Originally posted by Mindship
In a sense, this is what meditation and the mystical literature are about: acquiring perspective, so to speak. If someone is ready for it, I imagine it would be quite beneficial.
Indeed. Which then makes me wonder, would that alter our senses (other than visual) and our abilities to respond or work with what we find to be in existence around us.
Originally posted by King Castle
anyways bn practicing singing a song in my head and speaking and writing at the same time.. its kinda screwy wonder if anyone here can honestly do it or if i am just well lets call it what it is stupid..no need for fancy polite words.. i hate two face hypocracy
How stupid you are isn't really relevant to the question. Doing two things at once is a classic example of something that seems easy but is really very hard. The typical example being: rub your belly and pat yourself on the head at the same time.
Also, it's "hypocrisy" not "hypocracy" you buffoon.
Originally posted by King Castle
but i can rub my belly and pat my head..
Simultaneously? For several seconds?
Most people can't do that.
Originally posted by King Castle
i wanna be able to say something in my mind and say something else out loud or type/write..
Well, I'm not the neuropsychologist but I suspect that thinking a word and speaking a word require work from the same parts of the brain (mainly Broca's area). If you try to do both at once the signals scramble.
On the other hand the arms are each controlled by their own section of the brain (the right motor cortex for the left arm and visa versa) so the task of rubbing your belly and patting your head would be somewhat easier, but still unnatural (think of how many tasks you do when the hands aren't working mutually). Considering you're a soldier you likely have very better motor control than the average person, which I'm sure would help.
manual dexterity exercises were no big deal i practice a lot as a kid with using both hands and tryin to write two different things..
same for the head patting and stomach rubbing..
even using my feet for writing..
i had fun at school as a lil kid.. even in high school like human anatomy and biology classes we would try certain exercises..
it just came naturally probably from playing sports alot and MA training as well...
but like i said i the mental exercises did screw me up big time lil mental fits trying to recite a song in mind while i write or say something else out loud. would come out as blahh,, like i had a stroke..
yeh, i know i am weird.
also i wasnt a soldier(mean face) i was a warrior massive difference
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Well, I'm not the neuropsychologist but I suspect that thinking a word and speaking a word require work from the same parts of the brain (mainly Broca's area). If you try to do both at once the signals scramble.
the problem would more likely be due to an inability to attend to both the thought and produced speach streams.
I forget, and can't be bothered to look it up, but iirc, Broca's is speach production and Wernickies is speach perception.
I'm not saying it is possible, but it is possible someone could think of another thing while saying a very well rehersed presentation... You would loose audio feedback from your voice though...
very intersting question...
Originally posted by King CastleGood meditation exercise, ie, separating speech from thought.
i wanna be able to say something in my mind and say something else out loud or type/write..
Originally posted by inimalistAnnie Hall, balcony scene. 😎
...but it is possible someone could think of another thing while saying a very well rehersed presentation...
Impromptu > well rehearsed.
hi. i'm an atheist. but when i was kid, i was trained to be a devout catholic. as i grew into my mid teens, i became agnostic. and now, as an adult, i consider myself an absolute atheist.
i don't believe in god. i don't believe in the devil, or heaven or hell. i don't believe in sin or souls or angels or spirits or ghosts or demons or an afterlife. the bible is fiction and we are all insignificant really. i don't believe anybody's watching us up there, down there, or over there.
the meaning of life is to make the most of it to pleasurable ends. we're born, we live, and then we die, and that's it. we'll all go into an eternal uncouncious sleep where there is no feeling, nor light or darkness, just a perfect oblivious stillness that'll go beyond the end of time and forevermore, where we eventually pulverize into particles that evetually disappear into nothingness.
Originally posted by FistOfThe North
hi. i'm an atheist. but when i was kid, i was trained to be a devout catholic. as i grew into my mid teens, i became agnostic. and now, as an adult, i consider myself an absolute atheist.i don't believe in god. i don't believe in the devil, or heaven or hell. i don't believe in sin or souls or angels or spirits or ghosts or demons or an afterlife. the bible is fiction and we are all insignificant really. i don't believe anybody's watching us up there, down there, or over there.
the meaning of life is to make the most of it to pleasurable ends. we're born, we live, and then we die, and that's it. we'll all go into an eternal uncouncious sleep where there is no feeling, nor light or darkness, just a perfect oblivious stillness that'll go beyond the end of time and forevermore, where we eventually pulverize into particles that evetually disappear into nothingness.
A better term for that view point in nihilism.
Originally posted by FistOfThe North
hi. i'm an atheist. but when i was kid, i was trained to be a devout catholic. as i grew into my mid teens, i became agnostic. and now, as an adult, i consider myself an absolute atheist.i don't believe in god. i don't believe in the devil, or heaven or hell. i don't believe in sin or souls or angels or spirits or ghosts or demons or an afterlife. the bible is fiction and we are all insignificant really. i don't believe anybody's watching us up there, down there, or over there.
the meaning of life is to make the most of it to pleasurable ends. we're born, we live, and then we die, and that's it. we'll all go into an eternal uncouncious sleep where there is no feeling, nor light or darkness, just a perfect oblivious stillness that'll go beyond the end of time and forevermore, where we eventually pulverize into particles that evetually disappear into nothingness.
Interesting view and less morbid than some atheists I've spoken to.
I do have one problem here -
How the hell can a particle disappear into nothingness?
Originally posted by lil bitchinessVirtual particles pop in and out of "nothingness" (the spacetime foam) all the time. It happens at the Planck scale so quickly, laws of conservation aren't violated.
Interesting view and less morbid than some atheists I've spoken to.I do have one problem here -
How the hell can a particle disappear into nothingness?
I was raised as a non-practicng catholic. I was baptized and took a first comunion, pretty much the only two times I went to church other than weddings and seventh day masses for the dead.
As such I had never given much deep thought to the existence of god until my early teens, I remember praying as a small child when my mom taught me how to do it or it was expected of me in a situation or another, but I diont even recall if i believed in it or not, probably because god is too much of an abstraction for a 5 yo. But when I was 13 (I had always had an interest in mithology) it ocurred to me that what we referred to as greek mythology with their multiple fictional gods was simply a dead religion. One that died when there was no one left to believe in it. I then realized that christianity would innevitably follow the same path and that nothing set it or any other religion apart from dead myths. People only believe in it because they are educated to do so (until they dont anymore), not because its dogmas can be experienced, demonstrated or concluded in any manner, just like the existence of the greek gods couldn't and people thus referred to it as myths. It was quite an epiphany for me at the time.
The fact that the physical appearences of gods in artistic portrayals reflected the humans worshipping them (and sometimes animals they knew and were important to them) also cemented my disbelief in god as a culturally delimited construct.
Regarding the supposed leap of faith atheists are supposed to take, i've since felt that desbelief is a default condition regarding everything. Until you see or are somehow convinced of the existence of something you don't believe in it by default. Because no convincing (to me) argument can be made for the existence of god and the concept of god can be tracked to its historical roost as an invention that was not always present and isn't a self-evident truth or a construct every culture or person arrives at necessarilly, Icant see any god reason to believ in it.
I do, however, think that myths (broad meaning) and rituals are extremelly important for societies and that they do not necessarilly require appeals to anything transcending the material universe. As a nature worshipping atheist I consider myself extremlly spiritualized even if I don't believe in the existence of the spirit as a metaphysical entity of any kind.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Interesting view and less morbid than some atheists I've spoken to.I do have one problem here -
How the hell can a particle disappear into nothingness?
I don't see why that idea is so hard. I mean if you had no preconceived ideas about what the world there's no reason you'd favour one idea over the other.
Originally posted by Mindship
Virtual particles pop in and out of "nothingness" (the spacetime foam) all the time. It happens at the Planck scale so quickly, laws of conservation aren't violated.
But we're not made of virtual particles.
It is expected that real subatomic particles have half-lives (albeit on the order of billions or trillions of years) but I don't think anyone has ever seen one decay. They don't become nothing, of course, a burst of energy and neutrinos I think.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
But we're not made of virtual particles.It is expected that real subatomic particles have half-lives (albeit on the order of billions or trillions of years) but I don't think anyone has ever seen one decay. They don't become nothing, of course, a burst of energy and neutrinos I think.
Well that's much better explanation and more likely outcome.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't see why that idea is so hard. I mean if you had no preconceived ideas about what the world there's no reason you'd favour one idea over the other.
Originally posted by Mindship
Some peoples' brains, I suspect, are made of virtual particles.
I LOL'd.