Topic:Brain Vs Conscious Mind
Brain Vs Conscious Mind
For a while i've a theory that sometimes the brain can make discisions independantly of the conscious mind which we would generally recognise as our discision maker.
i.e. we decide to go down to the shop for milk; conscious mind
...but in the case say where something might happen, we might do something which our conscious mind might think wrong but turn out to be for the best, like people say God works in mysterious ways, maybe its just a part of the brain at work that we don't understand yet.
Say like through experience or whatever one's brain works out which is good and what is bad, say a very general example;
your hanging out with your friends and they decide to go drinking and say your not training, having a break or whatever and your saying to yourself " yeah lets go, have a good time" i.e. the conscious mind is saying this.
....while the brain, the part of our body some people claim we only ever use like 1% of, goes through this thought process saying "if you go drinking now you might establish a habbit, that in future might upset your training, your taking it seriously, you'd be far better going home, getting something good to eat and getting an early night, that way you'll be better for training soon"
...but this thought never actually passes through the conscious mind. It is formed and stays in the brain, the 99% of which some people think is not in use.
And so as the brain knows that to you as a person training is far more important than some wee night out, but that your conscious mind will would, if it considered this thought, simply ignore it.
So the brain imposes an action on your body that prevents you from say going on this night out. It say, decides to make you feel tired even though you got a good nights sleep the previous night, or more extreme, if it deduced that if was crucial that you didn't go on this night out, it might impose a minor kind of sickness on you so that even if you did go out you would not enjoy it, thus hampering all efforts to go out even if the conscious mind was really up for it cause maybe you were meeting some girl or something.
The ultimate discision was made by the brain that deduced that from the experiences it had with you up to this point, long term training and its rewards are far more important to you than some night out and a once off with some girl. And it was also aware that consciously you would not see things this way but just think of the short term (i.e. the girl probably!); so it imposed a sickness and thus did what was best for you even if it was against your own will and gave you something you were pretty pissed off about!
Thus the brain and conscious mind are like two different entities that deduce the best possible situation for yourself and thus control the body this way.
So maybe were not as in control of ourselves as we might have thought and maybe there is an individual path laid out for us and if we veer off of it our brain will bring us back to it, even if it means causing us some relatively short term trouble.
Lets take an example of one of my heros and maybe one of the greatest sports men ever to walk the planet; Lance Armstrong, six time Tour De France Champion.
Initialy Lance was a great athelete, excellent cyclist. And then he got three types of cancer and was reduced to a shell of a human being.
I read the biography and what he described he went through sounded nothing short of utter hell.
Such an athelete one day and the next not being able to move from bed or eat and being in that state for months and months.
But lets not forget what BC Forbes said, and I quote
"History has demonstrated that usually the most notable champions overcame the most heartbreaking obsticles before they triumphed.
They won because they refused to become refused to become discouraged by their defeats"
Maybe Lance Armstrong would have gone on to become a great champion regardless, even if he didn't go through such a terrible ordeal,
or would he?
He was a very healthy individual before he got cancer, no smoking, the occasional drink/coffee whatever. Nothing to suggest he would ever become the victim of such a terrible disease, and at such a young age.
But was it possible that deep in his brain, it knew that, or rather his brain knew that he had to succumb to something so heartbreaking and discouraging for him to spring back and reach his maximum potential? And so perhaps it weakend the bodies defenses to the extent where Lance would become infected, all in the knowedge that he had the potential to overcome the disease and thus make him better than ever.
Of course we would not everyday hear of a story of something so harrowing happening to someone on their rise to greatness..
.. but can you ever recall a situation at any point in your life where something bad happened to you but caused you to spring forward to something better?
Or something bad or even harrowing which happend which may have caused you to change the course of your life or perhaps bring your life back onto the course for which perhaps you deeply yearned for but where something was holding you back?
As a last example we think of Steven Hawking. He did not particularly excel academically up to almost exactly the point he commenced his study of astrology at Cambridge, at almost exactly the same time he developed his neurological disorder. And today he is considered perhaps one of the greatest minds of our time.
But would this have been the case if this terrible disorder had not manifested itself?
Please feel free to contribute,
Cheers.
For a while i've a theory that sometimes the brain can make discisions independantly of the conscious mind which we would generally recognise as our discision maker.
i.e. we decide to go down to the shop for milk; conscious mind
...but in the case say where something might happen, we might do something which our conscious mind might think wrong but turn out to be for the best, like people say God works in mysterious ways, maybe its just a part of the brain at work that we don't understand yet.
Say like through experience or whatever one's brain works out which is good and what is bad, say a very general example;
your hanging out with your friends and they decide to go drinking and say your not training, having a break or whatever and your saying to yourself " yeah lets go, have a good time" i.e. the conscious mind is saying this.
....while the brain, the part of our body some people claim we only ever use like 1% of, goes through this thought process saying "if you go drinking now you might establish a habbit, that in future might upset your training, your taking it seriously, you'd be far better going home, getting something good to eat and getting an early night, that way you'll be better for training soon"
...but this thought never actually passes through the conscious mind. It is formed and stays in the brain, the 99% of which some people think is not in use.
And so as the brain knows that to you as a person training is far more important than some wee night out, but that your conscious mind will would, if it considered this thought, simply ignore it.
So the brain imposes an action on your body that prevents you from say going on this night out. It say, decides to make you feel tired even though you got a good nights sleep the previous night, or more extreme, if it deduced that if was crucial that you didn't go on this night out, it might impose a minor kind of sickness on you so that even if you did go out you would not enjoy it, thus hampering all efforts to go out even if the conscious mind was really up for it cause maybe you were meeting some girl or something.
The ultimate discision was made by the brain that deduced that from the experiences it had with you up to this point, long term training and its rewards are far more important to you than some night out and a once off with some girl. And it was also aware that consciously you would not see things this way but just think of the short term (i.e. the girl probably!); so it imposed a sickness and thus did what was best for you even if it was against your own will and gave you something you were pretty pissed off about!
Thus the brain and conscious mind are like two different entities that deduce the best possible situation for yourself and thus control the body this way.
So maybe were not as in control of ourselves as we might have thought and maybe there is an individual path laid out for us and if we veer off of it our brain will bring us back to it, even if it means causing us some relatively short term trouble.
Lets take an example of one of my heros and maybe one of the greatest sports men ever to walk the planet; Lance Armstrong, six time Tour De France Champion.
Initialy Lance was a great athelete, excellent cyclist. And then he got three types of cancer and was reduced to a shell of a human being.
I read the biography and what he described he went through sounded nothing short of utter hell.
Such an athelete one day and the next not being able to move from bed or eat and being in that state for months and months.
But lets not forget what BC Forbes said, and I quote
"History has demonstrated that usually the most notable champions overcame the most heartbreaking obsticles before they triumphed.
They won because they refused to become refused to become discouraged by their defeats"
Maybe Lance Armstrong would have gone on to become a great champion regardless, even if he didn't go through such a terrible ordeal,
or would he?
He was a very healthy individual before he got cancer, no smoking, the occasional drink/coffee whatever. Nothing to suggest he would ever become the victim of such a terrible disease, and at such a young age.
But was it possible that deep in his brain, it knew that, or rather his brain knew that he had to succumb to something so heartbreaking and discouraging for him to spring back and reach his maximum potential? And so perhaps it weakend the bodies defenses to the extent where Lance would become infected, all in the knowedge that he had the potential to overcome the disease and thus make him better than ever.
Of course we would not everyday hear of a story of something so harrowing happening to someone on their rise to greatness..
.. but can you ever recall a situation at any point in your life where something bad happened to you but caused you to spring forward to something better?
Or something bad or even harrowing which happend which may have caused you to change the course of your life or perhaps bring your life back onto the course for which perhaps you deeply yearned for but where something was holding you back?
As a last example we think of Steven Hawking. He did not particularly excel academically up to almost exactly the point he commenced his study of astrology at Cambridge, at almost exactly the same time he developed his neurological disorder. And today he is considered perhaps one of the greatest minds of our time.
But would this have been the case if this terrible disorder had not manifested itself?
Please feel free to contribute,
Cheers.
dark shows you the light
I think another angle is that the conscious operates after the sense information has been processed. The light information enters through the eyes (and skin) and is processed ...the processing compares to all passed experiences, our beliefs and thoughts on all of them (among other things) and then we interpret it and see a tree or a beautiful woman etc...
The thing is we don't see the tree or woman without the information being filtered through our beliefs, programming and past experiences... the thought then comes but it is not really a conscious thought of our own, just a conscious thought we are aware of..
Pick up the Bible or the Gita and you cannot study it without the info passing through your subconscious mind and comparing to all your programmed beliefs (much of which is programmed in before 7 years old), past related experiences etc you will find what you are looking for... truth or bullshit (even if you don't know that is what you are looking for...)
Now this is to a degree, although a large one, we can have no experience, no sense info enter our body and mind, without judgment and filters... we think we think for oursleves but we can only do that if we look at our programming, become aware of it, choose what programming serves and what we want to keep, load the programming we want, and change what doesn't serve or be conscious enought o be aware of it when it kicks in..
Don't think thats true - try to respond with conscious thought to the question and your answer for a week when people say "hows it going?" good luck...
92%of brain function is subconscious...programs run the subconscious -whats your programming...
memetics is worth looking into on this one in my opinion..
you talk in a sense of dark showing you the light...
tell me, can you recognize anything without recognizing its relative polar opposite?
How can you see a woman and think she is beautiful without have a comparison to what is not beautiful? If you only ever felt 20 degrees you would have no concept of hot and cold... simply not possible to have an experience without relative opposites. you only know hot because it is hotter than... or cold cause it is colder than...
To recognize one you must recognize the other (all really just a sliding scale - relativity)
It is learning from the "dark" and pain that moves us into the light...
bang your head against the wall - it hurts... got a choice, bang some more or stop... simple concept yet we all do it daily it seems... we do the same thing with the same painful result instead of going... you know what - hitting my head against the wall hurts...
Know why it is so hard to stop??? cause we are not operating out of conscious awareness and not truly thinking for self. Its the programs, beliefs and -perceptions- of past experiences that our thinking and sense input goes through... unless the programs are looked at we cannot have freedom of choice (some may call self control)
Its is our beliefs in our being right that makes others wrong (to us)... Christians kill Muslims and Muslims kill Christians...
The Nazi's believed they were good and right they were not evil in their minds - but in creating I am right they created you are wrong and killed mass loads of people. Their "good" created "evil" (Jews etc)...
you cannot see a woman and think she is beautiful without comparing to others being ugly or less beautiful...
(this is not all meant to be black and white but concepts to express a point - relative you see :P)
Would some of the greats be great without adversity and pain??? who knows - generally the greats have learned from it and have often thanked it. Armstrong (if I recall) said cancer was the best thing that ever happened to him)
It is not what is but how we see it and we can only see it clearly when we are conscious and choose how to see it... often there is lots of programmed beliefs and past experience perceptions (change the perception and filters change for how you experience life)...
example - fall in love - get heart broken
in the subconscious (could also be in conscious) love and pain are linked. You cannot experience a new relationship without the subconscious (if not also conscious) comparing to all past relationships... if you have pain in the past that is still stored or "hard wired" (dentrites, neronets etc) then you will experience love through the filters connected with pain... change the perception and judgment of the past experience = change the hardwiring and your perception ina relationship changes.
put on different glasses and the whole world changes colour...and maybe a lot more.
at least that is part of my deluded perception which I would like to think comes from conscious thought
(studies on brain washing and memetics suggest that only 2% of the worlds population have access to their own brains)
No riddle me this - how conscious are you when you get upset or angry? You are simply operating out of past programming, experience, beliefs...
Why would it matter if someone hasd another opinion? cause the ego holds onto its identity of beliefs as though it was its life..
I think another angle is that the conscious operates after the sense information has been processed. The light information enters through the eyes (and skin) and is processed ...the processing compares to all passed experiences, our beliefs and thoughts on all of them (among other things) and then we interpret it and see a tree or a beautiful woman etc...
The thing is we don't see the tree or woman without the information being filtered through our beliefs, programming and past experiences... the thought then comes but it is not really a conscious thought of our own, just a conscious thought we are aware of..
Pick up the Bible or the Gita and you cannot study it without the info passing through your subconscious mind and comparing to all your programmed beliefs (much of which is programmed in before 7 years old), past related experiences etc you will find what you are looking for... truth or bullshit (even if you don't know that is what you are looking for...)
Now this is to a degree, although a large one, we can have no experience, no sense info enter our body and mind, without judgment and filters... we think we think for oursleves but we can only do that if we look at our programming, become aware of it, choose what programming serves and what we want to keep, load the programming we want, and change what doesn't serve or be conscious enought o be aware of it when it kicks in..
Don't think thats true - try to respond with conscious thought to the question and your answer for a week when people say "hows it going?" good luck...
92%of brain function is subconscious...programs run the subconscious -whats your programming...
memetics is worth looking into on this one in my opinion..
you talk in a sense of dark showing you the light...
tell me, can you recognize anything without recognizing its relative polar opposite?
How can you see a woman and think she is beautiful without have a comparison to what is not beautiful? If you only ever felt 20 degrees you would have no concept of hot and cold... simply not possible to have an experience without relative opposites. you only know hot because it is hotter than... or cold cause it is colder than...
To recognize one you must recognize the other (all really just a sliding scale - relativity)
It is learning from the "dark" and pain that moves us into the light...
bang your head against the wall - it hurts... got a choice, bang some more or stop... simple concept yet we all do it daily it seems... we do the same thing with the same painful result instead of going... you know what - hitting my head against the wall hurts...
Know why it is so hard to stop??? cause we are not operating out of conscious awareness and not truly thinking for self. Its the programs, beliefs and -perceptions- of past experiences that our thinking and sense input goes through... unless the programs are looked at we cannot have freedom of choice (some may call self control)
Its is our beliefs in our being right that makes others wrong (to us)... Christians kill Muslims and Muslims kill Christians...
The Nazi's believed they were good and right they were not evil in their minds - but in creating I am right they created you are wrong and killed mass loads of people. Their "good" created "evil" (Jews etc)...
you cannot see a woman and think she is beautiful without comparing to others being ugly or less beautiful...
(this is not all meant to be black and white but concepts to express a point - relative you see :P)
Would some of the greats be great without adversity and pain??? who knows - generally the greats have learned from it and have often thanked it. Armstrong (if I recall) said cancer was the best thing that ever happened to him)
It is not what is but how we see it and we can only see it clearly when we are conscious and choose how to see it... often there is lots of programmed beliefs and past experience perceptions (change the perception and filters change for how you experience life)...
example - fall in love - get heart broken
in the subconscious (could also be in conscious) love and pain are linked. You cannot experience a new relationship without the subconscious (if not also conscious) comparing to all past relationships... if you have pain in the past that is still stored or "hard wired" (dentrites, neronets etc) then you will experience love through the filters connected with pain... change the perception and judgment of the past experience = change the hardwiring and your perception ina relationship changes.
put on different glasses and the whole world changes colour...and maybe a lot more.
at least that is part of my deluded perception which I would like to think comes from conscious thought
(studies on brain washing and memetics suggest that only 2% of the worlds population have access to their own brains)
No riddle me this - how conscious are you when you get upset or angry? You are simply operating out of past programming, experience, beliefs...
Why would it matter if someone hasd another opinion? cause the ego holds onto its identity of beliefs as though it was its life..
Hi Mark L.
Yes. It finally clicked. I understood the concept of programming that you were explaining but could not understand how it actually applied to the mental thought/subconscious thought process.
So this programming is developed through past experience?
You are of the belief that these programs are something we're not born with as such, but rather they develop with experience?
So say for example, I dunno, for me personally, one way that I see that this programming may apply, particularly when I was younger and in school, say if I had an evening of homework that I needed to do but was sat in front of the telly and didn't have the discipline to forgo watching television to do my homework, what I would find myself doing would be to start flicking through all the channels. If I came across a program that I liked, in order to dissuade myself from watching, I would flick back and forth between this and another channel until my interest in the initial program had waned, thus the program or television would no longer hold sufficient interest for me to stay watching, I would abandon that and go do my homework.
So to summarize what I see as the mental program that was at work; a comfortable situation that I needed to remove myself from but one in which it was difficult to do so, I would ensure that the pleasantness of that situation or the interest I held in it, that it would diminish by means similar to above, but obviously the means themselves varying greatly, and thus it would make that situation a lot easier to abandon and leave behind.
The television example is just one of so many that I can think of that apply/have applied to me in relation to this program
i.e. creating an uncomfortable current situation thus encouraging myself into a subsequently more progressive and productive one.
In other words, this particular mental program, although put to use for a relatively small purpose in the aforementioned example, has been used in a similar way to play a part in myself extricating myself from other situations, which have then gone on to allow me to put myself in more progressive situations, far more beneficial than the former.
So for the Lance Armstrong example, would you be of the opinion that it was a mental program at work?
That somehow, perhaps through his own past experience, his subconscious had deduced that when he was put in a situation that may threaten his well being, that it would cause him to perhaps take stock of his situation and upon recovery he would rededicate himself, but on a much more disciplined level.
In his own words, and as you pointed out, Armstrong felt that without having suffered through cancer, he would not have won the Tour De France even once.
Is it possible that this subconscious mental programs could be so extreme?
Consciously, even if he was aware of the benefits – so to speak – I don't think Armstrong would ever have wished three forms of cancer upon himself.
Is it possible that this subconscious program allowed his body to be subjected to the sickness, bring him back from the brink, a brink that by all medical standards he shouldn't have been brought back from, and therefore put him in a position or situation that would allow him to achieve his maximum potential?
My question before about these programs being developed though past experience?
Some people believe in pre-destiny or “everything happens for a reason”, as some people say.
Oftentimes, these things don't occur outside of us as such, but rather they're self inflicted.
Perhaps when I was young and sat in front of the telly when I should have been studying for my exam the next day, maybe at the time I thought it was a blessing that there was nothing of interest on the telly that evening, it was God intervening – I'm aware of how comical this sounds, as well as the fact that this is a very trivial example compared to the gravity of the results of the actions of such a program in a more serious situation (Lance Armstrong for example) – "thank God the television programs that evening were boring else I would have stayed watching, not studied, and ended up failing that crucial exam."
It wasn't God intervening, or some predestined occurrence, it was our own mind, the subconscious convincing/deceiving the conscious, albeit in a very round about way, to create a “mess” of the current situation, thus encouraging us out of it, into a better more productive situation for us.
Could these programs be so extreme?
I'd be interested to hear your opinion?
Can you or anyone think of an example where their programming may have had a drastic, as such, affect on them in order to dissuade them out of a situation or particular frame of mind, into a more productive one?
************************************
On a slightly separate subject.
Also, our being pushed or pulled into or away from certain situations, perhaps there are some external factors?
Astrology is something I must look into further – there was a thread in Off-topic before, think it got erased or something?
I know pretty much nothing about it save for my own theory.
If the smallest particle known to man, the electron, has an actual gravitational pull on other objects around it, 10x-8 Newtons or something, despite that fact that the force is negligible – the stars, despite the fact there millions and millions of miles away and their gravitational force is negligable, given the quantity of them and their specific arrangement and orders in their constillations, they may have an affect on us, depending on their position, our position - their affect beginning at the time of our birth/conception and affecting us as they move with time/as we grow with time? Or perhaps more specifically an affect on our minds? Is the brain or thoughts themselves affected in some unknown, as yet unscientifically proven way, by gravity, the gravitational push/pull affected of the millions of constellations of stars?
But I'm not really expected a reply on that one, just thought I'd share my own far out theory.
Yes. It finally clicked. I understood the concept of programming that you were explaining but could not understand how it actually applied to the mental thought/subconscious thought process.
So this programming is developed through past experience?
You are of the belief that these programs are something we're not born with as such, but rather they develop with experience?
So say for example, I dunno, for me personally, one way that I see that this programming may apply, particularly when I was younger and in school, say if I had an evening of homework that I needed to do but was sat in front of the telly and didn't have the discipline to forgo watching television to do my homework, what I would find myself doing would be to start flicking through all the channels. If I came across a program that I liked, in order to dissuade myself from watching, I would flick back and forth between this and another channel until my interest in the initial program had waned, thus the program or television would no longer hold sufficient interest for me to stay watching, I would abandon that and go do my homework.
So to summarize what I see as the mental program that was at work; a comfortable situation that I needed to remove myself from but one in which it was difficult to do so, I would ensure that the pleasantness of that situation or the interest I held in it, that it would diminish by means similar to above, but obviously the means themselves varying greatly, and thus it would make that situation a lot easier to abandon and leave behind.
The television example is just one of so many that I can think of that apply/have applied to me in relation to this program
i.e. creating an uncomfortable current situation thus encouraging myself into a subsequently more progressive and productive one.
In other words, this particular mental program, although put to use for a relatively small purpose in the aforementioned example, has been used in a similar way to play a part in myself extricating myself from other situations, which have then gone on to allow me to put myself in more progressive situations, far more beneficial than the former.
So for the Lance Armstrong example, would you be of the opinion that it was a mental program at work?
That somehow, perhaps through his own past experience, his subconscious had deduced that when he was put in a situation that may threaten his well being, that it would cause him to perhaps take stock of his situation and upon recovery he would rededicate himself, but on a much more disciplined level.
In his own words, and as you pointed out, Armstrong felt that without having suffered through cancer, he would not have won the Tour De France even once.
Is it possible that this subconscious mental programs could be so extreme?
Consciously, even if he was aware of the benefits – so to speak – I don't think Armstrong would ever have wished three forms of cancer upon himself.
Is it possible that this subconscious program allowed his body to be subjected to the sickness, bring him back from the brink, a brink that by all medical standards he shouldn't have been brought back from, and therefore put him in a position or situation that would allow him to achieve his maximum potential?
My question before about these programs being developed though past experience?
Some people believe in pre-destiny or “everything happens for a reason”, as some people say.
Oftentimes, these things don't occur outside of us as such, but rather they're self inflicted.
Perhaps when I was young and sat in front of the telly when I should have been studying for my exam the next day, maybe at the time I thought it was a blessing that there was nothing of interest on the telly that evening, it was God intervening – I'm aware of how comical this sounds, as well as the fact that this is a very trivial example compared to the gravity of the results of the actions of such a program in a more serious situation (Lance Armstrong for example) – "thank God the television programs that evening were boring else I would have stayed watching, not studied, and ended up failing that crucial exam."
It wasn't God intervening, or some predestined occurrence, it was our own mind, the subconscious convincing/deceiving the conscious, albeit in a very round about way, to create a “mess” of the current situation, thus encouraging us out of it, into a better more productive situation for us.
Could these programs be so extreme?
I'd be interested to hear your opinion?
Can you or anyone think of an example where their programming may have had a drastic, as such, affect on them in order to dissuade them out of a situation or particular frame of mind, into a more productive one?
************************************
On a slightly separate subject.
Also, our being pushed or pulled into or away from certain situations, perhaps there are some external factors?
Astrology is something I must look into further – there was a thread in Off-topic before, think it got erased or something?
I know pretty much nothing about it save for my own theory.
If the smallest particle known to man, the electron, has an actual gravitational pull on other objects around it, 10x-8 Newtons or something, despite that fact that the force is negligible – the stars, despite the fact there millions and millions of miles away and their gravitational force is negligable, given the quantity of them and their specific arrangement and orders in their constillations, they may have an affect on us, depending on their position, our position - their affect beginning at the time of our birth/conception and affecting us as they move with time/as we grow with time? Or perhaps more specifically an affect on our minds? Is the brain or thoughts themselves affected in some unknown, as yet unscientifically proven way, by gravity, the gravitational push/pull affected of the millions of constellations of stars?
But I'm not really expected a reply on that one, just thought I'd share my own far out theory.
Marco I once read a book by Steven Hawkins about quantom physics and you will be amazed at the fact he states and believes in the deifferent dimensions in the universe and that although not proven goes in to a lot about gravitational pulls and the stars. You would love the book. I felt like blacking out when I was reading it....I don't believe in many things but the way he describes it is unbelievable and makes absoloute sense.
genotype and phenotype play a big part.
The light information enters through the eyes (and skin) and is processed ...the processing compares to all passed experiences, our beliefs and thoughts on all of them (among other things) and then we interpret it and see a tree or a beautiful woman etc...
Does this mean we are receiving information at the speed of light?
I think a specific part on the eye : on the back.
IMO a specific connection to the brain, and different than others. Optic / Brain connection.
Dammit Jim!
I'm not a brain surgeon.
The light information enters through the eyes (and skin) and is processed ...the processing compares to all passed experiences, our beliefs and thoughts on all of them (among other things) and then we interpret it and see a tree or a beautiful woman etc...
Does this mean we are receiving information at the speed of light?
I think a specific part on the eye : on the back.
IMO a specific connection to the brain, and different than others. Optic / Brain connection.
Dammit Jim!
I'm not a brain surgeon.
Hey mattyb, what was the title of that book?
There's a fair few by Hawking
There's a fair few by Hawking
Hi,
A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes.
Your probably much smarter than me and will understand most of it unlike me. I was reading paragraphs like 3 times over :-( absoloutly amazing though!
A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes.
Your probably much smarter than me and will understand most of it unlike me. I was reading paragraphs like 3 times over :-( absoloutly amazing though!
Marco - you bring up some interesting thoughts and ideas... a subject area that fascinates me... I hope to have some time soon to read more closely and discuss with you (and anyone interested).
I think a huge part are programs based on beliefs, experiences and what was modeled for us by parents, siblings, teachers etc... HUGE influence from TV, media, songs etc... music/lyrics have the ability to go more deeply into the subconscious as they are linking the left and right hemispheres of the brain which allows the contents to go deep... there is little difference between propaganda and advertising imo.
I do not have a "stance" on pre-destiny vs free choice per say... It does seem to me that in life true opposites don't seem to exist in this world and universe. I am curious as to how both might hold truth.
A term I like is "opposames"... things that seem opposite but aren't really. I look at creation and evolution this way as well as democrat and republican... The later - illusion of choice to keep us thinking we are free where the main agendas of those in power happen regardless of who is "voted in by the public". The former, creation/evolution, I think there maybe a creative force of such that may have created through a form of evolution...
Some theories suggest multiple dimensions/realities... and many theories, from spiritual teachings to quantum physics talk about the relativity of time and suggest time to be somewhat of an illusion. IF time doesn't really exist (a possible explanation of eternity) and all is now then in a way that would be pre-destiny, not in you have a chosen path but that it is already done so to speak... however what is freedom of choice and does it exist? One of my teachers suggests the possibility that freedom of choice is not in choosing your life but choosing how to experience what you do. I play with the idea that if all time is now and if there are alternate possibilities existing simultaneously (hard thing for my mind/ego to grasp - though some experiences suggest there is some truth in it) then maybe in choosing your perception of reality takes you on an almost choose your own adventure. All possibilities (all that can exist for me) are there and therefor in a sense pre-destined yet my choice in experiencing them moves me along one of many many possible paths...
Ideas I toy with anyway...
There are interesting studies that suggest things aren't quite as we see them..
1 example - showing pictures to subjects with positive and negative emotional content and recording body/brain reactions... -the reactions came BEFORE the pics came up>>
2nd example
open brain experiments...
subject puts hand in cold water - automatic reaction of body is to pull out and then the brain fires..
I'll make up the times here...
hand goes in, at 1 second the hand pulls out and at 2 seconds the brain fires...
Now here is the crazy bit... when they interrupted the signal to the brain at 1.5 seconds the hand did not pull out at 1 second...
Try to swallow that...
Hand goes in, at one second pulls out but doesn't pull out at 2 seconds if at 1.5 seconds the connections interrupted...
Certainly food for thought for me anyway....
Hope to read more closely soon...
I think a huge part are programs based on beliefs, experiences and what was modeled for us by parents, siblings, teachers etc... HUGE influence from TV, media, songs etc... music/lyrics have the ability to go more deeply into the subconscious as they are linking the left and right hemispheres of the brain which allows the contents to go deep... there is little difference between propaganda and advertising imo.
I do not have a "stance" on pre-destiny vs free choice per say... It does seem to me that in life true opposites don't seem to exist in this world and universe. I am curious as to how both might hold truth.
A term I like is "opposames"... things that seem opposite but aren't really. I look at creation and evolution this way as well as democrat and republican... The later - illusion of choice to keep us thinking we are free where the main agendas of those in power happen regardless of who is "voted in by the public". The former, creation/evolution, I think there maybe a creative force of such that may have created through a form of evolution...
Some theories suggest multiple dimensions/realities... and many theories, from spiritual teachings to quantum physics talk about the relativity of time and suggest time to be somewhat of an illusion. IF time doesn't really exist (a possible explanation of eternity) and all is now then in a way that would be pre-destiny, not in you have a chosen path but that it is already done so to speak... however what is freedom of choice and does it exist? One of my teachers suggests the possibility that freedom of choice is not in choosing your life but choosing how to experience what you do. I play with the idea that if all time is now and if there are alternate possibilities existing simultaneously (hard thing for my mind/ego to grasp - though some experiences suggest there is some truth in it) then maybe in choosing your perception of reality takes you on an almost choose your own adventure. All possibilities (all that can exist for me) are there and therefor in a sense pre-destined yet my choice in experiencing them moves me along one of many many possible paths...
Ideas I toy with anyway...
There are interesting studies that suggest things aren't quite as we see them..
1 example - showing pictures to subjects with positive and negative emotional content and recording body/brain reactions... -the reactions came BEFORE the pics came up>>
2nd example
open brain experiments...
subject puts hand in cold water - automatic reaction of body is to pull out and then the brain fires..
I'll make up the times here...
hand goes in, at 1 second the hand pulls out and at 2 seconds the brain fires...
Now here is the crazy bit... when they interrupted the signal to the brain at 1.5 seconds the hand did not pull out at 1 second...
Try to swallow that...
Hand goes in, at one second pulls out but doesn't pull out at 2 seconds if at 1.5 seconds the connections interrupted...
Certainly food for thought for me anyway....
Hope to read more closely soon...
Just to give my brain an apology for not putting anything in to writing as good as above. What I TRULY believe in and think is the turth is part of your post Mark. Sorry to QUOTE but....
Some theories suggest multiple dimensions/realities... and many theories, from spiritual teachings to quantum physics talk about the relativity of time and suggest time to be somewhat of an illusion. IF time doesn't really exist (a possible explanation of eternity) and all is now then in a way that would be pre-destiny, not in you have a chosen path but that it is already done so to speak... however what is freedom of choice and does it exist? One of my teachers suggests the possibility that freedom of choice is not in choosing your life but choosing how to experience what you do. I play with the idea that if all time is now and if there are alternate possibilities existing simultaneously (hard thing for my mind/ego to grasp - though some experiences suggest there is some truth in it) then maybe in choosing your perception of reality takes you on an almost choose your own adventure. All possibilities (all that can exist for me) are there and therefor in a sense pre-destined yet my choice in experiencing them moves me along one of many many possible paths...
*END QUOUTE*
Which the above is why i believe in reincarnation. Now maybe some people will fire away at me now and say they dont relate. But think about the two things together.
Some theories suggest multiple dimensions/realities... and many theories, from spiritual teachings to quantum physics talk about the relativity of time and suggest time to be somewhat of an illusion. IF time doesn't really exist (a possible explanation of eternity) and all is now then in a way that would be pre-destiny, not in you have a chosen path but that it is already done so to speak... however what is freedom of choice and does it exist? One of my teachers suggests the possibility that freedom of choice is not in choosing your life but choosing how to experience what you do. I play with the idea that if all time is now and if there are alternate possibilities existing simultaneously (hard thing for my mind/ego to grasp - though some experiences suggest there is some truth in it) then maybe in choosing your perception of reality takes you on an almost choose your own adventure. All possibilities (all that can exist for me) are there and therefor in a sense pre-destined yet my choice in experiencing them moves me along one of many many possible paths...
*END QUOUTE*
Which the above is why i believe in reincarnation. Now maybe some people will fire away at me now and say they dont relate. But think about the two things together.
something here to think about and i konw it may be slightly off topic but maybe you guys could give an opinion on this. Do you think its a possibility or absoloutly obsurd?
I watched a TV documentary about Stephen Hawking recently on BBC TV.
Similarities were drawn, as is often the case, between the work of Hawking and Galileo, both being renown physicists.
The program pointed out that Stephen Hawking and Galileo Galilee have a date in common. The date is 8th January. In Galileo’s case 1642 and in Stephen’s case 1942.
The coincidence is that Galileo Galilee died on 8th January 1642 and Stephen Hawking was born on 8th January 1942, 300 years to the day after Galileo died.
Galileo was much troubled for his beliefs, amongst others, that the earth rotated around the sun, he was persecuted, threatened with death and after apologising for his erroneous ways was eventually allowed to spend the end of his days under house arrest.
After that lot, if Galileo had decided to reincarnate, I bet he would have chosen to return as someone who did not appear to be quite such a threat.
Hey Presto!
I watched a TV documentary about Stephen Hawking recently on BBC TV.
Similarities were drawn, as is often the case, between the work of Hawking and Galileo, both being renown physicists.
The program pointed out that Stephen Hawking and Galileo Galilee have a date in common. The date is 8th January. In Galileo’s case 1642 and in Stephen’s case 1942.
The coincidence is that Galileo Galilee died on 8th January 1642 and Stephen Hawking was born on 8th January 1942, 300 years to the day after Galileo died.
Galileo was much troubled for his beliefs, amongst others, that the earth rotated around the sun, he was persecuted, threatened with death and after apologising for his erroneous ways was eventually allowed to spend the end of his days under house arrest.
After that lot, if Galileo had decided to reincarnate, I bet he would have chosen to return as someone who did not appear to be quite such a threat.
Hey Presto!
And again...i mentioned 300 years BUT with Stephen Hawkings theories on time you could read in to that what you like!!! this only proves that they were calander years. Stephen Hawking doesnt relate loads to the actual calander. That is just a way of manipulating/ordering the conciousness/unconciousness/dimensions/timelines/what ever you want to belive. Again could read and delve so much more on to this but it takes you back to the time issue again and literally sends me dizzy...
If you can try this.....
Before going to sleep in bed. Think about nothingness, and that no human has ever existed , the world as we know it does not exist. and just keep thinking about it over and over.
Its supposed to (when done properly) strip your subconcious mind. Stephen Hawking has touched on something similar aswel. If you manage to strip the subconcious/unconcious mind then you can apparantly do and see amazing things. (not just quitting fags, being fitter stronger) it does all relate back in to what you guys are taking about perfectly. So i will try and find these books and let you know if anyone is interested so i could actually tell you how he says it all relates in?
A hypnotist once did a study on this...and i know im not a hypnotist but i did it myself and the feeling u get in your mind is very strange. I did and when i woke up the next morning I couldnt recall one thing i had done the day before but i felt great. That isnt what the study was trying to show because you cant really do it on your own. but anyway try it, because i got some weird weird things going on in my head but next morning i felt unbeliveable and still cant remember what happened that day. although thank god my girlfriend reassures me i wasnt abducted by aliens ha.
Ill also try yo dig out that book that it explains it in if anyones interested?
If you can try this.....
Before going to sleep in bed. Think about nothingness, and that no human has ever existed , the world as we know it does not exist. and just keep thinking about it over and over.
Its supposed to (when done properly) strip your subconcious mind. Stephen Hawking has touched on something similar aswel. If you manage to strip the subconcious/unconcious mind then you can apparantly do and see amazing things. (not just quitting fags, being fitter stronger) it does all relate back in to what you guys are taking about perfectly. So i will try and find these books and let you know if anyone is interested so i could actually tell you how he says it all relates in?
A hypnotist once did a study on this...and i know im not a hypnotist but i did it myself and the feeling u get in your mind is very strange. I did and when i woke up the next morning I couldnt recall one thing i had done the day before but i felt great. That isnt what the study was trying to show because you cant really do it on your own. but anyway try it, because i got some weird weird things going on in my head but next morning i felt unbeliveable and still cant remember what happened that day. although thank god my girlfriend reassures me i wasnt abducted by aliens ha.
Ill also try yo dig out that book that it explains it in if anyones interested?
wish i had more time :)
never thought about reincarnation related to the people mentioned above...
look into Kennedy And Lincoln in terms of dates letters in name... crazy amounts...
hmmm
reincarnation could only exist with multiple, or simultaneous realities... otherwise it doesn't add up math wise - populations
k got my daughter on my lap and i'm done on here
never thought about reincarnation related to the people mentioned above...
look into Kennedy And Lincoln in terms of dates letters in name... crazy amounts...
hmmm
reincarnation could only exist with multiple, or simultaneous realities... otherwise it doesn't add up math wise - populations
k got my daughter on my lap and i'm done on here
mattyb, about Hawking/Galileo, that's seriously interesting. Needless to say its a little enigmatic. When I get time I'm definitely going to look into them books.
Mark L, I haven't thought about this enough to explain explain fully and correctly my feeling on the matter but;
As far as pre-destiny goes, as in - all things are already done as such, we don't have a choice - my personal take on that is as follows.
To use an analogy; imagine one big glass container or beaker filled with all sorts of chemicals.
Every chemical has its own properties and therefore reacts a certain way with the rest of the chemicals until it finds its own balance - its own place in the mix.
Whenever a new chemical is introduced, the same happens. It must react until the mixture comes to a balance i.e. that chemical finds its own place.
As humans, were all naturally endowed with certain characteristics.
Some of us are strong in some areas, not so much in others. The bible tells us though that whatever our strengths and weaknesses, assuming one compensates for the other, were all made equal.
When we come of a certain age I think our strengths and weaknesses become more defined i.e. we become more defined as people.
Ever notice small kids. They're all friends. They all get on with one another, for the most part at least.
However, as they get older they tend to find they're own group. And older still, as they're becoming more defined, they may drift off and do their own thing altogether.
So given our natural characteristics, our strengths and weaknesses, there is a certain place in the world for us. A place that suits us best.
Some people might find that it is where they are and always were, growing up.
I notice some of the guys I went to school with, the guys who seemed to fit into their particular area or neighborhood best, they're the guys that, when I go back in ten years, they that will have remained there.
Other guys that passed through school, got on fine but it wasn't their particular area, they may go farther afield to find their niche, to find the place where they fit best given their strengths etc.
Some guys might go away to develop in certain areas and come back, I dunno. But for the most part I think the above is true.
So when it comes to pre-destiny, the mapping out of our fate; given where we started (our place of birth) and the time we started (our time of birth) and the person we are, with every situation we come across, there are certain paths out of that situation that will suit us best, undoubtedly the ones we will choose, the ones we will be happiest in.
So as oppose to a route being mapped for us, perhaps were just reacting with every situation and fitting in as best we can.
If you could calculate all the variables, put numbers on certain characteristics and other variables in the situation, maybe we could determine where we will end up or what we will end up doing.
Maybe someone or something has mapped out our potential path already.
Maybe its "written in the stars" so to speak.
But we still have to work at it ourselves and determine the best paths for us so we can progress and ensure our happiness, cause I certainly don't think it's a sure thing, and there's lots of room for error, accidents, mistakes, shortcomings etc.
That's just my take on it though.
It makes sense to me also that there is input from astrological forces on the direction we take, I'm just not sure how that ties in.
Final thing I'd like to comment on.
Ever notice a couple, married couple say, they get on very well. I suppose they'd want to, given the fact that they're going to spend the rest of their lives together.
Oftentimes, at least what I notice, they tend to be the same type of people. They share the same characteristics. Alot of the time also they tend to compliment each other in certain ways; I lived with this couple one time and as I commented on, they shared alot of the same characteristics. But the woman in the couple was very I suppose, aggressive, for want of a better word.
Now I couldn't put up with her, and I don't know many people who could. But for the man, it's like he was built for being able to deal with that. He knew just how to react, just what to say to calm her down. Indeed, sometimes I got the feeling he even found that aspect of her nature a little endearing.
That's going off the point a little.
The point is this.
For people to get on, to live together, or even be friends, what I find is that they must share aspects of they're lifestyle.
Obviously, if two people don't share a lifestyle, they're not gonna share a life.
Again, with the couple I was talking about above, they both enjoyed the same things, being around the same people; they shared each others lifestyle.
My point is, given peoples characteristics, they will find through life experience - not so much destiny IMO - they're own niche in life. The lifestyle that suits them best.
They're characteristics are what lead them to this lifestyle.
Were they destined to find each other, one the love of the others life?
Or was it they're lifestyles, maybe what they were doing at that particular time, and the fact that they could share in one anothers lifestyle, that brought them together?
And their naturally occurring and mutual characteristics the reason why they get on so well?
I simply think this reinforces my opinion that it is someone's characteristics, as well their time and place of birth, that determines the path their life will take.
Perhaps not so much the fact that its all mapped out already.
Again, it makes sense to me that the push pull motion of stars plays a role somewhere... I'll have to get stuck into them books asap.
Mark L, I haven't thought about this enough to explain explain fully and correctly my feeling on the matter but;
As far as pre-destiny goes, as in - all things are already done as such, we don't have a choice - my personal take on that is as follows.
To use an analogy; imagine one big glass container or beaker filled with all sorts of chemicals.
Every chemical has its own properties and therefore reacts a certain way with the rest of the chemicals until it finds its own balance - its own place in the mix.
Whenever a new chemical is introduced, the same happens. It must react until the mixture comes to a balance i.e. that chemical finds its own place.
As humans, were all naturally endowed with certain characteristics.
Some of us are strong in some areas, not so much in others. The bible tells us though that whatever our strengths and weaknesses, assuming one compensates for the other, were all made equal.
When we come of a certain age I think our strengths and weaknesses become more defined i.e. we become more defined as people.
Ever notice small kids. They're all friends. They all get on with one another, for the most part at least.
However, as they get older they tend to find they're own group. And older still, as they're becoming more defined, they may drift off and do their own thing altogether.
So given our natural characteristics, our strengths and weaknesses, there is a certain place in the world for us. A place that suits us best.
Some people might find that it is where they are and always were, growing up.
I notice some of the guys I went to school with, the guys who seemed to fit into their particular area or neighborhood best, they're the guys that, when I go back in ten years, they that will have remained there.
Other guys that passed through school, got on fine but it wasn't their particular area, they may go farther afield to find their niche, to find the place where they fit best given their strengths etc.
Some guys might go away to develop in certain areas and come back, I dunno. But for the most part I think the above is true.
So when it comes to pre-destiny, the mapping out of our fate; given where we started (our place of birth) and the time we started (our time of birth) and the person we are, with every situation we come across, there are certain paths out of that situation that will suit us best, undoubtedly the ones we will choose, the ones we will be happiest in.
So as oppose to a route being mapped for us, perhaps were just reacting with every situation and fitting in as best we can.
If you could calculate all the variables, put numbers on certain characteristics and other variables in the situation, maybe we could determine where we will end up or what we will end up doing.
Maybe someone or something has mapped out our potential path already.
Maybe its "written in the stars" so to speak.
But we still have to work at it ourselves and determine the best paths for us so we can progress and ensure our happiness, cause I certainly don't think it's a sure thing, and there's lots of room for error, accidents, mistakes, shortcomings etc.
That's just my take on it though.
It makes sense to me also that there is input from astrological forces on the direction we take, I'm just not sure how that ties in.
Final thing I'd like to comment on.
Ever notice a couple, married couple say, they get on very well. I suppose they'd want to, given the fact that they're going to spend the rest of their lives together.
Oftentimes, at least what I notice, they tend to be the same type of people. They share the same characteristics. Alot of the time also they tend to compliment each other in certain ways; I lived with this couple one time and as I commented on, they shared alot of the same characteristics. But the woman in the couple was very I suppose, aggressive, for want of a better word.
Now I couldn't put up with her, and I don't know many people who could. But for the man, it's like he was built for being able to deal with that. He knew just how to react, just what to say to calm her down. Indeed, sometimes I got the feeling he even found that aspect of her nature a little endearing.
That's going off the point a little.
The point is this.
For people to get on, to live together, or even be friends, what I find is that they must share aspects of they're lifestyle.
Obviously, if two people don't share a lifestyle, they're not gonna share a life.
Again, with the couple I was talking about above, they both enjoyed the same things, being around the same people; they shared each others lifestyle.
My point is, given peoples characteristics, they will find through life experience - not so much destiny IMO - they're own niche in life. The lifestyle that suits them best.
They're characteristics are what lead them to this lifestyle.
Were they destined to find each other, one the love of the others life?
Or was it they're lifestyles, maybe what they were doing at that particular time, and the fact that they could share in one anothers lifestyle, that brought them together?
And their naturally occurring and mutual characteristics the reason why they get on so well?
I simply think this reinforces my opinion that it is someone's characteristics, as well their time and place of birth, that determines the path their life will take.
Perhaps not so much the fact that its all mapped out already.
Again, it makes sense to me that the push pull motion of stars plays a role somewhere... I'll have to get stuck into them books asap.
"The bible tells us though that whatever our strengths and weaknesses, assuming one compensates for the other, were all made equal."
This may be related - Jung talks about the inner and outer (trying to simplify and shorten so terminology and depth lacking here) and how if the outer is one way the inner is generally the other - balance... This is of course in part and not complete... Example... the more masculine a man on the outer the more often the inner to have more of the feminine qualities (all humans have both qualities and this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with sexuality). Jung suggests, as I understand him, that the less emotion one consciously connects with in the outer the more emotion lives in the unconscious (which certainly influence the conscious) -note how childish expression of emotion (emotions are more feminine) some "tough" guys act (example of pro fighters crying/being pissed off after loosing a fight - seen this)
ok back to reading your last post and if time I'll reread rest (my daughter and wife are sleeping lol)
"So as oppose to a route being mapped for us, perhaps were just reacting with every situation and fitting in as best we can.
If you could calculate all the variables, put numbers on certain characteristics and other variables in the situation, maybe we could determine where we will end up or what we will end up doing.
Maybe someone or something has mapped out our potential path already.
Maybe its "written in the stars" so to speak."
I think what you're theory over all has loads of potential "truth". It makes sense to me and fits in... I am not sure it is the whole or complete picture (and I suspect and hope I would say that with all theories - keeping open the the possibility of further growth, development and understanding and the possibility that I am partially mistaken).
Party I think that all you said in the last quote has truth and influence but maybe not complete control of the outcome, or at least one, by the info given, could not completely mathematically predict life paths/experience... I think maybe strong strong tenancies, characteristics etc I do think that maybe just a bit more could be factored in (not sure what exactly) that could bring the equation closer the perfection...
I think the parts you mention influence... just like the moon cycles influence tides, women's menstrual cycles (if they are living more naturally - less artificial light), talk to anyone working in the emergency room or loonie bin and the things happen related to moon cycles (possibly co-arising more than one controls other but thats another topic - basically all reflects all maybe)... anyway, it is a small small stretch for me to consider the plants to have influence (astrology). ok so that said, as I see it, they DO have influence but they are NOT controlling per say. The more conscious and aware an individual is the more they can choose. Freedom of choice exists to the degree that one is consciously aware (most of us, most of the time seem to think we are more consciously aware, which to me means becoming more aware of the unconscious or else you wouldn't be conscious of it, right?,
Paramhansa Yogananda (brought Kriya Yoga to the West, author of "Autobiography of a Yogi" talks about how he came to believe in the planetary influences and how when astrology predicted bad times etc he always got done what he wanted though it was harder at those times to do it... the influence didn't stop him but it did make him work harder for what he wanted to consciously create, manifest in his life etc... (amazing book by the way - very long and if anyone is interested I would suggest audio)
ok back to reading more... :)
men, women, relationships I'll start by saying I don't have this one down by any stretch LOL
Again with Jung... just like the inner can be "opposite" to the outer, partners are, same and opposite also. The "aggressiveness" in the outer woman suggests compensation for weakness inside and also of the inner "aggressiveness" of him that is hidden from the outer.
It goes back and fourth and switches, its all same or opposites, inner and outer as well as the projection and perception of each other and self etc
At least the is a brief, rough explanation from some of my limited perspective of what Jung writes about and I think holds some truth.
I think people "fall in love" and see loads of sameness as well as the opposites desired consciously or unconsciously. After the falling in love stage passes I think sometimes the differences become difficult.. Similarities and similar interests are great, yet the sameness in some of our shadows is a reflection the child ego (when acting childish - many of us much of the time lol) doesn't like. Again the differences in the outer may reflect similarities on the inner. The mature adult may be more conscious of his shadow parts and therefor more understanding, accepting and ok with the differences and the shadow side of samenesses (parts he doesn't like in self)
Partly due to projection and perception the individual will (the math equation would lead us here it seems) always find a perfect reflection in a partner of himself, be it inner and or outer reflection...
I guess what I am playing with here as in ideas is that I agree with your direction and thought process as I understand it and I think that indeed our inner workings (DNA maybe/passed down energy/soul stuff whatever) combined with influences such as planets/time etc could very strongly predict one lifes path etc... Again I think freedom of choice (is this my ego needing control) can also move us, if we can access it, on a different path... Again though, maybe those influences could predict that or maybe there is another part of the equation that could be added that would show that lol
The only way anything makes sense to me (or at least seems to to some degree in my warp and limited perspective) is when I see the paradox, which essentially says the only way anything makes sense is when nothing does (or Nothing...No Thing = Everything, again paradox - No-Thing/Evereything being what some may call God)
Thank you for sharing your thoughts... got me thinking and considering. I also think there is great truth in them...
In Kriya Yoga philosophy the Truth is that which never chances - it seems that the only constant is change, at least within the Universe... "evolution" (i'm sure we have a limited perspective of what that is) is change. The paradox is that evolution and creation are, in my perspective, the same... an "opposame" to use a David Icke term. Maybe there is a Truth outside the Universe in the realm of "God" whatever that means (and to me that is not a man or even a being and I think man, in his narcissistic state, creates a God in his! image... imagine taking away all human characteristics from "God"... I wonder if that is closer to the "truth") things are not paradoxical.
In the relative realm/earth plane/our universe all I can see (when i look deeper) is the relative polar opposites... up/down, black/white, left/right, north/south, man/women, hot/cold. It is, as I see it, the only way existence can be and it is how the Universe functions. Without relative polar opposites there would be no experience...
There is no left leg if there is no right leg for the leg would have nothing to be left of.
There is no hot without cold... more accurately there is no hotter without colder. We speak in black and white, in absolutes... we say hottub water is hot... it is hotter than water from the fridge yet much colder than the sun. The RELATIVE opposites is all there seems to be. Yin/Yang
ok so through good and evil in there ;) lol that will offend some peoples sensibilities
(Isiah 45:7 -King James version is good on this one)
I guess how this relates I think is that relative opposites must exist in order to experience
(if internally and externally everything was exactly the same temperature always, you have have no perception of temperature and essentially it wouldn't exist as there is nothing (great word lol) to compare it to to separate it to bring into any awareness). Therefor no experience being possible without relative (relative) opposites.
So a life path, influences, pre-destiny possibly would be mathematically possible and understandable from the understanding of the influences that are present, relative to their polar opposites.....?
the more light there is the more shadow it must create, a simultaneous vacuum instantaneously creates the polar opposite, more accurately co-arises maybe.
The aggressive woman, is an relative polar opposite to the timid inner woman, and attracts either the reflection of the same spectrum of aggressive/timid man. The aggressive/timid man may be more balanced in the inner or outer or maybe more aggressive on the inner and timid on the outer or timid on the outer and aggressive on the inner.
hmmm... it seems a circle yet a circle is self contained...
I wonder if the only way anything can have meaning is if nothing has meaning and if nothing has meaning the paradox is that everything has meaning.
If any of that is true then would we not always find that everything leads to ALL and No-Thing as it is all the same when you take away the relative opposites...but when you take them away you may have No-Thing left... is that a path to "enlightenment" or madness? lol Possible they are the same... Possibly the ego needs to hold onto the illusion of power, control and meaning in separateness for it must remain separate to exist... But to consider the possibility challenges the ego so strongly it is hard to swallow... yet if it holds truth then the more we reject the idea the more true it probably is - or is this just a crazy way to try to prove a thought process???? LOL
ok major tangents above probably I hope you enjoy if you read... I enjoyed writing and thinking, thank you for sharing things for me to think about and consider... got my mind going...
"A big step towards sanity is recognizing you are crazy."
then how can you trust any of your thoguhts? lol
The crazy man (maybe) believes his own thoughts and beliefs. Why is this crazy, because of course they make sense, his brain came up with them... to assume you are right is a little crazy I think LOL
So then you are left with crazy (which the relative polar opposite of is sanity) and in recognizing crazy maybe we can start to glimpse sanity... no hot without cold, so maybe no sanity without crazy, maybe no awarenes without delusion.
So if life can be seen, predicted, interpreted by the influences seen above the relative opposite must also exist (?) and that does not contradict but actually re-enforces it.
A Zen practice I heard of is to take an idea and sit with it untill you can see the truth and the falsehood in it... not purely intellectually, but also feel and connect with both sides/points of view/polarities...
I guess this is what I am trying to do which makes it hard to completely agree or disagree with anything. It is crazy yet makes sense. It is insanity yet clarity (to the degree that I do at the time)...
or maybe I am just crazy! :)
Fuck lol
again, thank you teacher
This may be related - Jung talks about the inner and outer (trying to simplify and shorten so terminology and depth lacking here) and how if the outer is one way the inner is generally the other - balance... This is of course in part and not complete... Example... the more masculine a man on the outer the more often the inner to have more of the feminine qualities (all humans have both qualities and this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with sexuality). Jung suggests, as I understand him, that the less emotion one consciously connects with in the outer the more emotion lives in the unconscious (which certainly influence the conscious) -note how childish expression of emotion (emotions are more feminine) some "tough" guys act (example of pro fighters crying/being pissed off after loosing a fight - seen this)
ok back to reading your last post and if time I'll reread rest (my daughter and wife are sleeping lol)
"So as oppose to a route being mapped for us, perhaps were just reacting with every situation and fitting in as best we can.
If you could calculate all the variables, put numbers on certain characteristics and other variables in the situation, maybe we could determine where we will end up or what we will end up doing.
Maybe someone or something has mapped out our potential path already.
Maybe its "written in the stars" so to speak."
I think what you're theory over all has loads of potential "truth". It makes sense to me and fits in... I am not sure it is the whole or complete picture (and I suspect and hope I would say that with all theories - keeping open the the possibility of further growth, development and understanding and the possibility that I am partially mistaken).
Party I think that all you said in the last quote has truth and influence but maybe not complete control of the outcome, or at least one, by the info given, could not completely mathematically predict life paths/experience... I think maybe strong strong tenancies, characteristics etc I do think that maybe just a bit more could be factored in (not sure what exactly) that could bring the equation closer the perfection...
I think the parts you mention influence... just like the moon cycles influence tides, women's menstrual cycles (if they are living more naturally - less artificial light), talk to anyone working in the emergency room or loonie bin and the things happen related to moon cycles (possibly co-arising more than one controls other but thats another topic - basically all reflects all maybe)... anyway, it is a small small stretch for me to consider the plants to have influence (astrology). ok so that said, as I see it, they DO have influence but they are NOT controlling per say. The more conscious and aware an individual is the more they can choose. Freedom of choice exists to the degree that one is consciously aware (most of us, most of the time seem to think we are more consciously aware, which to me means becoming more aware of the unconscious or else you wouldn't be conscious of it, right?,
Paramhansa Yogananda (brought Kriya Yoga to the West, author of "Autobiography of a Yogi" talks about how he came to believe in the planetary influences and how when astrology predicted bad times etc he always got done what he wanted though it was harder at those times to do it... the influence didn't stop him but it did make him work harder for what he wanted to consciously create, manifest in his life etc... (amazing book by the way - very long and if anyone is interested I would suggest audio)
ok back to reading more... :)
men, women, relationships I'll start by saying I don't have this one down by any stretch LOL
Again with Jung... just like the inner can be "opposite" to the outer, partners are, same and opposite also. The "aggressiveness" in the outer woman suggests compensation for weakness inside and also of the inner "aggressiveness" of him that is hidden from the outer.
It goes back and fourth and switches, its all same or opposites, inner and outer as well as the projection and perception of each other and self etc
At least the is a brief, rough explanation from some of my limited perspective of what Jung writes about and I think holds some truth.
I think people "fall in love" and see loads of sameness as well as the opposites desired consciously or unconsciously. After the falling in love stage passes I think sometimes the differences become difficult.. Similarities and similar interests are great, yet the sameness in some of our shadows is a reflection the child ego (when acting childish - many of us much of the time lol) doesn't like. Again the differences in the outer may reflect similarities on the inner. The mature adult may be more conscious of his shadow parts and therefor more understanding, accepting and ok with the differences and the shadow side of samenesses (parts he doesn't like in self)
Partly due to projection and perception the individual will (the math equation would lead us here it seems) always find a perfect reflection in a partner of himself, be it inner and or outer reflection...
I guess what I am playing with here as in ideas is that I agree with your direction and thought process as I understand it and I think that indeed our inner workings (DNA maybe/passed down energy/soul stuff whatever) combined with influences such as planets/time etc could very strongly predict one lifes path etc... Again I think freedom of choice (is this my ego needing control) can also move us, if we can access it, on a different path... Again though, maybe those influences could predict that or maybe there is another part of the equation that could be added that would show that lol
The only way anything makes sense to me (or at least seems to to some degree in my warp and limited perspective) is when I see the paradox, which essentially says the only way anything makes sense is when nothing does (or Nothing...No Thing = Everything, again paradox - No-Thing/Evereything being what some may call God)
Thank you for sharing your thoughts... got me thinking and considering. I also think there is great truth in them...
In Kriya Yoga philosophy the Truth is that which never chances - it seems that the only constant is change, at least within the Universe... "evolution" (i'm sure we have a limited perspective of what that is) is change. The paradox is that evolution and creation are, in my perspective, the same... an "opposame" to use a David Icke term. Maybe there is a Truth outside the Universe in the realm of "God" whatever that means (and to me that is not a man or even a being and I think man, in his narcissistic state, creates a God in his! image... imagine taking away all human characteristics from "God"... I wonder if that is closer to the "truth") things are not paradoxical.
In the relative realm/earth plane/our universe all I can see (when i look deeper) is the relative polar opposites... up/down, black/white, left/right, north/south, man/women, hot/cold. It is, as I see it, the only way existence can be and it is how the Universe functions. Without relative polar opposites there would be no experience...
There is no left leg if there is no right leg for the leg would have nothing to be left of.
There is no hot without cold... more accurately there is no hotter without colder. We speak in black and white, in absolutes... we say hottub water is hot... it is hotter than water from the fridge yet much colder than the sun. The RELATIVE opposites is all there seems to be. Yin/Yang
ok so through good and evil in there ;) lol that will offend some peoples sensibilities
(Isiah 45:7 -King James version is good on this one)
I guess how this relates I think is that relative opposites must exist in order to experience
(if internally and externally everything was exactly the same temperature always, you have have no perception of temperature and essentially it wouldn't exist as there is nothing (great word lol) to compare it to to separate it to bring into any awareness). Therefor no experience being possible without relative (relative) opposites.
So a life path, influences, pre-destiny possibly would be mathematically possible and understandable from the understanding of the influences that are present, relative to their polar opposites.....?
the more light there is the more shadow it must create, a simultaneous vacuum instantaneously creates the polar opposite, more accurately co-arises maybe.
The aggressive woman, is an relative polar opposite to the timid inner woman, and attracts either the reflection of the same spectrum of aggressive/timid man. The aggressive/timid man may be more balanced in the inner or outer or maybe more aggressive on the inner and timid on the outer or timid on the outer and aggressive on the inner.
hmmm... it seems a circle yet a circle is self contained...
I wonder if the only way anything can have meaning is if nothing has meaning and if nothing has meaning the paradox is that everything has meaning.
If any of that is true then would we not always find that everything leads to ALL and No-Thing as it is all the same when you take away the relative opposites...but when you take them away you may have No-Thing left... is that a path to "enlightenment" or madness? lol Possible they are the same... Possibly the ego needs to hold onto the illusion of power, control and meaning in separateness for it must remain separate to exist... But to consider the possibility challenges the ego so strongly it is hard to swallow... yet if it holds truth then the more we reject the idea the more true it probably is - or is this just a crazy way to try to prove a thought process???? LOL
ok major tangents above probably I hope you enjoy if you read... I enjoyed writing and thinking, thank you for sharing things for me to think about and consider... got my mind going...
"A big step towards sanity is recognizing you are crazy."
then how can you trust any of your thoguhts? lol
The crazy man (maybe) believes his own thoughts and beliefs. Why is this crazy, because of course they make sense, his brain came up with them... to assume you are right is a little crazy I think LOL
So then you are left with crazy (which the relative polar opposite of is sanity) and in recognizing crazy maybe we can start to glimpse sanity... no hot without cold, so maybe no sanity without crazy, maybe no awarenes without delusion.
So if life can be seen, predicted, interpreted by the influences seen above the relative opposite must also exist (?) and that does not contradict but actually re-enforces it.
A Zen practice I heard of is to take an idea and sit with it untill you can see the truth and the falsehood in it... not purely intellectually, but also feel and connect with both sides/points of view/polarities...
I guess this is what I am trying to do which makes it hard to completely agree or disagree with anything. It is crazy yet makes sense. It is insanity yet clarity (to the degree that I do at the time)...
or maybe I am just crazy! :)
Fuck lol
again, thank you teacher
"History has demonstrated that usually the most notable champions overcame the most heartbreaking obsticles before they triumphed.
They won because they refused to become refused to become discouraged by their defeats"
if relative opposites are polarized, as I believe they are, the more off balance anything is the greater the magnetic pull in the other direction...
hardship pushes towards success... doesn't mean it will lead to but if the will or body is not too broken it will push back... sneak up on someone and start to push them and they will resist.
Obviously some get pushed over but the magnetizing polar affect exists...
lets same your strength is a 5 out of 10 and you come across a 9 obstacle... you're likely fucked. Lets same you look at 4, 5 and even 6 level obstacles and over come them then you strength moves up to a 6.
If Lance Armstrong taps into the strength he used to overcome cancer, most of lifes lessor obstacles will seem very small even if to others they seem large.
I think we can dig deep and raise our strength levels... say a Mum lifting a car off a child. With big enough desire or reason, faith or belief, we can raise our strength levels... but that motivation needs to be bigger then our resistance.
So either Lance's strength (assuming there is truth in any of the above) was higher than the obstacle either his over all level or because he tapped into some motivating power to raise his strength levels.
So the question for me is how to raise my strength levels (such as seeking challenges I CAN, though not easily, over come and also finding desire and motivation and reason for moving in my desired direction that is a greater number than the obstacles ahead.
The monarch butterfly has a tough time breaking out of his cocoon... help him out and he will not be able to fly.. these things cross oceans I think... the point is clearly that struggle, if it doesn't kill you or parts of you and if you can learn from it will make you stronger...
I think I could embrace my struggles more and in learning from them and knowing I am strengthening... well I think that would also give me more strength to face them...
Thanks Lance and Marco S :)
They won because they refused to become refused to become discouraged by their defeats"
if relative opposites are polarized, as I believe they are, the more off balance anything is the greater the magnetic pull in the other direction...
hardship pushes towards success... doesn't mean it will lead to but if the will or body is not too broken it will push back... sneak up on someone and start to push them and they will resist.
Obviously some get pushed over but the magnetizing polar affect exists...
lets same your strength is a 5 out of 10 and you come across a 9 obstacle... you're likely fucked. Lets same you look at 4, 5 and even 6 level obstacles and over come them then you strength moves up to a 6.
If Lance Armstrong taps into the strength he used to overcome cancer, most of lifes lessor obstacles will seem very small even if to others they seem large.
I think we can dig deep and raise our strength levels... say a Mum lifting a car off a child. With big enough desire or reason, faith or belief, we can raise our strength levels... but that motivation needs to be bigger then our resistance.
So either Lance's strength (assuming there is truth in any of the above) was higher than the obstacle either his over all level or because he tapped into some motivating power to raise his strength levels.
So the question for me is how to raise my strength levels (such as seeking challenges I CAN, though not easily, over come and also finding desire and motivation and reason for moving in my desired direction that is a greater number than the obstacles ahead.
The monarch butterfly has a tough time breaking out of his cocoon... help him out and he will not be able to fly.. these things cross oceans I think... the point is clearly that struggle, if it doesn't kill you or parts of you and if you can learn from it will make you stronger...
I think I could embrace my struggles more and in learning from them and knowing I am strengthening... well I think that would also give me more strength to face them...
Thanks Lance and Marco S :)
Mattyb
"I felt like blacking out when I was reading it..."
My understanding is this is the ego trying to hide from something that challenges it. You reading it was overcoming the control of the ego.
ok stripping the conscious mind...
Mattyb and Marco S
I have mentioned this on here and so far had no responses to anyone doing it... I think you two might be interested....
Take left hand and place in cold water
right hand in hot water (not so hot or cold to hurt)
look into your own eyes in a mirror.
look deep into your own pupils, get lost in them, be open and curious like you are getting lost in a lovers eye... look deep into your soul (eyes are windows to the soul they say)
Do for a few minutes and just experience what you experience...maybe something maybe nothing....
let me know if you choose to :)
"I felt like blacking out when I was reading it..."
My understanding is this is the ego trying to hide from something that challenges it. You reading it was overcoming the control of the ego.
ok stripping the conscious mind...
Mattyb and Marco S
I have mentioned this on here and so far had no responses to anyone doing it... I think you two might be interested....
Take left hand and place in cold water
right hand in hot water (not so hot or cold to hurt)
look into your own eyes in a mirror.
look deep into your own pupils, get lost in them, be open and curious like you are getting lost in a lovers eye... look deep into your soul (eyes are windows to the soul they say)
Do for a few minutes and just experience what you experience...maybe something maybe nothing....
let me know if you choose to :)
**if relative opposites are polarized, as I believe they are, the more off balance anything is the greater the magnetic pull in the other direction...
hardship pushes towards success... doesn't mean it will lead to but if the will or body is not too broken it will push back... sneak up on someone and start to push them and they will resist.**
Just to comment on this idea first.
Firstly, I definitely like the idea, and it makes 100% sense, both thinking about it and seeing it in everyday life.
Referring to the "pulled in one direction to push in the other direction" analogy; I think the actual momentum as such, begins with that person striving for something. As oppose to having something negative happen initially.
Cause if you don't try to get something good, and have that expectation, then you don't know what it feels like to be denied it.
I'm sure there's a more comprehensible way to put it..
But I think it refers to what your saying about polar opposites, which I think you may have already pointed out already - if you don't know hot, then you never know cold.
So to feel disappointment we must first feel hope, or have ambition.
Then, with the setback, the swinging of the pendulum in the opposite direction (the disappointment/frustration/other negative things, side of the spectrum) in turn propels us to swing back harder towards the positive side,
i.e. swing back with more hope, more enthusiasm, more dedication and of course the wisdom and knowledge we may have taken from our setback.
In Lance Armstrongs case, I can't see what wisdom he may have taken from his cancer experience that he could have applied to his cycling. But purely in terms of the fact that cancer brought the pendulum so far into the negative spectrum, the fact that he could sustain himself throughout that without "falling over", to take a reference of your analogy; this gave him the vigor or allowed him to draw from the strength he gained through overcoming his ordeal, and apply it to his cycling.
Yeah, looking over your post again, I see this is the exact point which you made already :)
But yes, I think the whole idea is something that's very evident on a day to day basis.
A challenger sets his sights high on defeating the champion. He does not succeed, but the pendulum motion, so to speak, of the loss and the feeling of disappointment, propels him back, and gives him the strength/dedication to return that much stronger and then defeat the champion.
The degree to which the pendulum will swing into the negative spectrum is directly proportional to the degree to which it was pushed into the positive spectrum initially.
So in terms of the quantity of negativity, perhaps mentally "breaking" the fighter, or "pushing him over", again using the separate analogy; this should not be the case. But it should take him to the limit, the breaking point limit.
Or at least that's the way I see it in theory.
Perhaps this, in real life, only happens in very extreme cases.
But in any case, with the negative swing being proportional to the positive swing, it should not take him over the breaking point limit... ??
I think I've gone off on a bit of a tangent there..
In any case, the idea now makes thorough sense: The fact that he refused to become discouraged by his defeat and embrace that feeling, is what gave him the strength to return, I guess, stronger, the next time.
I wonder what's the case with guys like Fedor Emelienenko?
He never lost. Where did he get his drive from? Perhaps overcoming other hardships in his personal life? I guess he was brought up in a poor family and served time in the Russian army. I'm sure he had some tough obstacles to overcome in relation to both of those.
Just lastly, I'm a sucker for the romance novels.
Not that it's entirely romance, but Jilly Cooper has a recurring theme in, I think pretty much all of her books, that relates to this idea somehow I think.
In each book, upon the culmination of the story, there is a union of two unlikely characters.
Throughout the book, she describes how the union comes about; but always it's a case of back and forth. As in, that pendulum motion, back and forth.
Hopes raised high, only to be dashed.
In other words, it's a very intrepid journey.
But the fact that with each setback, or oscillation, from the positive into the negative; the hope becomes higher each time. It makes their feelings for each other that much stronger with each swing, so when the union does eventually occur, it has set a very strong, as Jilly describes it, almost unbreakable foundation for the relationship; two people hugely devoted to each other, in an almost indelible fashion.
But this is brought about by the swinging back and forth of the hope/disappointment pendulum. i.e. each setback, once overcome, strengthens their devotion to each other, thus creating something almost assuredly lasting and enduring.
I guess just another way the idea as a whole can be applied to everyday life that doesn't take a form so obvious as two guys fighting each other, with the defeated subsequently emerging the victor; or overcoming obstacles to attain ones goals.
**
In relation to one or two of the previous idea's mentioned:
*Freedom of choice exists to the degree that one is consciously aware (most of us, most of the time seem to think we are more consciously aware, which to me means becoming more aware of the unconscious or else you wouldn't be conscious of it, right?, *
This makes sense to me. Choice is not really an option when your not aware of something therefore the belief in freedom of choice will take precedence over the belief of pre-destiny in so far as we have that awareness.
Maybe we just use the idea of pre-destiny as an excuse for having been to lazy to develop that awareness?? :/
But I guess that can't possibly be relative to every situation?
e.g. how was the guy to know he was gonna get hit with the bolt of lightening?
I dunno; that example is obviously a bit extreme but it relates the general idea?
**
In terms of the idea referring to paradoxical situations; to make sense it must make no sense, and how that can be applied to a situation.. it's gonna take some thinking about to try and understand that one.
hardship pushes towards success... doesn't mean it will lead to but if the will or body is not too broken it will push back... sneak up on someone and start to push them and they will resist.**
Just to comment on this idea first.
Firstly, I definitely like the idea, and it makes 100% sense, both thinking about it and seeing it in everyday life.
Referring to the "pulled in one direction to push in the other direction" analogy; I think the actual momentum as such, begins with that person striving for something. As oppose to having something negative happen initially.
Cause if you don't try to get something good, and have that expectation, then you don't know what it feels like to be denied it.
I'm sure there's a more comprehensible way to put it..
But I think it refers to what your saying about polar opposites, which I think you may have already pointed out already - if you don't know hot, then you never know cold.
So to feel disappointment we must first feel hope, or have ambition.
Then, with the setback, the swinging of the pendulum in the opposite direction (the disappointment/frustration/other negative things, side of the spectrum) in turn propels us to swing back harder towards the positive side,
i.e. swing back with more hope, more enthusiasm, more dedication and of course the wisdom and knowledge we may have taken from our setback.
In Lance Armstrongs case, I can't see what wisdom he may have taken from his cancer experience that he could have applied to his cycling. But purely in terms of the fact that cancer brought the pendulum so far into the negative spectrum, the fact that he could sustain himself throughout that without "falling over", to take a reference of your analogy; this gave him the vigor or allowed him to draw from the strength he gained through overcoming his ordeal, and apply it to his cycling.
Yeah, looking over your post again, I see this is the exact point which you made already :)
But yes, I think the whole idea is something that's very evident on a day to day basis.
A challenger sets his sights high on defeating the champion. He does not succeed, but the pendulum motion, so to speak, of the loss and the feeling of disappointment, propels him back, and gives him the strength/dedication to return that much stronger and then defeat the champion.
The degree to which the pendulum will swing into the negative spectrum is directly proportional to the degree to which it was pushed into the positive spectrum initially.
So in terms of the quantity of negativity, perhaps mentally "breaking" the fighter, or "pushing him over", again using the separate analogy; this should not be the case. But it should take him to the limit, the breaking point limit.
Or at least that's the way I see it in theory.
Perhaps this, in real life, only happens in very extreme cases.
But in any case, with the negative swing being proportional to the positive swing, it should not take him over the breaking point limit... ??
I think I've gone off on a bit of a tangent there..
In any case, the idea now makes thorough sense: The fact that he refused to become discouraged by his defeat and embrace that feeling, is what gave him the strength to return, I guess, stronger, the next time.
I wonder what's the case with guys like Fedor Emelienenko?
He never lost. Where did he get his drive from? Perhaps overcoming other hardships in his personal life? I guess he was brought up in a poor family and served time in the Russian army. I'm sure he had some tough obstacles to overcome in relation to both of those.
Just lastly, I'm a sucker for the romance novels.
Not that it's entirely romance, but Jilly Cooper has a recurring theme in, I think pretty much all of her books, that relates to this idea somehow I think.
In each book, upon the culmination of the story, there is a union of two unlikely characters.
Throughout the book, she describes how the union comes about; but always it's a case of back and forth. As in, that pendulum motion, back and forth.
Hopes raised high, only to be dashed.
In other words, it's a very intrepid journey.
But the fact that with each setback, or oscillation, from the positive into the negative; the hope becomes higher each time. It makes their feelings for each other that much stronger with each swing, so when the union does eventually occur, it has set a very strong, as Jilly describes it, almost unbreakable foundation for the relationship; two people hugely devoted to each other, in an almost indelible fashion.
But this is brought about by the swinging back and forth of the hope/disappointment pendulum. i.e. each setback, once overcome, strengthens their devotion to each other, thus creating something almost assuredly lasting and enduring.
I guess just another way the idea as a whole can be applied to everyday life that doesn't take a form so obvious as two guys fighting each other, with the defeated subsequently emerging the victor; or overcoming obstacles to attain ones goals.
**
In relation to one or two of the previous idea's mentioned:
*Freedom of choice exists to the degree that one is consciously aware (most of us, most of the time seem to think we are more consciously aware, which to me means becoming more aware of the unconscious or else you wouldn't be conscious of it, right?, *
This makes sense to me. Choice is not really an option when your not aware of something therefore the belief in freedom of choice will take precedence over the belief of pre-destiny in so far as we have that awareness.
Maybe we just use the idea of pre-destiny as an excuse for having been to lazy to develop that awareness?? :/
But I guess that can't possibly be relative to every situation?
e.g. how was the guy to know he was gonna get hit with the bolt of lightening?
I dunno; that example is obviously a bit extreme but it relates the general idea?
**
In terms of the idea referring to paradoxical situations; to make sense it must make no sense, and how that can be applied to a situation.. it's gonna take some thinking about to try and understand that one.
mattyb - I tried that self hypnosis thing you were saying.
I'm not sure is this exactly the same as you did but I got it from this webpage.
http://www.wikihow.com/Perform-Self-Hypnosis
I thought it would have no affect but it's actually amazing how you can access the subconscious, the separate trains of thought and how something that seems very vague consciously becomes so apparent.
As I said I don't know if this is exactly what you were referring to but yes I would be interested to hear more on your experience and thoughts on it?
I'm not sure is this exactly the same as you did but I got it from this webpage.
http://www.wikihow.com/Perform-Self-Hypnosis
I thought it would have no affect but it's actually amazing how you can access the subconscious, the separate trains of thought and how something that seems very vague consciously becomes so apparent.
As I said I don't know if this is exactly what you were referring to but yes I would be interested to hear more on your experience and thoughts on it?
Again short on time so just a quick thought...
conscious mind...
there is the collective unconscious, unconscious and conscious mind
I strongly think that the conscious mind is influenced by the unconscious mind to the degree that we see what we already believe...
look up the study on upside down glasses..
If a person experienced some strange light that sort of had a shape...
the Christian may see a demon/angel
a Thai might see a spirit
someone might see an alien
etc etc
All of them will validate their belief in whatever their interpretation was through their experience...
Seeing is believing is backwards I think... believing is seeing...
So the conscious mind, as I see it, gives us feed back to our belief systems through our experiences...
If we don't like our experiences then it makes sense to me too seek out subconscious programming and consider reprogramming the mind in a way that offers us the experiences we choose... that is moving towards freedom of choice also i think...
Now what degree is the conscious mind influenced by the collective unconscious???
When you look at mythologies and religions etc the same, themes, archetypes, stories etc show up and to the degree that we are sensitive so to be aware they show up in each and every one of us I believe.
I guess the conscious mind, as in my limited view, can be used yet is best used when you know what you are working with and look into your unconscious and into the collective unconscious...
I guess to put it as simply as possible... cause and affect.
If you don't like something or what to change something then one must see what one can change in order to act, live, experience differently.
The brain, in all its amazing splendor, pales in the face of consciousness I think.
conscious mind...
there is the collective unconscious, unconscious and conscious mind
I strongly think that the conscious mind is influenced by the unconscious mind to the degree that we see what we already believe...
look up the study on upside down glasses..
If a person experienced some strange light that sort of had a shape...
the Christian may see a demon/angel
a Thai might see a spirit
someone might see an alien
etc etc
All of them will validate their belief in whatever their interpretation was through their experience...
Seeing is believing is backwards I think... believing is seeing...
So the conscious mind, as I see it, gives us feed back to our belief systems through our experiences...
If we don't like our experiences then it makes sense to me too seek out subconscious programming and consider reprogramming the mind in a way that offers us the experiences we choose... that is moving towards freedom of choice also i think...
Now what degree is the conscious mind influenced by the collective unconscious???
When you look at mythologies and religions etc the same, themes, archetypes, stories etc show up and to the degree that we are sensitive so to be aware they show up in each and every one of us I believe.
I guess the conscious mind, as in my limited view, can be used yet is best used when you know what you are working with and look into your unconscious and into the collective unconscious...
I guess to put it as simply as possible... cause and affect.
If you don't like something or what to change something then one must see what one can change in order to act, live, experience differently.
The brain, in all its amazing splendor, pales in the face of consciousness I think.
MarcoS
The pendulum - I think you might find Itzak Bentov's works quite interesting..
"Stalking The Wild Pendulum" and "A Brief Tour Through Higher Consciousness"
I don't think only pain leads to pleasure, nor hardship the only thing that leads to success.
I do think they propel or push or create a pull in the other direction.
The world exists/is created in opposites (perceived opposite polarities) - that is just the way it is as I see it anyway.
You don't need to loose fights to become a great fighter however loosing offers some great potential for growth, improvement, development. It also strongly test character and your (what I call) wannabe/warrior balance (relative spectrum's of the same thing).
The lessons one learns in anything (Lance A and cancer) can be applied to any other area of life (cycling, relationships).. I started to experience this with pool and MuayThai and have heard people share their journeys to similar conclusions from math, science, nature, psyche, electricity etc etc
All reflects ALL is my perspective and be that true or not I think there are always parts we can take from any experience that can be applied to anything else.
Riding a bike in many ways is easier than living with and moving beyond cancer. The strength it takes for the later and the seriousness of it makes riding a bike, no matter how much society praises as a big big thing, much smaller and easier undertaking I think.. as one example.
The pendulum - I think you might find Itzak Bentov's works quite interesting..
"Stalking The Wild Pendulum" and "A Brief Tour Through Higher Consciousness"
I don't think only pain leads to pleasure, nor hardship the only thing that leads to success.
I do think they propel or push or create a pull in the other direction.
The world exists/is created in opposites (perceived opposite polarities) - that is just the way it is as I see it anyway.
You don't need to loose fights to become a great fighter however loosing offers some great potential for growth, improvement, development. It also strongly test character and your (what I call) wannabe/warrior balance (relative spectrum's of the same thing).
The lessons one learns in anything (Lance A and cancer) can be applied to any other area of life (cycling, relationships).. I started to experience this with pool and MuayThai and have heard people share their journeys to similar conclusions from math, science, nature, psyche, electricity etc etc
All reflects ALL is my perspective and be that true or not I think there are always parts we can take from any experience that can be applied to anything else.
Riding a bike in many ways is easier than living with and moving beyond cancer. The strength it takes for the later and the seriousness of it makes riding a bike, no matter how much society praises as a big big thing, much smaller and easier undertaking I think.. as one example.
MarcoS
By the way they both have much of same stuff... the brief tour is a shorter read but less in depth
By the way they both have much of same stuff... the brief tour is a shorter read but less in depth
Just one quick question I'd just like to throw out there.
So I'll make a statement that may or may not be correct and be open to criticism on it:
1) Some people operate mainly from instinct. They go on what the have a "gut" feeling on. They will pick up things, learning etc, from experience, on a subconscious level.
2) Others operate more consciously. They must analyze what they do and deduce consciously the reason or means behind doing it in order - to do it.
In other words, take for example, I dunno, learning a new technique in thai boxing.
I think, the majority - I dunno, I guess - of people will gain an understanding of the technique by repetition.
In other words, they get "a feel" for it. They are unaware, to a degree, of the cause for the improvement in the technique but the subconscious or instinct has developed, through experience, "a feel" for how to do it and it has been learned in this sense.
And so the technique has been programmed in their subconscious through their experience of preforming it - their repetition.
Now, some people have a complete incapacity do to this. To get "a feel" for what they're doing.
To preform the technique they must consciously understand the mechanics behind doing it.
Say for example with throwing the knee.
The mechanics being; the generation of momentum from the pendulum motion of the knee from 0 to 90 degrees and the transference of the momentum into the horizontal direction or Y-vector by thrusting the hips forward - along the horizontal plane - and turning on the ball of the foot so the body shifts forward again - on a horizontal plane.
Thus the momentum of the knee collides horizontally, perpendicularly (most effectively) with the vertical plane of the opposing body.
So that's the statement:
The learning and programming takes place on a subconscious level for those being case (1)
The programs are stored subconsciously for those being case (2) but the actual learning takes place on a conscious level.
Maybe this is not the case as regards everything, but what I think is - and this is the point of my making this statement - for some people, they rely more heavily on the conscious understanding as oppose to the subconscious "getting a feel for something" and as a result their subconscious programming can often be MORE ACCURATE! - ???
Now, as regards your statement above;
*QUOTE
So the conscious mind, as I see it, gives us feed back to our belief systems through our experiences...
If we don't like our experiences then it makes sense to me too seek out subconscious programming and consider reprogramming the mind in a way that offers us the experiences we choose... that is moving towards freedom of choice also i think...
*END QUOTE
For the person in case (1), say they want to throw the knee better, improve their technique - this "reprogramming" that you have described - it will be more difficult for this person, as they have done the learning through experience and in order to change their technique they will have to consider it on a conscious level - consider every facet and detail of the technique.
For the person in case (2), if they want to improve their technique, the adjustment will not be as near as difficult, as they have learned it on a conscious level - BUT - unfortunately for them, until the point that they took it upon themselves to understand the mechanics consciously, their ability to throw the knee was ZERO.
No matter how much repetition they did, they could not "get a feel" for the technique.
And again - BUT, when they did come to understand the technique consciously, their conscious understanding developed a technique that was more thorough or correct - much of the time - than the person in case (1) where the technique was developed through repetition.
***************
Now, more everyday application of the above:
I read recently about a case of a lady that divorced from her husband.
She described her meeting of him, how it was "love at first sight". A very chemical type experience and a very strong physical attraction.
She described also how her ex-partner, to a strong degree, mimicked the characteristics of father.
She also described how her relationship with her father was quite tumultuous - he was controlling, abusive etc.
This also recurred with her ex-partner (in her opinion, due to the similarity in characteristics of the people that they are) - the controlling and abusive behavior, ultimately leading to their separation.
The cause of the attraction, she stated - or as was her belief - was her FAMILIARITY with this type of person.
She had developed this programming through her past experience, and her future attractions were thus determined by this programming.
In this sense, her "freedom of choice" as to who she may or may not be attracted to, or the degree to which she may have been attracted, was limited to what she had experience of - what she had been programmed with.
She described her intention to work on "reprogramming" her subconscious, but how it would be difficult as she had always been the type to develop things on a "gut" level, on a subconscious level.
i.e. a case (1) person, as above.
Would this make sense, or is there part of that where I may be going wide of the mark a bit??
My main area of thought revolves around the case (2) person.
The degree to which they rely on conscious understanding of something to develop the programming.
How there is a complete inability to develop this programming through experience, as such, to "get a feel" for something.
This is obviously detrimental in a case where that person has not set aside the time or effort to develop this understanding.
Has there been cases of where someone would be such an extreme case of this that they may need to set aside time to consciously comprehend things so fundamental such as, I dunno, say - facial expression.
What the various expressions and facial movements communicate - something which I believe is almost 100% developed by most people on a subconscious level, again, through the experience of the communication that they have had.
Perhaps this is a facet of human evolution - the leaning away from instinct more towards conscious understanding?
After all, they say humans only actually use a very small percentage of their brains.
Just some wild speculation there!
There's a well known mma fighter, Bas Rutten, who I've heard comment again and again that fighting is 100% in the mind.
Everything comes from the mind. There will be no physical manifestation unless it is preceded by the mental one.
If you want to get better at something, you think about it, develop the understanding.
Perhaps my question is, is it heard of that this could extend to the point I have described above - to the most fundamental things?
Where we actually have to set aside time and effort to develop this understanding - again, of things that are so fundamental?
Hope that hasn't been too much a vague rambling!!
So I'll make a statement that may or may not be correct and be open to criticism on it:
1) Some people operate mainly from instinct. They go on what the have a "gut" feeling on. They will pick up things, learning etc, from experience, on a subconscious level.
2) Others operate more consciously. They must analyze what they do and deduce consciously the reason or means behind doing it in order - to do it.
In other words, take for example, I dunno, learning a new technique in thai boxing.
I think, the majority - I dunno, I guess - of people will gain an understanding of the technique by repetition.
In other words, they get "a feel" for it. They are unaware, to a degree, of the cause for the improvement in the technique but the subconscious or instinct has developed, through experience, "a feel" for how to do it and it has been learned in this sense.
And so the technique has been programmed in their subconscious through their experience of preforming it - their repetition.
Now, some people have a complete incapacity do to this. To get "a feel" for what they're doing.
To preform the technique they must consciously understand the mechanics behind doing it.
Say for example with throwing the knee.
The mechanics being; the generation of momentum from the pendulum motion of the knee from 0 to 90 degrees and the transference of the momentum into the horizontal direction or Y-vector by thrusting the hips forward - along the horizontal plane - and turning on the ball of the foot so the body shifts forward again - on a horizontal plane.
Thus the momentum of the knee collides horizontally, perpendicularly (most effectively) with the vertical plane of the opposing body.
So that's the statement:
The learning and programming takes place on a subconscious level for those being case (1)
The programs are stored subconsciously for those being case (2) but the actual learning takes place on a conscious level.
Maybe this is not the case as regards everything, but what I think is - and this is the point of my making this statement - for some people, they rely more heavily on the conscious understanding as oppose to the subconscious "getting a feel for something" and as a result their subconscious programming can often be MORE ACCURATE! - ???
Now, as regards your statement above;
*QUOTE
So the conscious mind, as I see it, gives us feed back to our belief systems through our experiences...
If we don't like our experiences then it makes sense to me too seek out subconscious programming and consider reprogramming the mind in a way that offers us the experiences we choose... that is moving towards freedom of choice also i think...
*END QUOTE
For the person in case (1), say they want to throw the knee better, improve their technique - this "reprogramming" that you have described - it will be more difficult for this person, as they have done the learning through experience and in order to change their technique they will have to consider it on a conscious level - consider every facet and detail of the technique.
For the person in case (2), if they want to improve their technique, the adjustment will not be as near as difficult, as they have learned it on a conscious level - BUT - unfortunately for them, until the point that they took it upon themselves to understand the mechanics consciously, their ability to throw the knee was ZERO.
No matter how much repetition they did, they could not "get a feel" for the technique.
And again - BUT, when they did come to understand the technique consciously, their conscious understanding developed a technique that was more thorough or correct - much of the time - than the person in case (1) where the technique was developed through repetition.
***************
Now, more everyday application of the above:
I read recently about a case of a lady that divorced from her husband.
She described her meeting of him, how it was "love at first sight". A very chemical type experience and a very strong physical attraction.
She described also how her ex-partner, to a strong degree, mimicked the characteristics of father.
She also described how her relationship with her father was quite tumultuous - he was controlling, abusive etc.
This also recurred with her ex-partner (in her opinion, due to the similarity in characteristics of the people that they are) - the controlling and abusive behavior, ultimately leading to their separation.
The cause of the attraction, she stated - or as was her belief - was her FAMILIARITY with this type of person.
She had developed this programming through her past experience, and her future attractions were thus determined by this programming.
In this sense, her "freedom of choice" as to who she may or may not be attracted to, or the degree to which she may have been attracted, was limited to what she had experience of - what she had been programmed with.
She described her intention to work on "reprogramming" her subconscious, but how it would be difficult as she had always been the type to develop things on a "gut" level, on a subconscious level.
i.e. a case (1) person, as above.
Would this make sense, or is there part of that where I may be going wide of the mark a bit??
My main area of thought revolves around the case (2) person.
The degree to which they rely on conscious understanding of something to develop the programming.
How there is a complete inability to develop this programming through experience, as such, to "get a feel" for something.
This is obviously detrimental in a case where that person has not set aside the time or effort to develop this understanding.
Has there been cases of where someone would be such an extreme case of this that they may need to set aside time to consciously comprehend things so fundamental such as, I dunno, say - facial expression.
What the various expressions and facial movements communicate - something which I believe is almost 100% developed by most people on a subconscious level, again, through the experience of the communication that they have had.
Perhaps this is a facet of human evolution - the leaning away from instinct more towards conscious understanding?
After all, they say humans only actually use a very small percentage of their brains.
Just some wild speculation there!
There's a well known mma fighter, Bas Rutten, who I've heard comment again and again that fighting is 100% in the mind.
Everything comes from the mind. There will be no physical manifestation unless it is preceded by the mental one.
If you want to get better at something, you think about it, develop the understanding.
Perhaps my question is, is it heard of that this could extend to the point I have described above - to the most fundamental things?
Where we actually have to set aside time and effort to develop this understanding - again, of things that are so fundamental?
Hope that hasn't been too much a vague rambling!!
Also to include;
Perhaps it works in the contrasting sense also.
I knew a guy at one stage. A kick boxer.
He was probably and is probably one of the greatest talents around in terms of skill level - just incredible to watch.
But in terms of developing the skill consciously, I strongly believe this was not the case with him.
He seemed to operate almost entirely out of instinct.
When asked to show someone how to preform a technique - the intricacies, the finer points, seemed to be lost on him.
Curiously, to speak to the individual himself, that conscious awareness seemed to be lesser than average. This conveyed itself in terms of speech clarity, expression, so on. (I hope this doesn't come across as a condescending or improper description - but it's simply a description of the case as it was)
So what we can deduce from this is that his ability to attain a "feel" for something or gain a subconscious understanding of something through performance and repetition was higher than average - while his conscious ability to take on and process information was perhaps lower than average.
So this is in contrast to the person described above where the subconscious ability or ability to develop a "feel" for something was lacking but the conscious ability to process information and develop that conscious understanding was quite keen.
Just speculating; I guess that most people would fall in the middle. The two cases described above may be somewhat closer to the ends of the spectrum - opposing ends in these two cases.
For most people I would think there seems to be a good ability to consciously comprehend and a good ability to subconsciously develop a feel for something - or perhaps they vary - if we were to look at a meter chart for example perhaps some people would fall at 4 for conscious awareness, 6 for unconscious - in another case 5 for each - so on.
The two cases above being relatively extreme in terms of abilities in each area i.e. 1 for conscious 9 for subconscious - vice-versa
Perhaps we all develop to the same degree but using what we have to our advantage and making the most of what were not so strong in.
i.e. if we are roughly the same in terms of ability to consciously comprehend and develop the understanding and also develop that gut feeling for something, we use both in conjunction to attain an understanding of that which we wish to learn.
In terms of reprogramming an already-in-place subconscious program, in terms of, and I quote "seeing what we already believe" the degree of difficulty or ease of doing this for each of these cases.. ?
Maybe relative to the above paragraph - we just use what were strong at??
But is it necessary to consciously comprehend in order to reprogram??
Perhaps it works in the contrasting sense also.
I knew a guy at one stage. A kick boxer.
He was probably and is probably one of the greatest talents around in terms of skill level - just incredible to watch.
But in terms of developing the skill consciously, I strongly believe this was not the case with him.
He seemed to operate almost entirely out of instinct.
When asked to show someone how to preform a technique - the intricacies, the finer points, seemed to be lost on him.
Curiously, to speak to the individual himself, that conscious awareness seemed to be lesser than average. This conveyed itself in terms of speech clarity, expression, so on. (I hope this doesn't come across as a condescending or improper description - but it's simply a description of the case as it was)
So what we can deduce from this is that his ability to attain a "feel" for something or gain a subconscious understanding of something through performance and repetition was higher than average - while his conscious ability to take on and process information was perhaps lower than average.
So this is in contrast to the person described above where the subconscious ability or ability to develop a "feel" for something was lacking but the conscious ability to process information and develop that conscious understanding was quite keen.
Just speculating; I guess that most people would fall in the middle. The two cases described above may be somewhat closer to the ends of the spectrum - opposing ends in these two cases.
For most people I would think there seems to be a good ability to consciously comprehend and a good ability to subconsciously develop a feel for something - or perhaps they vary - if we were to look at a meter chart for example perhaps some people would fall at 4 for conscious awareness, 6 for unconscious - in another case 5 for each - so on.
The two cases above being relatively extreme in terms of abilities in each area i.e. 1 for conscious 9 for subconscious - vice-versa
Perhaps we all develop to the same degree but using what we have to our advantage and making the most of what were not so strong in.
i.e. if we are roughly the same in terms of ability to consciously comprehend and develop the understanding and also develop that gut feeling for something, we use both in conjunction to attain an understanding of that which we wish to learn.
In terms of reprogramming an already-in-place subconscious program, in terms of, and I quote "seeing what we already believe" the degree of difficulty or ease of doing this for each of these cases.. ?
Maybe relative to the above paragraph - we just use what were strong at??
But is it necessary to consciously comprehend in order to reprogram??
"In other words, take for example, I dunno, learning a new technique in thai boxing.
I think, the majority - I dunno, I guess - of people will gain an understanding of the technique by repetition.
In other words, they get "a feel" for it. They are unaware, to a degree, of the cause for the improvement in the technique but the subconscious or instinct has developed, through experience, "a feel" for how to do it and it has been learned in this sense.
And so the technique has been programmed in their subconscious through their experience of preforming it - their repetition."
I guess you get a "feel" from doing as the motor programs and familiarity etc takes hold.
That feel, I think, comes so much faster when teaching to "feel" wtf is going on comes over teaching 1,2 kick, or go go go
The faster and harder one goes the less aware they can be - the less they "feel" other than strain and drain and muscle pump etc... the subtle feels that give you the feel (great language choice lol) come when one feel's things like their balance when punching, their awareness of hand positioning starting, going in, returning and finishing etc, thats all "feel"
I think starting on that at the beginning makes loads of sense.
Start with teaching how to feel basic balance, positions, core function, readiness etc as they start to learn all the kicks and punches etc which I think is the icing, not the cake.
-
Inability to get a feel I think is mostly lack of body awareness.
"The learning and programming takes place on a subconscious level for those being case (1)
The programs are stored subconsciously for those being case (2) but the actual learning takes place on a conscious level. "
I think there is truth in the above, I also think it is way more multifacited and complicated.
I watched some MMA last night and I feel I can see, to a degree, how tapped into themselves they are in regards to a "feel" and to instinct.
Maybe I am delusional (wasn't completely sober either, however)
Watch some fights, MMA (stand up - easier to see I think) or kickboxing and forget about who's throwing a nice punch or how hard a kick landed and watch the over all movement and ways of attacking or defending etc
Now put in your mind that you are watching animals (we are animals!!! of the mammalian flavor) and see who you think is moving more like an animal than someone who has learned some way of kicking and punching... what looks more natural - not related to the sport as we have been taught it and not through the eyes of how we normally watch (guessing how most people watch) but through the eyes of watching animals and seeing witch one seem more animalish...
that I think is tapping more into instinct....or showing of..
I've seen some pretty cool improvements from having athletes/students take a moment to pretend (in whatever way works for them) that they already know how to do something - then have them just do it... often the improvement is pretty noticeable...
possible angles in explaining this include
getting the mind out of the - never mind it can easily get in the way in a big big way but also we are so conditioned to be in the mind that it over works and we try try try instead of doing... I believe that in observation alone (everyone learns differently I know) the body has the capacity to pretty much copy and other humans movements - now that is to the degree of health and function of the body (including strength, flexibility etc) and the degree that we are in touch with our body and can essentially be one with it as opposed to try so damn hard to control it. (the mind is also the home of the ego which often focuses on whats "wrong" as opposed to what you want to do therefor having the subconscious mind receive info on exactly the thing you don't want to be focusing on)
getting more "esoteric" - ideas like - you can never learn anything only reaffirm what you already know or that you can tap into the energy or information of what you are wanting to do... - not going to get into deep explanations of example etc
simply slowing the hell down, distracting the crazy drunken monkey mind enough to get out of the way and just do what you want.
Point is the mind is many faceted, I think and we can tap into intuition and instinct.
But we don't do that by going harder all the time, it starts to come when we focus on awareness of the body, of mental processes, of emotions, of thoughts... as we become more in tune with self we are able to tap into instinct - we ARE animals!!!! The "feeling" of the heart and the rational and learning in the brain become a blend, not really knowing where one stops and one starts...
I guess kind of like Avatar...
its the biggest delusion that we think we are not animals or not a part of nature... we are, we just don't act like it...
Want to run and jump and tap into that flow... its getting back to who we are and in tune with self...
At least there are some thoughts from a very tired not completely sober dad :)
I think, the majority - I dunno, I guess - of people will gain an understanding of the technique by repetition.
In other words, they get "a feel" for it. They are unaware, to a degree, of the cause for the improvement in the technique but the subconscious or instinct has developed, through experience, "a feel" for how to do it and it has been learned in this sense.
And so the technique has been programmed in their subconscious through their experience of preforming it - their repetition."
I guess you get a "feel" from doing as the motor programs and familiarity etc takes hold.
That feel, I think, comes so much faster when teaching to "feel" wtf is going on comes over teaching 1,2 kick, or go go go
The faster and harder one goes the less aware they can be - the less they "feel" other than strain and drain and muscle pump etc... the subtle feels that give you the feel (great language choice lol) come when one feel's things like their balance when punching, their awareness of hand positioning starting, going in, returning and finishing etc, thats all "feel"
I think starting on that at the beginning makes loads of sense.
Start with teaching how to feel basic balance, positions, core function, readiness etc as they start to learn all the kicks and punches etc which I think is the icing, not the cake.
-
Inability to get a feel I think is mostly lack of body awareness.
"The learning and programming takes place on a subconscious level for those being case (1)
The programs are stored subconsciously for those being case (2) but the actual learning takes place on a conscious level. "
I think there is truth in the above, I also think it is way more multifacited and complicated.
I watched some MMA last night and I feel I can see, to a degree, how tapped into themselves they are in regards to a "feel" and to instinct.
Maybe I am delusional (wasn't completely sober either, however)
Watch some fights, MMA (stand up - easier to see I think) or kickboxing and forget about who's throwing a nice punch or how hard a kick landed and watch the over all movement and ways of attacking or defending etc
Now put in your mind that you are watching animals (we are animals!!! of the mammalian flavor) and see who you think is moving more like an animal than someone who has learned some way of kicking and punching... what looks more natural - not related to the sport as we have been taught it and not through the eyes of how we normally watch (guessing how most people watch) but through the eyes of watching animals and seeing witch one seem more animalish...
that I think is tapping more into instinct....or showing of..
I've seen some pretty cool improvements from having athletes/students take a moment to pretend (in whatever way works for them) that they already know how to do something - then have them just do it... often the improvement is pretty noticeable...
possible angles in explaining this include
getting the mind out of the - never mind it can easily get in the way in a big big way but also we are so conditioned to be in the mind that it over works and we try try try instead of doing... I believe that in observation alone (everyone learns differently I know) the body has the capacity to pretty much copy and other humans movements - now that is to the degree of health and function of the body (including strength, flexibility etc) and the degree that we are in touch with our body and can essentially be one with it as opposed to try so damn hard to control it. (the mind is also the home of the ego which often focuses on whats "wrong" as opposed to what you want to do therefor having the subconscious mind receive info on exactly the thing you don't want to be focusing on)
getting more "esoteric" - ideas like - you can never learn anything only reaffirm what you already know or that you can tap into the energy or information of what you are wanting to do... - not going to get into deep explanations of example etc
simply slowing the hell down, distracting the crazy drunken monkey mind enough to get out of the way and just do what you want.
Point is the mind is many faceted, I think and we can tap into intuition and instinct.
But we don't do that by going harder all the time, it starts to come when we focus on awareness of the body, of mental processes, of emotions, of thoughts... as we become more in tune with self we are able to tap into instinct - we ARE animals!!!! The "feeling" of the heart and the rational and learning in the brain become a blend, not really knowing where one stops and one starts...
I guess kind of like Avatar...
its the biggest delusion that we think we are not animals or not a part of nature... we are, we just don't act like it...
Want to run and jump and tap into that flow... its getting back to who we are and in tune with self...
At least there are some thoughts from a very tired not completely sober dad :)
I think understanding comes in different forms, levels and ways...
knowing could be understanding but knowing with experience is knowledge and a whole different level of understanding.
One can understand a punch, logically, one can understand what it does and how to do it and the muscle movements and how to pivot (oh perfect example)
I see many people pivot but it doesn't really help... I mean the pivot and the body movements and the arm movements are not linked together - they are not working synergisticaly - they just learned that is how you punch but didn't feel the body working in unison.
A fighter understands a sport on a different level from a judge who has never fought.
case with woman - husband and father
I think it makes loads of sense - but I think there are some more angles to explain the situation and how and why (never not seen couples who didn't masrry their parents in some way lol)
great point - freedom of choice is only possible to the degree that we are conscious and aware
how aware is a fighter (say in gym) when you say "you're dropping your right when you jab" and he can't keep the right up for the 5 minutes?
your instinctual kick boxer friend...
maybe there are levels, or many areas in which we can be more or less conscious, more or less aware, more or less tapping into instinct, more or less etc etc etc
Maybe its so multileveled and multifaceted... like a good puncher yet shitty kicks... he has some body awareness in some areas... same in mental, instinct, intuition etc etc etc
I think there is truth and value in your conscious and unconscious perceptions LOL read that again... ok let me rewrite - I think there is truth in your idea about the conscious and subconscious etc. I also think it fits into a piece of the puzzle..
"...is it necessary to consciously comprehend in order to reprogram??"
only to consciously reprogram is there a requirement of some level of conscious comprehension - thats my opinion
lots of programming goes on - the more conscious you are the more you can choose your programming and start to operate beyond it.
some thoughts and opinions :)
knowing could be understanding but knowing with experience is knowledge and a whole different level of understanding.
One can understand a punch, logically, one can understand what it does and how to do it and the muscle movements and how to pivot (oh perfect example)
I see many people pivot but it doesn't really help... I mean the pivot and the body movements and the arm movements are not linked together - they are not working synergisticaly - they just learned that is how you punch but didn't feel the body working in unison.
A fighter understands a sport on a different level from a judge who has never fought.
case with woman - husband and father
I think it makes loads of sense - but I think there are some more angles to explain the situation and how and why (never not seen couples who didn't masrry their parents in some way lol)
great point - freedom of choice is only possible to the degree that we are conscious and aware
how aware is a fighter (say in gym) when you say "you're dropping your right when you jab" and he can't keep the right up for the 5 minutes?
your instinctual kick boxer friend...
maybe there are levels, or many areas in which we can be more or less conscious, more or less aware, more or less tapping into instinct, more or less etc etc etc
Maybe its so multileveled and multifaceted... like a good puncher yet shitty kicks... he has some body awareness in some areas... same in mental, instinct, intuition etc etc etc
I think there is truth and value in your conscious and unconscious perceptions LOL read that again... ok let me rewrite - I think there is truth in your idea about the conscious and subconscious etc. I also think it fits into a piece of the puzzle..
"...is it necessary to consciously comprehend in order to reprogram??"
only to consciously reprogram is there a requirement of some level of conscious comprehension - thats my opinion
lots of programming goes on - the more conscious you are the more you can choose your programming and start to operate beyond it.
some thoughts and opinions :)
*I guess you get a "feel" from doing as the motor programs and familiarity etc takes hold.
That feel, I think, comes so much faster when teaching to "feel" wtf is going on comes over teaching 1,2 kick, or go go go*
I'd agree with that.
Just to speculate - say for example, for someone who is finding it difficult to get a feel for something - cause you know it just seems to come easier for some than others - it is more necessary to have a more conscious understanding of what exactly it is they're trying to get a feel for.
i.e. a conscious understanding of the specifics of the technique itself.
This way they can "steer" themselves as such, on a path that is more productive.
At the same time, I do agree - whatever the case - whether the "feel" comes with greater or lesser conscious understanding, it is more beneficial to adopt a slower more composed and cerebral approach during the learning phase so the motor programs are set correctly?
For the instinctual kick boxer dude, perhaps it was a case for him where the feel came more naturally, the necessity for the conscious understanding was not as great and therefore his ability to relay the detail of the technique to others was not present so much, due to the fact that the techniques were absorbed in such a way that the conscious understanding of the detail was not necessary.
I think I've said the same thing twice in that sentence.
*****
For those in the middle - who can get a feel to a certain extent, but not develop 100% correctly the technique by this means alone, a degree of conscious understanding would/could improve what they have developed already. - through body awareness.
Curiously - IMO - what you can see alot is, when someone has enough to get by, as such - i.e. say they have a good punch, but not perfect - they tend not to be motivated to set aside the effort to gain that conscious understanding that may help to make it the perfect punch.
As oppose to someone who can't throw the punch at all - they tend to work at it and develop the understanding thoroughly until they have the perfect technique.
Hmmm - well maybe that's not entirely true - perhaps it's more to do with their personal satisfaction at the quality of what they hope to achieve - anyway, not to go off on a tangent to much.
*********
The case with the woman described above; my understanding of what happened there was she was programmed involuntarily, possibly due to the "intensity"?, of the situation when she was younger.
I.e. programmed - or to relate it to something physical - her motor functions were forced to develop a certain technique, not through her own choosing, and this caused her to react in a certain way.
Now to relate to the situation as described - that reaction being, she would find attractive immediately the type of person she was programmed to be familiar with - again, programmed due to the "intensity" of her previous experience with that type of person. But that's just a theory.
*********
*Inability to get a feel I think is mostly lack of body awareness.*
That would make sense.
And in turn, perhaps what is necessary to get that feel for someone lacking in body awareness, is to develop a conscious awareness - as oppose to the subconscious/body awareness, (maybe some people are just born or genetically coded to be more inclined the way of the latter?) - and develop the "feel" or develop the program of the movement, in this way.. ?
That feel, I think, comes so much faster when teaching to "feel" wtf is going on comes over teaching 1,2 kick, or go go go*
I'd agree with that.
Just to speculate - say for example, for someone who is finding it difficult to get a feel for something - cause you know it just seems to come easier for some than others - it is more necessary to have a more conscious understanding of what exactly it is they're trying to get a feel for.
i.e. a conscious understanding of the specifics of the technique itself.
This way they can "steer" themselves as such, on a path that is more productive.
At the same time, I do agree - whatever the case - whether the "feel" comes with greater or lesser conscious understanding, it is more beneficial to adopt a slower more composed and cerebral approach during the learning phase so the motor programs are set correctly?
For the instinctual kick boxer dude, perhaps it was a case for him where the feel came more naturally, the necessity for the conscious understanding was not as great and therefore his ability to relay the detail of the technique to others was not present so much, due to the fact that the techniques were absorbed in such a way that the conscious understanding of the detail was not necessary.
I think I've said the same thing twice in that sentence.
*****
For those in the middle - who can get a feel to a certain extent, but not develop 100% correctly the technique by this means alone, a degree of conscious understanding would/could improve what they have developed already. - through body awareness.
Curiously - IMO - what you can see alot is, when someone has enough to get by, as such - i.e. say they have a good punch, but not perfect - they tend not to be motivated to set aside the effort to gain that conscious understanding that may help to make it the perfect punch.
As oppose to someone who can't throw the punch at all - they tend to work at it and develop the understanding thoroughly until they have the perfect technique.
Hmmm - well maybe that's not entirely true - perhaps it's more to do with their personal satisfaction at the quality of what they hope to achieve - anyway, not to go off on a tangent to much.
*********
The case with the woman described above; my understanding of what happened there was she was programmed involuntarily, possibly due to the "intensity"?, of the situation when she was younger.
I.e. programmed - or to relate it to something physical - her motor functions were forced to develop a certain technique, not through her own choosing, and this caused her to react in a certain way.
Now to relate to the situation as described - that reaction being, she would find attractive immediately the type of person she was programmed to be familiar with - again, programmed due to the "intensity" of her previous experience with that type of person. But that's just a theory.
*********
*Inability to get a feel I think is mostly lack of body awareness.*
That would make sense.
And in turn, perhaps what is necessary to get that feel for someone lacking in body awareness, is to develop a conscious awareness - as oppose to the subconscious/body awareness, (maybe some people are just born or genetically coded to be more inclined the way of the latter?) - and develop the "feel" or develop the program of the movement, in this way.. ?
Just to speculate - say for example, for someone who is finding it difficult to get a feel for something - cause you know it just seems to come easier for some than others - it is more necessary to have a more conscious understanding of what exactly it is they're trying to get a feel for.
i.e. a conscious understanding of the specifics of the technique itself.
- I think so...I also think people learn differently.. watch, been moved through it, understand it etc
I think sensitivity to ones own body movements and ones body is more "natural" for some than others. I think in our society in general we are all pretty much a long long way away from our "natural" potential.
i.e. a conscious understanding of the specifics of the technique itself.
- I think so...I also think people learn differently.. watch, been moved through it, understand it etc
I think sensitivity to ones own body movements and ones body is more "natural" for some than others. I think in our society in general we are all pretty much a long long way away from our "natural" potential.
Just as regards the point of just being natural - more animal like - just feeling or focusing on MOVEMENT as oppose to the strength of the punches or something.
We were just doing 7/8 punch combos on the pads tonight and I was having difficulty adjusting my feet for each punch and therefore keeping my balance.
Then I remember seeing an interview with the mma fighter paul daley and one of the things he said he focuses on in particular is footwork and movement.
So I just tried to focus on movement more so as oppose to trying to hit the pads harder... and the improvement was immediate.
Perfectly balanced for each punch, feet moving in the right direction - not consciously, just naturally, by just telling myself to focus on movement.
It's like a conscious implementation of the subconscious or something maybe?
And my partner commented on the improvement in power of the punches, probably due to more efficient use of momentum with the better movement.
**
So yeah, your bang on I reckon - focusing on movement, being more animal like is another way to look at it, like you said.
Lastly, being a big youtube nerd, just a couple of bouts I found very interesting was this one
[youtube]B_nKbE-PDAg[/youtube]
Notice the Dutch fighter, he's just throwing straight punches and right kicks - but the timing and ability to keep his range and use angles - his movement in other words - allows him to dominate his opponent.
I don't know what kind of animal you would liken him to - maybe a scorpion getting ready to strike..
Another famous ground fighter commented in an interview that he aims to replicate an anaconda when fights.
To "round" his opponent as he said, and isolate a limb when they make a mistake.
[youtube]T13VFAUj3KQ[/youtube]
His strength - like that of an anaconda I guess, also plays a big part, I reckon, in his ability to control his opponent on the ground until he can find that weakness.
And in a training video, on the tire, one can notice his movement when circling the tire is very fluid and natural and relaxed, like that of an animal - as oppose to rigid and tense, as a human may be naturally inclined to do when working out.
[youtube]HKLScrnGClA[/youtube]
We were just doing 7/8 punch combos on the pads tonight and I was having difficulty adjusting my feet for each punch and therefore keeping my balance.
Then I remember seeing an interview with the mma fighter paul daley and one of the things he said he focuses on in particular is footwork and movement.
So I just tried to focus on movement more so as oppose to trying to hit the pads harder... and the improvement was immediate.
Perfectly balanced for each punch, feet moving in the right direction - not consciously, just naturally, by just telling myself to focus on movement.
It's like a conscious implementation of the subconscious or something maybe?
And my partner commented on the improvement in power of the punches, probably due to more efficient use of momentum with the better movement.
**
So yeah, your bang on I reckon - focusing on movement, being more animal like is another way to look at it, like you said.
Lastly, being a big youtube nerd, just a couple of bouts I found very interesting was this one
[youtube]B_nKbE-PDAg[/youtube]
Notice the Dutch fighter, he's just throwing straight punches and right kicks - but the timing and ability to keep his range and use angles - his movement in other words - allows him to dominate his opponent.
I don't know what kind of animal you would liken him to - maybe a scorpion getting ready to strike..
Another famous ground fighter commented in an interview that he aims to replicate an anaconda when fights.
To "round" his opponent as he said, and isolate a limb when they make a mistake.
[youtube]T13VFAUj3KQ[/youtube]
His strength - like that of an anaconda I guess, also plays a big part, I reckon, in his ability to control his opponent on the ground until he can find that weakness.
And in a training video, on the tire, one can notice his movement when circling the tire is very fluid and natural and relaxed, like that of an animal - as oppose to rigid and tense, as a human may be naturally inclined to do when working out.
[youtube]HKLScrnGClA[/youtube]
Damn it
**
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_nKbE-PDAg
Notice the Dutch fighter, he's just throwing straight punches and right kicks - but the timing and ability to keep his range and use angles - his movement in other words - allows him to dominate his opponent.
I don't know what kind of animal you would liken him to - maybe a scorpion getting ready to strike..
Another famous ground fighter commented in an interview that he aims to replicate an anaconda when fights.
To "round" his opponent as he said, and isolate a limb when they make a mistake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T13VFAUj3KQ
His strength - like that of an anaconda I guess, also plays a big part, I reckon, in his ability to control his opponent on the ground until he can find that weakness.
And in a training video, on the tire, one can notice his movement when circling the tire is very fluid and natural and relaxed, like that of an animal - as oppose to rigid and tense, as a human may be naturally inclined to do when working out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKLScrnGClA
**
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_nKbE-PDAg
Notice the Dutch fighter, he's just throwing straight punches and right kicks - but the timing and ability to keep his range and use angles - his movement in other words - allows him to dominate his opponent.
I don't know what kind of animal you would liken him to - maybe a scorpion getting ready to strike..
Another famous ground fighter commented in an interview that he aims to replicate an anaconda when fights.
To "round" his opponent as he said, and isolate a limb when they make a mistake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T13VFAUj3KQ
His strength - like that of an anaconda I guess, also plays a big part, I reckon, in his ability to control his opponent on the ground until he can find that weakness.
And in a training video, on the tire, one can notice his movement when circling the tire is very fluid and natural and relaxed, like that of an animal - as oppose to rigid and tense, as a human may be naturally inclined to do when working out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKLScrnGClA
So I just tried to focus on movement more so as oppose to trying to hit the pads harder... and the improvement was immediate.
exactly!!!! this is huge in my opinion.
the stance, core, balance and movement basics (footwork included) is part of your foundation... the punches and kicks are on top of that and limited to that imo...
Where I to teach the way I wanted 100% (don't have same group all the time and skill levels vary etc and many want to bang etc) I would focus on the stance, balance, posture, movement etc first then add the moves limiting power and speed etc to the degree that the foundation is maintained...
-increased power - when your whole body works together of course power and speed etc will increase (with less effort too!)...
The nervous system will use less energy and focus when the body is balanced (this also applies to muscle imbalances of strength and length etc)
I say it like this. You have the most powerful/fast sports car (not a car guy here so fill in good car terminology lol) put slicks on it and put it in snow and its not going to be overly useful....
Your stance/balance and movement etc is the tires ability to grip to move you, to transfer power into your punch etc etc
The core links the upper and lower body and in function bodies the core is where all movement starts... like dropping a pebble in water the ripple starts at core and goes down legs then back up through core into upper body and moving out through the arms (and everything inbetween etc)
give me a car that can grip the road over the power of the engine etc any day... once you can grip - rock and roll on the power and speed etc
I hope to watch video's soon....
So all this is huge in my opinion and important however it is mind work and that may one way to do it and for some needed... but in our western societies we can get overly stuck in the head... the heart, feeling it, awareness of the body is simply something one can DO - there is a trust that develops with the body and it can do things you have never trained for just because it works well...
For the first time I sprinted across this beach... good size rocks that most people would be careful walking over... I was literally going all out... my dog couldn't keep up at all...
(there are many things my body isn't doing so well these days due to life, work, lack of movement etc - but the lower legs, ankles, feet and whatever needed to do the above seemed to work.. my ankle rolled a few times but it has the movement and awareness to go that way and my body doesn't panick and goes with the flow...
My point is its not just training to fight its training to have a highly tuned functioning body AS WELL as learning to fight and then, it is my belief and limited experience, that the mind/body can take performance to new levels.
exactly!!!! this is huge in my opinion.
the stance, core, balance and movement basics (footwork included) is part of your foundation... the punches and kicks are on top of that and limited to that imo...
Where I to teach the way I wanted 100% (don't have same group all the time and skill levels vary etc and many want to bang etc) I would focus on the stance, balance, posture, movement etc first then add the moves limiting power and speed etc to the degree that the foundation is maintained...
-increased power - when your whole body works together of course power and speed etc will increase (with less effort too!)...
The nervous system will use less energy and focus when the body is balanced (this also applies to muscle imbalances of strength and length etc)
I say it like this. You have the most powerful/fast sports car (not a car guy here so fill in good car terminology lol) put slicks on it and put it in snow and its not going to be overly useful....
Your stance/balance and movement etc is the tires ability to grip to move you, to transfer power into your punch etc etc
The core links the upper and lower body and in function bodies the core is where all movement starts... like dropping a pebble in water the ripple starts at core and goes down legs then back up through core into upper body and moving out through the arms (and everything inbetween etc)
give me a car that can grip the road over the power of the engine etc any day... once you can grip - rock and roll on the power and speed etc
I hope to watch video's soon....
So all this is huge in my opinion and important however it is mind work and that may one way to do it and for some needed... but in our western societies we can get overly stuck in the head... the heart, feeling it, awareness of the body is simply something one can DO - there is a trust that develops with the body and it can do things you have never trained for just because it works well...
For the first time I sprinted across this beach... good size rocks that most people would be careful walking over... I was literally going all out... my dog couldn't keep up at all...
(there are many things my body isn't doing so well these days due to life, work, lack of movement etc - but the lower legs, ankles, feet and whatever needed to do the above seemed to work.. my ankle rolled a few times but it has the movement and awareness to go that way and my body doesn't panick and goes with the flow...
My point is its not just training to fight its training to have a highly tuned functioning body AS WELL as learning to fight and then, it is my belief and limited experience, that the mind/body can take performance to new levels.
**
the stance, core, balance and movement basics (footwork included) is part of your foundation... the punches and kicks are on top of that and limited to that imo...
**
I just have to repeat myself as regards this.
I've been focusing on this almost entirely - not neglecting other things such as power - but when the focus is on movement/balance/stance/position, everything has a 100% improvement and the more I focus on movement the better it becomes, the better my training.
I used to have problems finishing 5 rounds on pads - I'd feel half dead after.
With the focus now on movement, I can work harder, more productive, more powerful, more fluid and efficient - and conserve energy most effectively - not to mention the benefits in sparring.
It's the kind of thing I curse myself for not discovering sooner, but it's great to know it now anyway.
Applying movement across the board - when running, with the running technique, hitting the bag, skipping, lifting weights - just focusing on movement and bearing in mind the end result your hoping to achieve; that is, movement relative to fight movement.
I had a day off yesterday. Trained in the morning for two hours, and the evening for four hours - all productive - not killing myself when I know I'm tired, like I used to; but the focus on movement, meaning more efficient energy usage, means I can go alot longer.
As I said, I usually struggle to finish a session - one hour in morning and one in evening and I'm usually dead.
So very happydays!
the stance, core, balance and movement basics (footwork included) is part of your foundation... the punches and kicks are on top of that and limited to that imo...
**
I just have to repeat myself as regards this.
I've been focusing on this almost entirely - not neglecting other things such as power - but when the focus is on movement/balance/stance/position, everything has a 100% improvement and the more I focus on movement the better it becomes, the better my training.
I used to have problems finishing 5 rounds on pads - I'd feel half dead after.
With the focus now on movement, I can work harder, more productive, more powerful, more fluid and efficient - and conserve energy most effectively - not to mention the benefits in sparring.
It's the kind of thing I curse myself for not discovering sooner, but it's great to know it now anyway.
Applying movement across the board - when running, with the running technique, hitting the bag, skipping, lifting weights - just focusing on movement and bearing in mind the end result your hoping to achieve; that is, movement relative to fight movement.
I had a day off yesterday. Trained in the morning for two hours, and the evening for four hours - all productive - not killing myself when I know I'm tired, like I used to; but the focus on movement, meaning more efficient energy usage, means I can go alot longer.
As I said, I usually struggle to finish a session - one hour in morning and one in evening and I'm usually dead.
So very happydays!
Nice!!! Great to hear some experience!!
Words are powerful as they talk to our subconscious in a very influential way I think (also they reflex the subconscious).
Yesterday at the gym I had a thought on getting guys to ease up without necessarily pulling anything.
When I teach kicking I often call it "the no kick kick".
In short you swing your leg like a baseball bat in that the bat doesn't use any strength, its not flexing or moving from its own accord. I get the focus on the base leg, body posture, core and the hips and tell them to forget about the kicking leg and to let it float (albeit solid) and go for the ride.. a no kick kick... The "kicking" leg not do the kicking itself.
Anyway, I'm often trying to get guys to relax more and try less (we try so hard in the west and struggle when no struggle is needed and use way more energy than is needed imo&e). When I say relax they almost become floppy..
Well a part of getting guys to relax more while staying firm etc as well as backing off on speed was force..
There is a great book called Power vs Force that probably influenced the thought..
Holding pads I often don't want the power to go down yet they often try and strain to hard. So I said not to worry about decreasing power but back way off on the force... That seemed to help big time esspecially with the more experienced guys.
marco - you're onto something it seems. Thanks for the info...
A great running book is called "Qi Running" - I started using it just before I stopped running but it changed my running a lot even as I was only starting to get it all.. you may or may not be interested.
-focus on movement as opposed to the move - this is what I am big on but I never put it in those words. I think that will help explain to people - thank you!
Words are powerful as they talk to our subconscious in a very influential way I think (also they reflex the subconscious).
Yesterday at the gym I had a thought on getting guys to ease up without necessarily pulling anything.
When I teach kicking I often call it "the no kick kick".
In short you swing your leg like a baseball bat in that the bat doesn't use any strength, its not flexing or moving from its own accord. I get the focus on the base leg, body posture, core and the hips and tell them to forget about the kicking leg and to let it float (albeit solid) and go for the ride.. a no kick kick... The "kicking" leg not do the kicking itself.
Anyway, I'm often trying to get guys to relax more and try less (we try so hard in the west and struggle when no struggle is needed and use way more energy than is needed imo&e). When I say relax they almost become floppy..
Well a part of getting guys to relax more while staying firm etc as well as backing off on speed was force..
There is a great book called Power vs Force that probably influenced the thought..
Holding pads I often don't want the power to go down yet they often try and strain to hard. So I said not to worry about decreasing power but back way off on the force... That seemed to help big time esspecially with the more experienced guys.
marco - you're onto something it seems. Thanks for the info...
A great running book is called "Qi Running" - I started using it just before I stopped running but it changed my running a lot even as I was only starting to get it all.. you may or may not be interested.
-focus on movement as opposed to the move - this is what I am big on but I never put it in those words. I think that will help explain to people - thank you!
Yeah, my coach from back home was talking about that Qi running book one time.
I wasn't really focused on this aspect of training at that point so it went over my head a little, but from what I gathered it was again relative to position, movement, balance etc while running - for greater productivity and efficiency.
I'm a bit of a youtube addict at the moment, been neglecting the books pretty much entirely lately.
As regards, just what I think, on words influencing the subconscious.
I think that's spot on. I didn't really think of or understand it that way, but obviously that's what's happening.
It's funny, the various combination of words, or perhaps the understanding that a particular individual takes out of them, that's where they become effective - like the magic words for that person :) - for me at least.
Just coming up with them words "focus on movement, focus on movement", that's what I'm repeating to myself during training, and it seems to working - perhaps the word "movement" triggers something in the brain which compares your current movement to movement one has seen or learned at some stage, and adjusts the current state accordingly.
Another way to put it maybe: focusing mentally on how you wish the situation to manifest itself as such, knowing the area you must focus on in order for this to be the case - triggering that by using certain words - talking to our subconscious, as you say - and thus productivity is most forthcoming.
I know for myself, just from watching some fighters on youtube - Melvin manhoef, paul daley, duance ludwig etc. just seeing them, seeing how effective their movement is, visualizing it, comparing it to what I'm doing and using that to develop personally, that's what seems to work for me.
I guess it's just the key words "focus on movement", however that works in the brain, it just causes this type of activity I guess.
Another way to look at it maybe is, telling ourselves that, allows us to come out of our subconscious a bit more - become more conscious of our movement as such?
Wild speculation there really, but funnily, in an interview with Mike Tyson (done by Larry King I think), he commented on the importance of this in his training - consciousness.
He was very conscious of his speed - stemming from his movement.
At a later time, after he was released from prison, he said he increased his consciousness as regards his behavior as such; not just acting wildly out of instinct, but premeditating situations and being more thoughtful and conscious.
Perhaps this is the same thing that applies to movement during training.
I wish I had the patience to sit down and read a few books on the subject or something, understand the whole mechanics of the brain, conscious, subconscious etc. a bit better..
but so far so good anyway.
I wasn't really focused on this aspect of training at that point so it went over my head a little, but from what I gathered it was again relative to position, movement, balance etc while running - for greater productivity and efficiency.
I'm a bit of a youtube addict at the moment, been neglecting the books pretty much entirely lately.
As regards, just what I think, on words influencing the subconscious.
I think that's spot on. I didn't really think of or understand it that way, but obviously that's what's happening.
It's funny, the various combination of words, or perhaps the understanding that a particular individual takes out of them, that's where they become effective - like the magic words for that person :) - for me at least.
Just coming up with them words "focus on movement, focus on movement", that's what I'm repeating to myself during training, and it seems to working - perhaps the word "movement" triggers something in the brain which compares your current movement to movement one has seen or learned at some stage, and adjusts the current state accordingly.
Another way to put it maybe: focusing mentally on how you wish the situation to manifest itself as such, knowing the area you must focus on in order for this to be the case - triggering that by using certain words - talking to our subconscious, as you say - and thus productivity is most forthcoming.
I know for myself, just from watching some fighters on youtube - Melvin manhoef, paul daley, duance ludwig etc. just seeing them, seeing how effective their movement is, visualizing it, comparing it to what I'm doing and using that to develop personally, that's what seems to work for me.
I guess it's just the key words "focus on movement", however that works in the brain, it just causes this type of activity I guess.
Another way to look at it maybe is, telling ourselves that, allows us to come out of our subconscious a bit more - become more conscious of our movement as such?
Wild speculation there really, but funnily, in an interview with Mike Tyson (done by Larry King I think), he commented on the importance of this in his training - consciousness.
He was very conscious of his speed - stemming from his movement.
At a later time, after he was released from prison, he said he increased his consciousness as regards his behavior as such; not just acting wildly out of instinct, but premeditating situations and being more thoughtful and conscious.
Perhaps this is the same thing that applies to movement during training.
I wish I had the patience to sit down and read a few books on the subject or something, understand the whole mechanics of the brain, conscious, subconscious etc. a bit better..
but so far so good anyway.
Sponsor
Very cool thoughts...
I think its about what is in our conscious and the subconscious does come out and a big way is to consciously become more and more consciously aware. That said we can also add, delete, or modify subconscious programming. Learning to punch is programming the mind and body and we can later choose to focus conscious awareness somewhere else as the punch is good enough for now.
I think ideally there is both happening. Over all conscious awareness is increasing AND in the meantime we are changing programming we don't want and adding what we do want (Matrix - obvious loading of programs - less obvious changing and or deleting program through letting go... seems to parallel how easy it is to learn things and how much harder it can be to let go of old shit - I suspect that almost all limits to learning come from old programming - we are programmed to learn and grow and how I think society raises children to an very large degree, tells them not to learn, grow and explore even when we consciously want them to and think they are.
Teaching is a big problem I think!!! Guiding (not prefect word but better I think) foster learning how to learn and do for self. teaching teaches one to look to an outside source.
I see this with kids huge and it is very hard at times, depending how aware I am in the moment, to recall that (my programming runs deep, with my almost 2 yr old daughter.
I see it at fights too...
It would seem to me that to a degree if someone is ready to fight then they are ready to go through a right or passage as such and enter the ring ALONE! That doesn't mean he won't seek guidance but it is now his fight, he is a fighter and it is him and him alone in the ring.
The first fight especially, but any and all, it is the opportunity for the fighter to stand alone and many of us trainers are conditioned and programmed to hold their hand by teaching an hour before the fight (that doesn't install confidence to the subconscious I think) and also influences the fighter to look to the trainer instead of inside.
(often parents bring the child's focus onto themselves - I suspect subconscious insecurities and needing to feel needed/important etc - I do to at times and work towards less and less.. example - child is playing with the dog and calling it - parent "helps" by telling the dog to go to the child - this directs the dogs attention to the parent and the dog likely goes there, it also likely directs the childs attention to the parent when telling the dog and if not for sure when the dog goes to parent... Anyway - child is learning to interact with dog and parent redirects attention to self.)
I see the same in many changing rooms - trainers teaching, coaching, talking, preparing, taking care of, trying to help with mental or nerves etc etc with the fighter. The fighter is being taught to look outside as I see it and the right of passage is a journey alone. I think a first fight, set up with ritual (just any action you put meaning to) can be a huge "coming of age" experience which in our culture we do not recognize and meet (I strongly believe that these rituals that ancients all did held powerfully positive results.
I am not suggesting the fighter sit in a room alone (not that i think that would be bad either lol) but that the opportunity, hell the intention and focus, to be the fighter stepping out alone. Sometime alone leading to fight is huge I think.
Learning minutes before a fight is a little silly I think. If you prepared for the fight then its all done. You are ready to step in the ring and your focus now is that task, not so much your moves and training... I think this way of thinking and acting also helps the fighter translate the learning of moves into fighting... the better the fighter gets will be related (strongly suspect) how much he is fighting relative to how much he is doing his moves and training.
The more a fighter can adapt/change with the fight the better he will be. For he is fighting (with his training backing supporting him) as opposed to doing what he learned and his training and fighting second... Not sure if explaining well what I'm thinking/feeling.
Watch a guy with a fight or two and someone like Ali, Samart.. Extremes to make it easy but I think you can see degrees everywhere once you see it big... The new guy is doing his moves to fight and the the greats are fighting...
This is kind of what I'm trying to put in words with being more animal like...
I think observation and experience is better than books - but we have been so conditioned to look externally for knowledge that books can be a big help. I think there is also a shadow side to book learning. Balance - more aware of cause and effect... learn from experience...
hmmmm thanks again - I'm ina good space for thoughts flowing - thank you for some stimulus
I think its about what is in our conscious and the subconscious does come out and a big way is to consciously become more and more consciously aware. That said we can also add, delete, or modify subconscious programming. Learning to punch is programming the mind and body and we can later choose to focus conscious awareness somewhere else as the punch is good enough for now.
I think ideally there is both happening. Over all conscious awareness is increasing AND in the meantime we are changing programming we don't want and adding what we do want (Matrix - obvious loading of programs - less obvious changing and or deleting program through letting go... seems to parallel how easy it is to learn things and how much harder it can be to let go of old shit - I suspect that almost all limits to learning come from old programming - we are programmed to learn and grow and how I think society raises children to an very large degree, tells them not to learn, grow and explore even when we consciously want them to and think they are.
Teaching is a big problem I think!!! Guiding (not prefect word but better I think) foster learning how to learn and do for self. teaching teaches one to look to an outside source.
I see this with kids huge and it is very hard at times, depending how aware I am in the moment, to recall that (my programming runs deep, with my almost 2 yr old daughter.
I see it at fights too...
It would seem to me that to a degree if someone is ready to fight then they are ready to go through a right or passage as such and enter the ring ALONE! That doesn't mean he won't seek guidance but it is now his fight, he is a fighter and it is him and him alone in the ring.
The first fight especially, but any and all, it is the opportunity for the fighter to stand alone and many of us trainers are conditioned and programmed to hold their hand by teaching an hour before the fight (that doesn't install confidence to the subconscious I think) and also influences the fighter to look to the trainer instead of inside.
(often parents bring the child's focus onto themselves - I suspect subconscious insecurities and needing to feel needed/important etc - I do to at times and work towards less and less.. example - child is playing with the dog and calling it - parent "helps" by telling the dog to go to the child - this directs the dogs attention to the parent and the dog likely goes there, it also likely directs the childs attention to the parent when telling the dog and if not for sure when the dog goes to parent... Anyway - child is learning to interact with dog and parent redirects attention to self.)
I see the same in many changing rooms - trainers teaching, coaching, talking, preparing, taking care of, trying to help with mental or nerves etc etc with the fighter. The fighter is being taught to look outside as I see it and the right of passage is a journey alone. I think a first fight, set up with ritual (just any action you put meaning to) can be a huge "coming of age" experience which in our culture we do not recognize and meet (I strongly believe that these rituals that ancients all did held powerfully positive results.
I am not suggesting the fighter sit in a room alone (not that i think that would be bad either lol) but that the opportunity, hell the intention and focus, to be the fighter stepping out alone. Sometime alone leading to fight is huge I think.
Learning minutes before a fight is a little silly I think. If you prepared for the fight then its all done. You are ready to step in the ring and your focus now is that task, not so much your moves and training... I think this way of thinking and acting also helps the fighter translate the learning of moves into fighting... the better the fighter gets will be related (strongly suspect) how much he is fighting relative to how much he is doing his moves and training.
The more a fighter can adapt/change with the fight the better he will be. For he is fighting (with his training backing supporting him) as opposed to doing what he learned and his training and fighting second... Not sure if explaining well what I'm thinking/feeling.
Watch a guy with a fight or two and someone like Ali, Samart.. Extremes to make it easy but I think you can see degrees everywhere once you see it big... The new guy is doing his moves to fight and the the greats are fighting...
This is kind of what I'm trying to put in words with being more animal like...
I think observation and experience is better than books - but we have been so conditioned to look externally for knowledge that books can be a big help. I think there is also a shadow side to book learning. Balance - more aware of cause and effect... learn from experience...
hmmmm thanks again - I'm ina good space for thoughts flowing - thank you for some stimulus
Sponsor:
Javascript is disabled in your browser. Please turn on Javascript to post messages.
© Copyright - Brian Ritchie | Privacy Policy