I was first introduced to shamanism last semester in professor Hass Religious studies class. I thought it was a joke then and i think it's a joke now. Shamanism sounds like a person goes into deep meditation and then can apparently go through three worlds. My question is do the Shamans take any sort of drugs before they get into this transitive state? In regards to Hughes, I just cant believe people actually buy into this, now i can believe shamans can go into a deep trasitive state and in their mind look for truth, but people that buy into Shaminism actually think Shamans can spirtually step out of their body and go speak to spirits. Not only does this go against all laws of physics, but the only way i feel to get over an ailment is to take medication that has been approved by the FDA and has scientific proof that it actually works.
In Walsh he talks about "The Opening of the Western Mind" this is exactly what i was talking about in the previous paragraph. Walsh states that psychedelics were used to get into these altered states. A pandoras box if you will of highs and lows, Shaminism is not a practice of medicine that opens up the human mind beyond all imagination,It's getting high. Im sorry if my opinion offends anybody, but between Hughes, Walsh, and what i learned last semester about Shaminism its a joke. I say if your sick go to a medical doctor that has the tools and the resources such as medicine and machines to find a virus or bacteria that is making you sick.
A blog for IHUM 300W where students are asked to express their thoughts and opinions on the weekly readings.
Friday, September 5, 2008
week 2, my thoughts
Chapter 2
I really enjoyed reading this chapter! There were many things I found interesting.
- Cave art depicting bears, owls, rhinoceroses, lions, and mammoths in Ardeche Valley. But non predatory animals at other sites. Also, peices involving half human half animals. This shows the respect, passion and connection these people had for nature. Also, the use of ritual and trance.
-Cave art that depicts nothing figurative. Simply marks and images, such as dots and lines. These, are felt to be connected to the artists consciousness.
-Shaman: "Specialist of the soul", a medium between reality and the next world. These have been seen in many societies throughout history. In a way, these remind me of psychics or herbal healers of today. The idea of poets, singers, and dancers being Shamans surprised me at first, but once I thought about it, these people do pull from within or without and share something for the good with an audience. Some of the first use of hallucinogenic mushrooms to assist in travelling out of mind and body.
-On page 21, it states that humans exsisit along with nature and supernature. A Shaman must be able to live cohesivly with both. Therefore, a Shaman could get it's power from a hawk or a wolf (being interested in the book series Twilight, by Stephenie Meyer, I thought of a subplot which involves the Quileute tribe turning into werewolves. In Eclipse, book 3, the tribal leaders pulled the spirits from huge, thickfurred dogs. They lived in harmony with nature) It isn;t exactly the same, but it is similiar.
-It was interesting reading Joseph Beuys story. He faces a traumatic expierence, and went on to become a "Shaman" of sorts. Spreading his message of questioning the conventions of modern civilization.
-The whole idea that the circus has evolved from Shamanism is crazy. Clowns being the tricksters, bears and tigers being wild beasts that are tamed. Acrobats depicting the Shamans magical flight. All pretty nutty stuff.
Walsh 1&2
I really enjoyed reading this chapter! There were many things I found interesting.
- Cave art depicting bears, owls, rhinoceroses, lions, and mammoths in Ardeche Valley. But non predatory animals at other sites. Also, peices involving half human half animals. This shows the respect, passion and connection these people had for nature. Also, the use of ritual and trance.
-Cave art that depicts nothing figurative. Simply marks and images, such as dots and lines. These, are felt to be connected to the artists consciousness.
-Shaman: "Specialist of the soul", a medium between reality and the next world. These have been seen in many societies throughout history. In a way, these remind me of psychics or herbal healers of today. The idea of poets, singers, and dancers being Shamans surprised me at first, but once I thought about it, these people do pull from within or without and share something for the good with an audience. Some of the first use of hallucinogenic mushrooms to assist in travelling out of mind and body.
-On page 21, it states that humans exsisit along with nature and supernature. A Shaman must be able to live cohesivly with both. Therefore, a Shaman could get it's power from a hawk or a wolf (being interested in the book series Twilight, by Stephenie Meyer, I thought of a subplot which involves the Quileute tribe turning into werewolves. In Eclipse, book 3, the tribal leaders pulled the spirits from huge, thickfurred dogs. They lived in harmony with nature) It isn;t exactly the same, but it is similiar.
-It was interesting reading Joseph Beuys story. He faces a traumatic expierence, and went on to become a "Shaman" of sorts. Spreading his message of questioning the conventions of modern civilization.
-The whole idea that the circus has evolved from Shamanism is crazy. Clowns being the tricksters, bears and tigers being wild beasts that are tamed. Acrobats depicting the Shamans magical flight. All pretty nutty stuff.
Walsh 1&2
-Seeing how I was reading a book about Shamanism, I was expecting a concrete definition. But after reading Parts 1 and 2, I realized Shaminism is difficult to define.
-"...that Shamanism, not prostitution, is the world's oldest profession." This quote by anthropologist Michael Brown on page 17, humored me.
-It is interesting that Shamans were looked upon as heros, yet feared at the same time. I feel this way because they were so greatly needed. People needed thier assistance, but at the same time were scared of how they did what they did.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Week 1 blogs
Thanks to all of you for the comments and insights on these posts. I really enjoyed reading them and hope we'll have time in class to continue the discussion. Some points I'd like to expand upon here include, first of all, Tart's stabilization system. Remember that this is only one chapter of several books he's written on the subject, and as Wilbert points out, his credibility in the field is enhanced by his experience with meditation and as an Aikido master (thanks Wilbert for those extra insights). Ken thinks that Tart's system is similar to Freud's, but the systems approach is an attempt to get away from the stagnant and very restrictive Id, Ego, and Superego, which Freud is so famous for. Freud's outdated model is unpopular with most contemporary psychologists -- hence Jenna's disdain at the mention of his name.
Remember, too, that Tart is referring to the control of ordiany consciousness, and while this is analogous with other systems of control, we should concentrate on how/why ordinary consciousness (as opposed to communities or societies) needs to be controlled. The other control systems, however, are an interesting sidebar.
Some ideas to think about as we continue this discussion.
Lance's comment on creativity and spirituality -- "I don't think there is a way to remove physicality from the equation." Nice one. Let's think about it.
Jody: "...creativity may be an untapped area of consciousness."
Tyler: The difference between an ASC being an "escape" or a "window."
Josh S (there's two of you-which one is this?): Positive thinking as creativity? This really taps into some interesting levels of consciousness as it applies to the physical.
Wilbert: The Kabbalist text which refers to the real world being filtered through our senses. Our next big topic, Wilbert. Well done on making the connection.
Kristen: Would convergent thinking be possible in an ASC. Great question. Would it?
Ashley: Why do we leave certain senses untapped? Another good question, and one which we'll be discussing more about.
Gunnar: Lovely quote from Swift. I'll steal it once I find out where it's from. And "talent vs. creativity." Well done Gunnar, good point.
Suset: Online identities vs. face-to-face identities. Second Life is an online "game" which gives players -- well, a second life. Interesting stuff.
These are only some of the highlights, but well done everyone for this very insightful discussion.
Remember, too, that Tart is referring to the control of ordiany consciousness, and while this is analogous with other systems of control, we should concentrate on how/why ordinary consciousness (as opposed to communities or societies) needs to be controlled. The other control systems, however, are an interesting sidebar.
Some ideas to think about as we continue this discussion.
Lance's comment on creativity and spirituality -- "I don't think there is a way to remove physicality from the equation." Nice one. Let's think about it.
Jody: "...creativity may be an untapped area of consciousness."
Tyler: The difference between an ASC being an "escape" or a "window."
Josh S (there's two of you-which one is this?): Positive thinking as creativity? This really taps into some interesting levels of consciousness as it applies to the physical.
Wilbert: The Kabbalist text which refers to the real world being filtered through our senses. Our next big topic, Wilbert. Well done on making the connection.
Kristen: Would convergent thinking be possible in an ASC. Great question. Would it?
Ashley: Why do we leave certain senses untapped? Another good question, and one which we'll be discussing more about.
Gunnar: Lovely quote from Swift. I'll steal it once I find out where it's from. And "talent vs. creativity." Well done Gunnar, good point.
Suset: Online identities vs. face-to-face identities. Second Life is an online "game" which gives players -- well, a second life. Interesting stuff.
These are only some of the highlights, but well done everyone for this very insightful discussion.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Tart
While reading Tart's chapter, i found myself trying to actively find examples of each form of reeinforcement in my everyday life. In the course of my job, my superiors use all four methods of stablezation to keep employees "in line".
The analogy for Loading Stablezation is found in the huge daily workload assigned to us. I treat well over 100,000 square feet of lawn/turf/grass in a given day. Positive Feedback occurs when we hit or exceed our production goals. We are given a commission bonus (which is really a pittance) based on how much we exceed our weekly goal by. Negative Feedback is found when we fail to hit our weekly goal, in which case we are forced to work that Saturday. Limiting Stabilazation presents itself in the form that we have a limited amount of time to hit the goals (7 hours in the field, 5 days a week, or 35 hours total. With a goal of 5000 dollars a week and an average stop being worth 45 dollars, we need to do 112 stops a week or 22 stops a day.)
These can found in other facets of life, but this example encompasses all four stablezation methods. Our government uses three of the four (figure out which yourself) as do most high schools.
The analogy for Loading Stablezation is found in the huge daily workload assigned to us. I treat well over 100,000 square feet of lawn/turf/grass in a given day. Positive Feedback occurs when we hit or exceed our production goals. We are given a commission bonus (which is really a pittance) based on how much we exceed our weekly goal by. Negative Feedback is found when we fail to hit our weekly goal, in which case we are forced to work that Saturday. Limiting Stabilazation presents itself in the form that we have a limited amount of time to hit the goals (7 hours in the field, 5 days a week, or 35 hours total. With a goal of 5000 dollars a week and an average stop being worth 45 dollars, we need to do 112 stops a week or 22 stops a day.)
These can found in other facets of life, but this example encompasses all four stablezation methods. Our government uses three of the four (figure out which yourself) as do most high schools.
Tart Chapter 6
I found the article most fascinating. As a former psychology major, I learned about reinforcements and their effect on human behavior, but I had no idea the aspects of the human psyche went so deep. The first item that caught my interest were the four, basic, discreet state of consciousnesses that, though simple in concept, accounted for nearly all forms of human behavior.
First was the process of loading. In said process, so many tasks, both mental and physical, are given to an individual; so much, in fact, that they are unable to resist in any way, shape, or form to the standards of society. Now, I will admit that my initial reaction to this section was somewhat hostile, as it seemed to relate closer to 1984 than general human behavior. Fortunately, I was able to realize that this relates less to “conforming” and more towards “routine.” I also noticed that this related to our discussion of “how do we know we are not dreaming?”. In this respect, I have come to the conclusion that the more uniform the responses to one’s actions are in the environment, the more control the d-soc has over oneself. Also of attention is that of limiting the activities outside the set parameters. I notice that this is a bit of a foil to the concept of loading. Instead of giving actions, it refers to taking away possible actions. With that in regard, this would be the aforementioned 1984 type environment, censoring all activities outside the required social customs.
The remaining two discreet state of conciousnesses regard both positive and negative reinforcement. As I said, I am a former psychology major, so both of these concepts are familiar to me. A positive reinforcement involves rewarding a subject for a good behavior, in the case of the article, satisfaction for performing a good deed. Negative reinforcement entails removing a “reinforcer” as the reinforcement. In layman’s terms, performing an act to remove an annoyance/something negative. I was most fascinated, however, to see further elaborations of these concepts.
My first article for this class and my first blog ever; I’m very enthusiastic for this class after this experience. I will endeavor to improve my knowledge of human behavior (and blogging, as well) over the course of this semester.
First was the process of loading. In said process, so many tasks, both mental and physical, are given to an individual; so much, in fact, that they are unable to resist in any way, shape, or form to the standards of society. Now, I will admit that my initial reaction to this section was somewhat hostile, as it seemed to relate closer to 1984 than general human behavior. Fortunately, I was able to realize that this relates less to “conforming” and more towards “routine.” I also noticed that this related to our discussion of “how do we know we are not dreaming?”. In this respect, I have come to the conclusion that the more uniform the responses to one’s actions are in the environment, the more control the d-soc has over oneself. Also of attention is that of limiting the activities outside the set parameters. I notice that this is a bit of a foil to the concept of loading. Instead of giving actions, it refers to taking away possible actions. With that in regard, this would be the aforementioned 1984 type environment, censoring all activities outside the required social customs.
The remaining two discreet state of conciousnesses regard both positive and negative reinforcement. As I said, I am a former psychology major, so both of these concepts are familiar to me. A positive reinforcement involves rewarding a subject for a good behavior, in the case of the article, satisfaction for performing a good deed. Negative reinforcement entails removing a “reinforcer” as the reinforcement. In layman’s terms, performing an act to remove an annoyance/something negative. I was most fascinated, however, to see further elaborations of these concepts.
My first article for this class and my first blog ever; I’m very enthusiastic for this class after this experience. I will endeavor to improve my knowledge of human behavior (and blogging, as well) over the course of this semester.
Numero Uno
I think what I found most interesting about the readings was the fact that it made creativity out to be such a perplexing concept. I do feel that creativity is multifaceted and to be exceptionally creative does take quite a bit of energy, however, I feel that it is coupled with other factors like hard work and determination. I have always thought of writing a great work of fiction but I have always been impeded by that fact that when I sit down I can’t get down more than a few paragraphs. My irrational mind tells me that this great work should just come naturally, creatively, to the forefront of my consciousness and that if it were such a great work, and I was truly creative, I would need nothing else. Rationally, I have come to realize that if I did want to write such a work, it would come from experience, time and effort in writing a revising, a sense of focus in order to complete the project, as well as creativity. I think we deal with creativity everyday and don’t see it as such. I think an idealized idea of creativity, one in which something spectacular must come all at once is somewhat illogical. Hughes presented a dichotomy of creativity where it can be “extraordinary or everyday” however I feel it is more about perspective here than it is about results. Where he may see creativity as a bridge, I see it as the ground we walk on. I think it is more a part of our lives than we think. Granted there have been advances in science and technology due to creative endeavors, however who is to say what is truly creative. A great piece of art or music is all in the eyes of the beholder, and such advances could one day lead to destroy the earth as we know it.
When Tart explains the different ways of stabilizing a system, something that I found interesting was the emphasis on how these measures ultimately limit us. I assume he is trying to get at how altered states allow us to be our true (creative) selves, yet I feel he is disregarding the necessity of these measures. As there would be no us without them, I feel there would be no altered (unstable) without stable. I think the idea of altered states is one that is almost sought after for the advantageous qualities it possesses and leaves out the requirements of stability. I think our mind lends itself to the everyday qualities that give us the capability to explore the other elements of our nature. If our spiritual nature does exist, is there not a way to couple that with our physical nature? Does only true creativity come from the extreme? I just got the sense (and maybe this will change) that Tart and Hughes see altered states not just as a medium, but something we should all strive to constantly embody. As exciting as that may sound, I don’t think there is a way to remove physicality from the equation.
When Tart explains the different ways of stabilizing a system, something that I found interesting was the emphasis on how these measures ultimately limit us. I assume he is trying to get at how altered states allow us to be our true (creative) selves, yet I feel he is disregarding the necessity of these measures. As there would be no us without them, I feel there would be no altered (unstable) without stable. I think the idea of altered states is one that is almost sought after for the advantageous qualities it possesses and leaves out the requirements of stability. I think our mind lends itself to the everyday qualities that give us the capability to explore the other elements of our nature. If our spiritual nature does exist, is there not a way to couple that with our physical nature? Does only true creativity come from the extreme? I just got the sense (and maybe this will change) that Tart and Hughes see altered states not just as a medium, but something we should all strive to constantly embody. As exciting as that may sound, I don’t think there is a way to remove physicality from the equation.
Posted for Kenneth
The substantive facets of the topic currently under discussion is somewhat akin to an argument presented by David Chalmers in his book “Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness,” originally published in 1995. He is noted for separating any and all questions pertaining to consciousness into categories of either “easy” or “hard problems”. The “easy problems” consist of differentiating between the various brain functions of a person that take place while they are asleep versus the processes that take place while they are awake (and the neural relationships to sensation, etc.). The “hard problems” consist of why and how these particular neural processes take place. His argument identifies an explanatory gap which exists between the two approaches to understanding the mind, and is particularly critical of any physical explanations which attempt to clarify a physiological relationship between the two concepts. Although I do not share Chalmers lack of faith in science, his theory does bring up an important prerequisite for discussing consciousness: Neurologists are unable to identify the precise biological processes that cause and explain our conscious experience. Does this mean that neurologists will never be able to explain why or how our conscious experience occurs on a cellular level?
Chapters 1 and 3 of Hughes were fairly interesting except for the sections on transpersonal and paranormal activity. The section concerning creativity is particularly interesting, especially as it pertains to the artistic genius exemplified by certain artists, musicians, etc. throughout history and the unique masterpieces that they generated. As for Tart’s essay…Tart’s discrete states of consciousness are somewhat comparable to the reward and punishment approaches taken in behavioral psychology, yet his theories concerning the adaptive nature and interaction of “systems” and “subsystems” are somewhat analogous to the psychic structural model of Sigmund Freud (i.e. the id, ego, and superego). His repetitive ranting about “structures “ and “substructures” needs some further elaboration of particulars if Tart seeks to have his theories and concepts more accessible. Due to the subjective nature of Tart’s inquiries into the human psyche and the train of thought (or lack thereof) that supplies such theories, I am highly skeptical of the validity of such conjecture.
Chapters 1 and 3 of Hughes were fairly interesting except for the sections on transpersonal and paranormal activity. The section concerning creativity is particularly interesting, especially as it pertains to the artistic genius exemplified by certain artists, musicians, etc. throughout history and the unique masterpieces that they generated. As for Tart’s essay…Tart’s discrete states of consciousness are somewhat comparable to the reward and punishment approaches taken in behavioral psychology, yet his theories concerning the adaptive nature and interaction of “systems” and “subsystems” are somewhat analogous to the psychic structural model of Sigmund Freud (i.e. the id, ego, and superego). His repetitive ranting about “structures “ and “substructures” needs some further elaboration of particulars if Tart seeks to have his theories and concepts more accessible. Due to the subjective nature of Tart’s inquiries into the human psyche and the train of thought (or lack thereof) that supplies such theories, I am highly skeptical of the validity of such conjecture.
Blog number one
Chapter One: Creativity and Altered States.
When we think altered states of consciousness we generally tend to think about only being affected by drugs and alcohol so in the first chapter, it’s nice that there is a clarification as to what an altered-state of consciousness is.
I thought the paranormal section was a little interesting, only because I’ve known a few people who are into that kind of thing. They’re ghost hunters per say. So, they certainly believe in paranormal activity. Then Richard Dawkins wants to say that there is “no evidence whatsoever” but how many people report actually report paranormal activity? It’s much too easy to doubt things we don’t understand.
I think the definition of creativity in the book is pretty solid. I’d have to agree with the way it’s put and how it’s stated. I think creativity is more than “the use of imagination to transmute the inner world into external reality” because sometimes the external reality infiltrates the internal. I also don’t think creativity needs the acceptance and validation of others. A creative expression should be as individual as possible and not matter what anyone things. I also like how it’s stated that creativity has a destructive component as well, because it does.
In the connections part, once they started explaining things in Freudian terms, my faith in the author began to dwindle. Being a former Psychology major (it’s now my minor) I had my fair share of Freud. So, once Freud was used as credibility, in my eyes, the book lost some. I feel that every artist has his or her own creative process that may or may not coincide with the way the book explains on page thirteen throughout the first two paragraphs.
Chapter Three: Structures of the mind.
In terms of our skin seeing, I have had similar experiences to that. At least I can put a name to the experience. I think there are so many things our bodies and mind are capable of that I think the idea of perception is generally very interesting. Our brain, consciousness, and perception kind of go hand in hand together. All three interconnect and I feel that you cannot have one without the other.
I also find it interesting that Hughes points out, in the human body, in terms of altered state experiences, that most of them occur in the right side of the brain and there is an increased usage of cognation in that area of the brain. Since the right side controls that side, it only makes sense, but the fact that there is an increased cognition in the right side of the brain during altered-states means something is definitely happening.
I also found the section on multiple personalities to be interesting, but I also wonder if these people really feel or really do have multiple personalities. So basically, those who experience childhood trauma use the alternate personalities as a coping mechanism, and I wonder what would have happened to Sybil if she would have been treated as soon as she began developing the personalities.
If multiplicity as written by a victim is about “hiding, pain, and survival” it makes me wonder why people would want to deal with their situations that way.
Tart, Chapter Six: Stabilization of a State of Consciousness.
Yeah, so these “four major ways of stabilizing a system that constitutes a d-SoC” immediately reminded me of B.F.Skinner. Tart basically put threw a new label on Operant Conditioning and put some of his own concepts in there.
For instance, the example on page 63, the way Tart describes how to try to get a person to be a good citizen is too close to Operant Conditioning. The citizen is being conditioned with activities that constitute a good citizen (reinforcing stimulus), rewards (positive reinforcement), punishments (negative reinforcement), limiting opportunities sounds like getting “grounded” which also falls under (negative reinforcement and perhaps shaping as well).
When we think altered states of consciousness we generally tend to think about only being affected by drugs and alcohol so in the first chapter, it’s nice that there is a clarification as to what an altered-state of consciousness is.
I thought the paranormal section was a little interesting, only because I’ve known a few people who are into that kind of thing. They’re ghost hunters per say. So, they certainly believe in paranormal activity. Then Richard Dawkins wants to say that there is “no evidence whatsoever” but how many people report actually report paranormal activity? It’s much too easy to doubt things we don’t understand.
I think the definition of creativity in the book is pretty solid. I’d have to agree with the way it’s put and how it’s stated. I think creativity is more than “the use of imagination to transmute the inner world into external reality” because sometimes the external reality infiltrates the internal. I also don’t think creativity needs the acceptance and validation of others. A creative expression should be as individual as possible and not matter what anyone things. I also like how it’s stated that creativity has a destructive component as well, because it does.
In the connections part, once they started explaining things in Freudian terms, my faith in the author began to dwindle. Being a former Psychology major (it’s now my minor) I had my fair share of Freud. So, once Freud was used as credibility, in my eyes, the book lost some. I feel that every artist has his or her own creative process that may or may not coincide with the way the book explains on page thirteen throughout the first two paragraphs.
Chapter Three: Structures of the mind.
In terms of our skin seeing, I have had similar experiences to that. At least I can put a name to the experience. I think there are so many things our bodies and mind are capable of that I think the idea of perception is generally very interesting. Our brain, consciousness, and perception kind of go hand in hand together. All three interconnect and I feel that you cannot have one without the other.
I also find it interesting that Hughes points out, in the human body, in terms of altered state experiences, that most of them occur in the right side of the brain and there is an increased usage of cognation in that area of the brain. Since the right side controls that side, it only makes sense, but the fact that there is an increased cognition in the right side of the brain during altered-states means something is definitely happening.
I also found the section on multiple personalities to be interesting, but I also wonder if these people really feel or really do have multiple personalities. So basically, those who experience childhood trauma use the alternate personalities as a coping mechanism, and I wonder what would have happened to Sybil if she would have been treated as soon as she began developing the personalities.
If multiplicity as written by a victim is about “hiding, pain, and survival” it makes me wonder why people would want to deal with their situations that way.
Tart, Chapter Six: Stabilization of a State of Consciousness.
Yeah, so these “four major ways of stabilizing a system that constitutes a d-SoC” immediately reminded me of B.F.Skinner. Tart basically put threw a new label on Operant Conditioning and put some of his own concepts in there.
For instance, the example on page 63, the way Tart describes how to try to get a person to be a good citizen is too close to Operant Conditioning. The citizen is being conditioned with activities that constitute a good citizen (reinforcing stimulus), rewards (positive reinforcement), punishments (negative reinforcement), limiting opportunities sounds like getting “grounded” which also falls under (negative reinforcement and perhaps shaping as well).
Tart Ch. 6
Throughout the Tart reading I found that the Negative feedback stabilization was the most interesting. There have been many times when I was sleeping or my mind was wandering when I suddenly snapped back to reality because a noise or a movement that I may or may not have seen/heard. Many times I have been startled out of my sleep with my heart beating because of a something that I might have heard. Another thing that I found interesting was that Tart mentions that you can limit the effect drugs have on you by thinking about personal triumphs. This takes up all of your energy which keeps your mind from wandering to that altered state. I think that Tart did a good job with giving examples of each of the four ways of stabilizing the d-SoC.
Random thoughts and ideas...
Tart – 6
Each day, our lives are filled with patterns (Loading Stabilization) some may call it a routine. We get-up, shower, dress, go to work, etc. So much of what we do is predictable and our patterns happen without much thought, or so we think. According to Tart each one of us is maintaining a “constant internal thinking process” – for me, I imagine it like autopilot.
The chapter from Tart referenced body movement and kinesthetic feedback, which I find to be an interesting notion. Patterns and movements that we are conditioned to feel and carry out though habit. What happens when those links are broken? Broken in stoke patients, individuals with traumatic brain injuries, or a mental handicap?
Negative Feedback – Restabilizing subsystems when negative feedback enters your conscious made sense to me… At the surface, this idea is what Christians may refer to as keeping your thoughts “Christ Centered” so your mind does not stray to places of weakness.
Positive Feedback – when learning occurs a structure is formed. Think about it, the article talks about driving while you are tired. After hitting rumble strips at 70 mph you are jolted back to consciousness (learning) the alarm tells you hey I need coffee, cool air, or sleep! Sure seems logical to me…
I think that Stabilization of Consciousness aids you in maintaining an efficient system by directing positive and negative feedback on a continuous basis.
Hughes – 1 and 3
Creativity – In the early part of chapter 1 Hughes indicates that “the creative act is not normal.” How do we know it is not normal if we don’t go beyond our personal norm – creativity may be an untapped area of consciousness…
Also, the author alluded to creativity being the ability to bring an idea into reality. However, an additional part of the process is acceptance by others. I guess it is like art – I may think it is rubbish and someone else is moved to tears.
Chapter 3 was interesting because it explored elements of our brain and its integration with the senses.
A high-level mental activity referred to on page 42- Does that mean that everyone has the ability to think on a multi-task level; regardless of their mental ability?
Random thought – I saw the movie Sible in my high school health class. The movie was fascinating and defiantly worth viewing!!
Tart – 6
Each day, our lives are filled with patterns (Loading Stabilization) some may call it a routine. We get-up, shower, dress, go to work, etc. So much of what we do is predictable and our patterns happen without much thought, or so we think. According to Tart each one of us is maintaining a “constant internal thinking process” – for me, I imagine it like autopilot.
The chapter from Tart referenced body movement and kinesthetic feedback, which I find to be an interesting notion. Patterns and movements that we are conditioned to feel and carry out though habit. What happens when those links are broken? Broken in stoke patients, individuals with traumatic brain injuries, or a mental handicap?
Negative Feedback – Restabilizing subsystems when negative feedback enters your conscious made sense to me… At the surface, this idea is what Christians may refer to as keeping your thoughts “Christ Centered” so your mind does not stray to places of weakness.
Positive Feedback – when learning occurs a structure is formed. Think about it, the article talks about driving while you are tired. After hitting rumble strips at 70 mph you are jolted back to consciousness (learning) the alarm tells you hey I need coffee, cool air, or sleep! Sure seems logical to me…
I think that Stabilization of Consciousness aids you in maintaining an efficient system by directing positive and negative feedback on a continuous basis.
Hughes – 1 and 3
Creativity – In the early part of chapter 1 Hughes indicates that “the creative act is not normal.” How do we know it is not normal if we don’t go beyond our personal norm – creativity may be an untapped area of consciousness…
Also, the author alluded to creativity being the ability to bring an idea into reality. However, an additional part of the process is acceptance by others. I guess it is like art – I may think it is rubbish and someone else is moved to tears.
Chapter 3 was interesting because it explored elements of our brain and its integration with the senses.
A high-level mental activity referred to on page 42- Does that mean that everyone has the ability to think on a multi-task level; regardless of their mental ability?
Random thought – I saw the movie Sible in my high school health class. The movie was fascinating and defiantly worth viewing!!
Beginning Our Journey: Ch. 1 & 3; Tart, Ch. 6
Wow... where to begin? I can see why one would choose to start out in this direction for a "psychedelic" or a "mind-altering" journey. These chapters/readings were certainly filled with enough technical "mumbo-jumbo" to make my brain fizzle out for a couple hours. However, while preparing for any "psychedelic" journey, it is always best to know what you are getting yourself into. ::wink wink::
The first thing from these readings that made an impression on me was the slight drift towards a sense of negativity. Both readings did a good job at breaking the human mind down into these mathematical processes and formulas - something that I will not disagree with but yet I will not focus on it nor will I let it influence my life. It seems as if our creativity (according to the readings) comes from distress. It seems as if we use these altered states to escape and upon our return we bring creativity. This may be true for some but not for me. An altered state is not an escape - it is a window to your mind, it is a journey for knowledge of internal awareness and external awareness as well. When we go off into these states, we are discovering new paths. Paths not seen by any other individual and paths that CAN NOT be seen by any other individual (hence the term "individual"). This truth lies in the "filter process" that is discussed in the Tart reading. We must learn to break these everyday "filters". We have been conditioned to the point of numbness almost. I say almost because there are still those out there that have that desire to break out of this normal everyday shell - our d-SoC if you will.
I enjoyed how the Hughes reading kept referring to creativity as a synthesis because indeed it is. A synthesis of everything that has been in your life. A synthesis of what your life is. A synthesis of what your life can be. When Hughes pulled towards the negative side of creativity, he lost me. Talking about Van Gogh and some random graffiti artist of the 80's is not enough to convince me that all creativity stems from some sort of negativity. They were probably just wackos. I can find creativity in a flower, a rainstorm, a gold-medalist Olympian that is suddenly paralyzed. There is beauty and creativity in all of these things whether they are stereotyped as positive or negative aspects of life. I come back to that dreadful, awful, disgusting of a word: conditioning. YOU HAVE BEEN CONDITIONED!! Myself included or I wouldn't be sitting here typing on a Penn State computer for a Penn State class and a Penn State professor. We must look past these formulas and theories that can not be TRULY explained but so many scholars and students try to - there is simply no answer. Life is creativity. Creativity is life. It's all psychobabble really - isn't it??
The first thing from these readings that made an impression on me was the slight drift towards a sense of negativity. Both readings did a good job at breaking the human mind down into these mathematical processes and formulas - something that I will not disagree with but yet I will not focus on it nor will I let it influence my life. It seems as if our creativity (according to the readings) comes from distress. It seems as if we use these altered states to escape and upon our return we bring creativity. This may be true for some but not for me. An altered state is not an escape - it is a window to your mind, it is a journey for knowledge of internal awareness and external awareness as well. When we go off into these states, we are discovering new paths. Paths not seen by any other individual and paths that CAN NOT be seen by any other individual (hence the term "individual"). This truth lies in the "filter process" that is discussed in the Tart reading. We must learn to break these everyday "filters". We have been conditioned to the point of numbness almost. I say almost because there are still those out there that have that desire to break out of this normal everyday shell - our d-SoC if you will.
I enjoyed how the Hughes reading kept referring to creativity as a synthesis because indeed it is. A synthesis of everything that has been in your life. A synthesis of what your life is. A synthesis of what your life can be. When Hughes pulled towards the negative side of creativity, he lost me. Talking about Van Gogh and some random graffiti artist of the 80's is not enough to convince me that all creativity stems from some sort of negativity. They were probably just wackos. I can find creativity in a flower, a rainstorm, a gold-medalist Olympian that is suddenly paralyzed. There is beauty and creativity in all of these things whether they are stereotyped as positive or negative aspects of life. I come back to that dreadful, awful, disgusting of a word: conditioning. YOU HAVE BEEN CONDITIONED!! Myself included or I wouldn't be sitting here typing on a Penn State computer for a Penn State class and a Penn State professor. We must look past these formulas and theories that can not be TRULY explained but so many scholars and students try to - there is simply no answer. Life is creativity. Creativity is life. It's all psychobabble really - isn't it??
Tart and Hughes
Tart:
I identified with two parts of this reading. First, the thinking process in concern to Loading Stabilization. Tart mentions that "you have a constant internal thinking process going on, constant internal chatter, ...thinking, thinking, thinking." I'm a true believer in thinking positively, that is, thoughts that are positive. Some people seem to think that thinking the words "think positive" is thinking positively but it is not. It's the nature of the thought that has to be positive. If you were to describe your thoughts, would they be positive descriptions or not? Good things and happiness won't come about by streaming the words "think positive" through your mind. However, you can put a smile on your face by thinking a thought that is positive. Second, I found the example of falling asleep while driving kind of funny. Why? Because I have--almost. I had no idea how complex the learning process was for me to not almost fall asleep while driving any more. I figured that the first occurrence was scary enough so that now when I'm dozing off while driving I do all of the stereotypical things to stay awake---shift position in the seat, change the music, put down the windows, call someone, or my favorite--drink coffee. Apparently, my body sends anxiety and alarm through me that brings me back to full consciousness.
Hughes:
I've always said that I'm not a creative person, in that, I'm not artsy (I can't play an instrument or paint a picture, etc.) According to Hughes, I am a creative person by creating in reality the things that I imagine. Example: going to class, studying for a test, thinking I'll do well on the test, getting an A on the test. If this happens, am I creative? I hope so. Otherwise I'm back to saying I'm not a creative person. Also, Hughes states that both divergent and convergent thinking are necessary for creativity. I think I'm lacking in the divergent part but constantly operating through convergent thinking. I found it strange that words such as "unstable equilibrium", "balance", and "disturbed" were used to describe divergent thinking. The definition seems like one big contradiction. No wonder I can't think divergently.
Hughes also discusses consciousness through our senses and filters and that sometimes you can just know/feel something without any real life stimuli. I guess this is what people mean when they say they "had a gut feeling". Also, I like to quote "believe half of what you see and none of what you hear" (I don't know who said it though) as a way of sorting through all the nonsense you come across in day-to-day life. I suppose, though, that following this quote is more about thinking something through rather than just feeling it. In any case, if any one cares---I've been attempting to pick up yoga as an exercise to reach this "feeling" that I think I've been missing. I tried it once or twice and felt good after. But, I can't figure out if I really felt good or if that's just what I heard you would feel.
I identified with two parts of this reading. First, the thinking process in concern to Loading Stabilization. Tart mentions that "you have a constant internal thinking process going on, constant internal chatter, ...thinking, thinking, thinking." I'm a true believer in thinking positively, that is, thoughts that are positive. Some people seem to think that thinking the words "think positive" is thinking positively but it is not. It's the nature of the thought that has to be positive. If you were to describe your thoughts, would they be positive descriptions or not? Good things and happiness won't come about by streaming the words "think positive" through your mind. However, you can put a smile on your face by thinking a thought that is positive. Second, I found the example of falling asleep while driving kind of funny. Why? Because I have--almost. I had no idea how complex the learning process was for me to not almost fall asleep while driving any more. I figured that the first occurrence was scary enough so that now when I'm dozing off while driving I do all of the stereotypical things to stay awake---shift position in the seat, change the music, put down the windows, call someone, or my favorite--drink coffee. Apparently, my body sends anxiety and alarm through me that brings me back to full consciousness.
Hughes:
I've always said that I'm not a creative person, in that, I'm not artsy (I can't play an instrument or paint a picture, etc.) According to Hughes, I am a creative person by creating in reality the things that I imagine. Example: going to class, studying for a test, thinking I'll do well on the test, getting an A on the test. If this happens, am I creative? I hope so. Otherwise I'm back to saying I'm not a creative person. Also, Hughes states that both divergent and convergent thinking are necessary for creativity. I think I'm lacking in the divergent part but constantly operating through convergent thinking. I found it strange that words such as "unstable equilibrium", "balance", and "disturbed" were used to describe divergent thinking. The definition seems like one big contradiction. No wonder I can't think divergently.
Hughes also discusses consciousness through our senses and filters and that sometimes you can just know/feel something without any real life stimuli. I guess this is what people mean when they say they "had a gut feeling". Also, I like to quote "believe half of what you see and none of what you hear" (I don't know who said it though) as a way of sorting through all the nonsense you come across in day-to-day life. I suppose, though, that following this quote is more about thinking something through rather than just feeling it. In any case, if any one cares---I've been attempting to pick up yoga as an exercise to reach this "feeling" that I think I've been missing. I tried it once or twice and felt good after. But, I can't figure out if I really felt good or if that's just what I heard you would feel.
Hughes 1 and 3
Hughes Chapter 1
Creativity appears to have numerous definitions, and I think that is because everyone views creativity slightly differently. If someone saw a picture of Van Gogh's artwork they might say that it is very creative. However, if another person views the same piece of art they might not think it is creative at all. I feel that creativity is determined by the viewers. I do believe creativity can be disruptive, because creativity usually goes against rules in order to be unique and original. Perhaps altered states of consciousness do allow for the utmost creativity, however, I think people can still be very creative in a normal state of consciousness.
Hughes Chapter 3
Obviously, there is an interconnected pathway between an individual's brain, senses, and perceptions. I think the better a person knows themself, then the easier it is for them to obtain the state of consciousness they desire. However, the section on sybil kind of confused me. I'm not sure how a person can have so many different personalities all in one body. It seems like her mind was not developed correctly and that messed up all of her senses and perceptions. Since everything is connected there must be a problem in some area. I would be very interested to see a person that had MPD, because I cannot imagine how they would be.
Creativity appears to have numerous definitions, and I think that is because everyone views creativity slightly differently. If someone saw a picture of Van Gogh's artwork they might say that it is very creative. However, if another person views the same piece of art they might not think it is creative at all. I feel that creativity is determined by the viewers. I do believe creativity can be disruptive, because creativity usually goes against rules in order to be unique and original. Perhaps altered states of consciousness do allow for the utmost creativity, however, I think people can still be very creative in a normal state of consciousness.
Hughes Chapter 3
Obviously, there is an interconnected pathway between an individual's brain, senses, and perceptions. I think the better a person knows themself, then the easier it is for them to obtain the state of consciousness they desire. However, the section on sybil kind of confused me. I'm not sure how a person can have so many different personalities all in one body. It seems like her mind was not developed correctly and that messed up all of her senses and perceptions. Since everything is connected there must be a problem in some area. I would be very interested to see a person that had MPD, because I cannot imagine how they would be.
Tart Chapter 6
I never realized that an altered state of consciousness was so difficult to reach. We talked about it in class, but I never knew it was so complicated and difficult to obtain. If a person is tired or takes drugs they cannot instantly venture into an altered state of consciousness. Also, it is difficult to maintain a normal state of consciousness when a person is tired. An individual must focus or reload their mind, in order to resist falling asleep. I thought all of the different types of loading stabilizations were interesting. I never realized how vital my body and internalized body image was in the stabilization of a normal state of consciousness. Feeling ones arms and legs is a simple task that I always overlooked. I suppose awareness and knowing ones own body is a crucial process in stabilization. The normal thinking process that is continually going on in my head is a natural function that I never linked to a normal state of consciousness. There are a lot of little processes that occur and seem insignificant, but are part of a large interconnected system, that allow a person to know that they are in a normal state of consciousness.
Chapters 1 & 3 (Hughes) and 6 (Tart)
Well, Chapter 1 and 3 are certainly interesting. My personal definition of creativity is in agreement with Hughes. Though, the two reasoning processes (divergent and convergent) are also important when defining creativity. It is also important to recognize that the validation of that idea is crucial.
"Creativity includes not only the working out of an idea into external reality, but also its acceptance and validation by others." (Hughes, p. 11)
We often think of creativity as constructive, but Hughes argues that creativity is destructive in nature as well.
"All creativity has a destructive component, since the mold has to be broken in order to make something new." (Hughes, p. 11)
Throughout the text, Hughes embraces the idea of dualities. From the Taoist Yin/Yang to left brain/right brain dichotomy, it is clear that opposites are central to life and science.
Further, Hughes frequently makes a distinction between Western society/academics and its eastern counterpart. His explanations are clear and concise.
When we were listing altered states in class, I forgot all about MPD's! Sure we mentioned diseases, but I wasn't thinking of MPD specifically. I have always been a huge fan of the made-for-television movie Sybil (1976) starring Sally Field, which portrayed the story of Sybil Dorsett. Sybil allegedly suffered from MPD resulting from severe abuse that fragment her mind. Personally, I find MPD (reclassified as DID) the most fascinating topic. Specifically, I am interested in the relationship between trauma/sensory deprivation and mind control (which includes MPD). Hopefully, we'll have a chance to talk about it later in the semester.
Hughes text (specifically parts of Chapter 3) reminded me of something I read in a Kabbalist text. It argued that the "real world" was filtered by our five senses. This filtering process keeps us from experience true reality. Enhancing a sixth sense, enables one to tap into the "real world". I believe this.
As for Tart's Stabilization of a State of Consciousness... the methods used to stabilize a state of consciousness are all too familiar. You could easily replace the word "citizen" with "soldier". After reading Chapter 6, I did a little research on Tart and was pleasantly surprised to discover that he is a student of Aikido (a Japanese martial art). He is rather proficient in meditation as well. Certainly this adds to his credibility in my mind.
"Creativity includes not only the working out of an idea into external reality, but also its acceptance and validation by others." (Hughes, p. 11)
We often think of creativity as constructive, but Hughes argues that creativity is destructive in nature as well.
"All creativity has a destructive component, since the mold has to be broken in order to make something new." (Hughes, p. 11)
Throughout the text, Hughes embraces the idea of dualities. From the Taoist Yin/Yang to left brain/right brain dichotomy, it is clear that opposites are central to life and science.
Further, Hughes frequently makes a distinction between Western society/academics and its eastern counterpart. His explanations are clear and concise.
When we were listing altered states in class, I forgot all about MPD's! Sure we mentioned diseases, but I wasn't thinking of MPD specifically. I have always been a huge fan of the made-for-television movie Sybil (1976) starring Sally Field, which portrayed the story of Sybil Dorsett. Sybil allegedly suffered from MPD resulting from severe abuse that fragment her mind. Personally, I find MPD (reclassified as DID) the most fascinating topic. Specifically, I am interested in the relationship between trauma/sensory deprivation and mind control (which includes MPD). Hopefully, we'll have a chance to talk about it later in the semester.
Hughes text (specifically parts of Chapter 3) reminded me of something I read in a Kabbalist text. It argued that the "real world" was filtered by our five senses. This filtering process keeps us from experience true reality. Enhancing a sixth sense, enables one to tap into the "real world". I believe this.
As for Tart's Stabilization of a State of Consciousness... the methods used to stabilize a state of consciousness are all too familiar. You could easily replace the word "citizen" with "soldier". After reading Chapter 6, I did a little research on Tart and was pleasantly surprised to discover that he is a student of Aikido (a Japanese martial art). He is rather proficient in meditation as well. Certainly this adds to his credibility in my mind.
Tart, Charles T.
The ideas in this chapter regarding system stabilization were very interesting. Although, it seems that in some ways this is an attempt to explain the unexplainable, to understand that which we cannot understand. It would seem that the brain, the conscience and the states there of are completely outside the grasp of our comprehension. While Tart does a very good job using analogies and examples to illustrate his points, these ideas may be better left to states of society rather than states of conscience.
I am still waiting to receive my books and as a result, have no comments on the other readings.
I am still waiting to receive my books and as a result, have no comments on the other readings.
The Hughes readings were interesting. I had to read it in the library, since my book has not yet arrived from Amazon, so I am stuck with only my notes to reference. I can't wait for the book to arrive so I have more of an opportunity to study the material. The mailman should be arriving shortly, so maybe today will be my lucky day.
One of the quotes I noted from Hughes, Chapter 1, was this, “creativity is about the use of imagination to transmute the inner world into external reality......extends beyond the arts, sciences and philosophy. For it involves the organization of everyday subjective experience as well as of imaginative material, and thus include the whole of life.” I have always viewed myself as a very un-creative person. I do not draw, paint, play an instrument, write music, or do anything that is the typical "creative". My husband is the creative one in our relationship, or at least that's always what we say. Reading that quote, though, makes me view creativity a little bit differently. Though my creativity isn't manifested in a book, a painting, or a piece of music, I think that in my own ways, I think I can view myself as sort of creative. I take my "inner world" - my thoughts, my feelings, etc, and I put those into what I DO. Can that be considered creative too? Does creativity always have to result in someTHING being produced? I'm going to have think some more about that throughout the semester. Maybe my charity work, or my running, or the way I run the house, can be considered creative? Or do I run into a problem with the whole idea of creativity needing to be accepted and validated by others?
Another point of his that I am wondering about........"divergent reasoning is the intellectual ability to bring together two quite different sets of facts or ideas so as to form a new and meaningful synthesis. Convergent thinking is the intellectual ability to logically evaluate, analyze and choose the best idea from a selection and work it into external reality." I hope that throughout our discussions of altered states of consciousness, we talk about this. I'm wondering if these types of reasoning are both achievable in altered states of consciousness. I have a hard time imaging that convergent thinking would be possible in an altered state, brought on by drug use.
In Chapter 3, Hughes talks about the awakening or development of un/under-utilized senses while in an altered state. This is an intriguing point. I suppose this would be applicable to what shamans do, perhaps? I definitely don't know enough about that, but I'm sure I will soon, since one of our books is all on Shamanism!! During these types of experiences, he says that there is increased right-brain activity, which emphasizes the more creative, non-verbal.
I found the Tart reading interesting, because I never really broke down consciousness as he did. The way he talks about stabilizing a system makes so much sense, and really is simplistic. It's amazing that so much of that occurs daily, hourly, even second-by-second, and we think nothing of it. Yet, at the same time, we can force ourselves to do one of more of these stabilizations when we feel it's necessary. There are times when I don't want to think about something, so I throw myself, heart and soul, into another activity. For example, when I was going through the decline of my marriage, I was often overcome with the negativity that accompanies such a situation. I needed a diversion, so I started focusing on running. I ran my butt off, and kept my mind occupied in other ways, keeping my focus OFF of the negative. It certainly helped. I laughed when I thought about an application for the negative stabilization. I was running on the Appalachian Trail yesterday, and I was completely absorbed in my thinking......too much so.....I became fairly oblivious to what I was doing. What I would have given for a bird to chirp or for something to "wake me up" out of that oblivian. Instead, my "correction" came in the manner of an ill-placed footfall, resulting in a total face-plant into the trail. I truly miss the chunk of flesh that is gone from my hand, and could do without the bruises and cuts on my legs.
One of the quotes I noted from Hughes, Chapter 1, was this, “creativity is about the use of imagination to transmute the inner world into external reality......extends beyond the arts, sciences and philosophy. For it involves the organization of everyday subjective experience as well as of imaginative material, and thus include the whole of life.” I have always viewed myself as a very un-creative person. I do not draw, paint, play an instrument, write music, or do anything that is the typical "creative". My husband is the creative one in our relationship, or at least that's always what we say. Reading that quote, though, makes me view creativity a little bit differently. Though my creativity isn't manifested in a book, a painting, or a piece of music, I think that in my own ways, I think I can view myself as sort of creative. I take my "inner world" - my thoughts, my feelings, etc, and I put those into what I DO. Can that be considered creative too? Does creativity always have to result in someTHING being produced? I'm going to have think some more about that throughout the semester. Maybe my charity work, or my running, or the way I run the house, can be considered creative? Or do I run into a problem with the whole idea of creativity needing to be accepted and validated by others?
Another point of his that I am wondering about........"divergent reasoning is the intellectual ability to bring together two quite different sets of facts or ideas so as to form a new and meaningful synthesis. Convergent thinking is the intellectual ability to logically evaluate, analyze and choose the best idea from a selection and work it into external reality." I hope that throughout our discussions of altered states of consciousness, we talk about this. I'm wondering if these types of reasoning are both achievable in altered states of consciousness. I have a hard time imaging that convergent thinking would be possible in an altered state, brought on by drug use.
In Chapter 3, Hughes talks about the awakening or development of un/under-utilized senses while in an altered state. This is an intriguing point. I suppose this would be applicable to what shamans do, perhaps? I definitely don't know enough about that, but I'm sure I will soon, since one of our books is all on Shamanism!! During these types of experiences, he says that there is increased right-brain activity, which emphasizes the more creative, non-verbal.
I found the Tart reading interesting, because I never really broke down consciousness as he did. The way he talks about stabilizing a system makes so much sense, and really is simplistic. It's amazing that so much of that occurs daily, hourly, even second-by-second, and we think nothing of it. Yet, at the same time, we can force ourselves to do one of more of these stabilizations when we feel it's necessary. There are times when I don't want to think about something, so I throw myself, heart and soul, into another activity. For example, when I was going through the decline of my marriage, I was often overcome with the negativity that accompanies such a situation. I needed a diversion, so I started focusing on running. I ran my butt off, and kept my mind occupied in other ways, keeping my focus OFF of the negative. It certainly helped. I laughed when I thought about an application for the negative stabilization. I was running on the Appalachian Trail yesterday, and I was completely absorbed in my thinking......too much so.....I became fairly oblivious to what I was doing. What I would have given for a bird to chirp or for something to "wake me up" out of that oblivian. Instead, my "correction" came in the manner of an ill-placed footfall, resulting in a total face-plant into the trail. I truly miss the chunk of flesh that is gone from my hand, and could do without the bruises and cuts on my legs.
Hughes
I think the interesting thing about creativity, which Hughes touches on in his first chapter, is that people seem to be afraid of it, both those who are creative and those who are not. So many people wish to do something that will allow them to leave a bit of a legacy when they are no longer on this earth --- for some, that may simply mean no debt or burden for the surviving relatives, which other wish for something bigger, like the next great American novel.
On page 11, Hughes mentions that to be creative is to create something and at the same time to destroy something. It seems to be this dichotomy that most influences t hose who are desirous of being creative. On the whole, regardless of how many times people say they want to be different, we seem to be happy following the rules of society and fitting into one mold or another. That's not to say everyone wants to be just like someone else, but as a whole we seem to be comfortable knowing there are certain rules we can follow and certain things we cannot do. That being said, when a person realizes that he or she is being given an opportunity to be creative and to make some sort of noticeable difference, he or she must first argue with himself or herself to find out if making that statement (proverbially or literally) is worth the possibility of being ostracized. Maybe that's why it is sometimes so difficult for an author to allow others to read his or her writing. I know that's why I'm hesitant with this first blog assignment.
Most of the information presented in Chapter Three was pretty basic anatomy, for the most part already garnered from various science and psychology courses. It always amuses me, because there will always be people in the world who feel that humans are the most relevant and unique species on the planet, when really a view of our layered brain(s) reveals that every animal organism on this planet is derived from the same starting point, with adjustments here and there, akin to starting with a basic car model and adding a nice sound system and various other options. But I go off topic. One of the biggest questions I have, when faced with a detailed description of the organization of the brain, is why there do seem to be so many senses that have yet been untapped? I know, that's why we're taking this course, and I know, that's why we're reading this book. But this is a question that has come to mind fairly often.
After all, is it just coincidence that my sister and I (three years apart) had nearly the exact same dream involving a car accident, only to discover that she was involved in a decidedly similar wreck the following afternoon? The study involving "guessing" the color of a piece of covered paper (page 36) seems to build upon my study of energy work and the energy fields that surround people, different colors that the body is emitting indicating different likelihoods of personality traits. Have you ever blinked at just the right moment and wondered why you thought you saw a halo of color around someone from the corner of your eye, but when you try to take a closer look, there's nothing there but the person's physical form? The ability to see those energy fields on cue requires something similar to an altered state of consciousness, where the mind is relaxed and opened and trained to view that energy. As Dr Kearney said in last class, it takes a lot of work and willpower to allow one's mind to alter.
Tart
In all honesty, the excerpt from Tart was a little over my head at this point. In order to at least get through the few pages, I think I over-simplified the concepts by relating them to basic anatomy terms; that is to say, the body's desire to maintain a balance, to remain in homeostasis, where no matter what environmental (internal or external) effects there may be on a system, it struggles to maintain as a whole.
Page 64 also somewhat relates to the comment I had made earlier, regarding a person's hesitation to completely flout the rules of society. The analogy is made that we expect to touch a chair and feel something solid; it is only if our hands were to unexpectedly pass completely through the chair that we would be concerned. It is this comfort zone that sometimes keeps creativity at bay.
I think the interesting thing about creativity, which Hughes touches on in his first chapter, is that people seem to be afraid of it, both those who are creative and those who are not. So many people wish to do something that will allow them to leave a bit of a legacy when they are no longer on this earth --- for some, that may simply mean no debt or burden for the surviving relatives, which other wish for something bigger, like the next great American novel.
On page 11, Hughes mentions that to be creative is to create something and at the same time to destroy something. It seems to be this dichotomy that most influences t hose who are desirous of being creative. On the whole, regardless of how many times people say they want to be different, we seem to be happy following the rules of society and fitting into one mold or another. That's not to say everyone wants to be just like someone else, but as a whole we seem to be comfortable knowing there are certain rules we can follow and certain things we cannot do. That being said, when a person realizes that he or she is being given an opportunity to be creative and to make some sort of noticeable difference, he or she must first argue with himself or herself to find out if making that statement (proverbially or literally) is worth the possibility of being ostracized. Maybe that's why it is sometimes so difficult for an author to allow others to read his or her writing. I know that's why I'm hesitant with this first blog assignment.
Most of the information presented in Chapter Three was pretty basic anatomy, for the most part already garnered from various science and psychology courses. It always amuses me, because there will always be people in the world who feel that humans are the most relevant and unique species on the planet, when really a view of our layered brain(s) reveals that every animal organism on this planet is derived from the same starting point, with adjustments here and there, akin to starting with a basic car model and adding a nice sound system and various other options. But I go off topic. One of the biggest questions I have, when faced with a detailed description of the organization of the brain, is why there do seem to be so many senses that have yet been untapped? I know, that's why we're taking this course, and I know, that's why we're reading this book. But this is a question that has come to mind fairly often.
After all, is it just coincidence that my sister and I (three years apart) had nearly the exact same dream involving a car accident, only to discover that she was involved in a decidedly similar wreck the following afternoon? The study involving "guessing" the color of a piece of covered paper (page 36) seems to build upon my study of energy work and the energy fields that surround people, different colors that the body is emitting indicating different likelihoods of personality traits. Have you ever blinked at just the right moment and wondered why you thought you saw a halo of color around someone from the corner of your eye, but when you try to take a closer look, there's nothing there but the person's physical form? The ability to see those energy fields on cue requires something similar to an altered state of consciousness, where the mind is relaxed and opened and trained to view that energy. As Dr Kearney said in last class, it takes a lot of work and willpower to allow one's mind to alter.
Tart
In all honesty, the excerpt from Tart was a little over my head at this point. In order to at least get through the few pages, I think I over-simplified the concepts by relating them to basic anatomy terms; that is to say, the body's desire to maintain a balance, to remain in homeostasis, where no matter what environmental (internal or external) effects there may be on a system, it struggles to maintain as a whole.
Page 64 also somewhat relates to the comment I had made earlier, regarding a person's hesitation to completely flout the rules of society. The analogy is made that we expect to touch a chair and feel something solid; it is only if our hands were to unexpectedly pass completely through the chair that we would be concerned. It is this comfort zone that sometimes keeps creativity at bay.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Okay, How does this work
I hope my blog shows up. I'm nervous with anticipation. I've never done blogs before.
I just got back from New York City where I was visiting my family. I swear my ancestors are in a few history books as famous drinkers. Drinking with my grandfather requires stamina and a little athleticism. My uncle took us to a Brooklyn restaurant where we could all celebrate my upcoming birthday, and before I knew it everyone at the table had about 4 different cocktails (one for each brain) in front of them. Wine glasses we elbowed off the table, wives and girlfriends told their partners to be quiet, the wait staff was tipped well, and this morning I drove home with my body feeling like Phelps' after a swimming event.
I'm only sharing this brief story because as I was driving on 78, my girlfriend fell asleep, leaving me to my thoughts, which led me to the side of the road for a second (an example from Tart).
GF (waking up when the car shakes violenty on the rumble strip) - "What are you doing?"
Me - "Driving. Sorry."
"Do you want me to drive a little?"
"No, I'm ten and two."
I'm sure the next time I am driving a long distance I'll remember this instance and I'll start thinking of a d-SoC and a d-ASC, and Tart's right, I will think of myself as clever for applying his analysis to my own life, which will inspire a hypnagogic state, which will lead me to the side of the road, which will...
I'm curious to know if d-SoC and d-ASC are recognized by doctors who have to write out an Aderall prescription for an ADHD patient. What I gather is that in order to maintain a d-SoC, one must constantly do an internal balancing act with their brain(s). "A d-SoC is a dynamic system," so how many times must a person "learn" not to slip into a d-ASC. Can these things be fixed, or are the two at a constant battle internally. It also seems that ASCs are essential for a bit of variety in all our lives.
I hope everyone had a nice holiday.
Altered States
There is a Jonathan Swift quote that I read in a book entitled, "A Confederacy of Dunces," saying, "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
Throughout the first chapter I kept thinking of this quote as it applies to science and how creativity can at many times be looked at as "illusions and delusions," thus making a creator look foolish. "Although transformation is mysterious and 'wonderful' it is also unsettling." We have such high praise today for certain creative individuals such as Van Gogh or Twain, that we often fail to recognize that they were not as appreciated when they were living as much as they are now. Newtonian physics was at one time thought of as having paranormal qualities until others proved proved discoveries later.
I'm not sure if Hughes was conjuring a metaphor when he wrote that in order for a work to be deemed creative and have impact it must pass through a series of authorities and signatures- wha-? I was unaware that anybody could place value on creativity. Wait, yes I was, but shouldn't we be concerning ourselves with "talent" as well. Perhaps talent will be addressed in class.
Miles Davis once said something about music being his "blessing and his curse" (something like that cliche, but phrased with colorful, clever language). We want personal creativity as part of our everyday life to ressurrect ourselves from our everyday routines, yet there are correlations of mental illness found in many people who can't help but be creative whether they want to be or not.
- Before I forget. Ask about creativity deriving from boredom. Then ask about drug taking and boredom. Then discuss both together at the same time.
"Many artists mythologize their activities and their ways of working for numerous and often conflicting reasons, emphasizing the mysterious other worldly nature of their vocation."
-or they just don't care about it. It just might be a boring question artists hear all the time and get tired of answering. "No Direction Home" showcases some classic interviews with Dylan where he refuses to give straight answers. Is it because he was being creative, or just got bored.
On Chapter 3, and brains, and brains, and brains.
I mentioned the multiple brain thing to uncle on Saturday night, telling him we may have as many as four brains.
Uncle- "What?"
Me- "I don't know. I read it."
"In what?"
"My textbook. I forget the explanation now, and I don't feel like reading you a textbook."
Brain hemispheres, again, seem as if they have close ties with a d-SoC and a d-ASC.
Scientists believe that linear thinking is over-valued and leads to pathological states. Makes sense to me and my lack of scientific knowledge.
Altered-state experiences rely on the right hemisphere and are "pleasant and rewarding." In fact these experiences are so incredible, words cannot describe them. I'm going to have to re-read this passage because I'm a little unclear as to how this may be. However, I find it intriguing. I talk an awful lot (I'm in therapy for talking too much, which is weird because therapists encourage their patients to speak, but not me). I don't know how my brain(s) would react to something that defies words.
Alright, enough, enough. Goodnight.
I just got back from New York City where I was visiting my family. I swear my ancestors are in a few history books as famous drinkers. Drinking with my grandfather requires stamina and a little athleticism. My uncle took us to a Brooklyn restaurant where we could all celebrate my upcoming birthday, and before I knew it everyone at the table had about 4 different cocktails (one for each brain) in front of them. Wine glasses we elbowed off the table, wives and girlfriends told their partners to be quiet, the wait staff was tipped well, and this morning I drove home with my body feeling like Phelps' after a swimming event.
I'm only sharing this brief story because as I was driving on 78, my girlfriend fell asleep, leaving me to my thoughts, which led me to the side of the road for a second (an example from Tart).
GF (waking up when the car shakes violenty on the rumble strip) - "What are you doing?"
Me - "Driving. Sorry."
"Do you want me to drive a little?"
"No, I'm ten and two."
I'm sure the next time I am driving a long distance I'll remember this instance and I'll start thinking of a d-SoC and a d-ASC, and Tart's right, I will think of myself as clever for applying his analysis to my own life, which will inspire a hypnagogic state, which will lead me to the side of the road, which will...
I'm curious to know if d-SoC and d-ASC are recognized by doctors who have to write out an Aderall prescription for an ADHD patient. What I gather is that in order to maintain a d-SoC, one must constantly do an internal balancing act with their brain(s). "A d-SoC is a dynamic system," so how many times must a person "learn" not to slip into a d-ASC. Can these things be fixed, or are the two at a constant battle internally. It also seems that ASCs are essential for a bit of variety in all our lives.
I hope everyone had a nice holiday.
Altered States
There is a Jonathan Swift quote that I read in a book entitled, "A Confederacy of Dunces," saying, "When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
Throughout the first chapter I kept thinking of this quote as it applies to science and how creativity can at many times be looked at as "illusions and delusions," thus making a creator look foolish. "Although transformation is mysterious and 'wonderful' it is also unsettling." We have such high praise today for certain creative individuals such as Van Gogh or Twain, that we often fail to recognize that they were not as appreciated when they were living as much as they are now. Newtonian physics was at one time thought of as having paranormal qualities until others proved proved discoveries later.
I'm not sure if Hughes was conjuring a metaphor when he wrote that in order for a work to be deemed creative and have impact it must pass through a series of authorities and signatures- wha-? I was unaware that anybody could place value on creativity. Wait, yes I was, but shouldn't we be concerning ourselves with "talent" as well. Perhaps talent will be addressed in class.
Miles Davis once said something about music being his "blessing and his curse" (something like that cliche, but phrased with colorful, clever language). We want personal creativity as part of our everyday life to ressurrect ourselves from our everyday routines, yet there are correlations of mental illness found in many people who can't help but be creative whether they want to be or not.
- Before I forget. Ask about creativity deriving from boredom. Then ask about drug taking and boredom. Then discuss both together at the same time.
"Many artists mythologize their activities and their ways of working for numerous and often conflicting reasons, emphasizing the mysterious other worldly nature of their vocation."
-or they just don't care about it. It just might be a boring question artists hear all the time and get tired of answering. "No Direction Home" showcases some classic interviews with Dylan where he refuses to give straight answers. Is it because he was being creative, or just got bored.
On Chapter 3, and brains, and brains, and brains.
I mentioned the multiple brain thing to uncle on Saturday night, telling him we may have as many as four brains.
Uncle- "What?"
Me- "I don't know. I read it."
"In what?"
"My textbook. I forget the explanation now, and I don't feel like reading you a textbook."
Brain hemispheres, again, seem as if they have close ties with a d-SoC and a d-ASC.
Scientists believe that linear thinking is over-valued and leads to pathological states. Makes sense to me and my lack of scientific knowledge.
Altered-state experiences rely on the right hemisphere and are "pleasant and rewarding." In fact these experiences are so incredible, words cannot describe them. I'm going to have to re-read this passage because I'm a little unclear as to how this may be. However, I find it intriguing. I talk an awful lot (I'm in therapy for talking too much, which is weird because therapists encourage their patients to speak, but not me). I don't know how my brain(s) would react to something that defies words.
Alright, enough, enough. Goodnight.
Check It Out!!!
In Tart’s Chapter 6 I was very much interested in the four major ways of stabilizing a system that’s constitutes a d-SOC. Before reading this Chapter I was aware of some stabilization but none that I could really understand deeply, if you could say. For example, the loading of a person’s conscious constantly busy so that desired types of activities are left with too little energy to allow disruption of the system’s operations. We are ordinary people with our day- to- day activities not aware of what we can be capable of. It would be too weird for me to wake up and see part of my body disappearing. Tart states, “ If you suddenly felt half your body starting to disappear you would question whether you were in your ordinary d-SOC.” (Tart pg.65) The section which Tart says if he took a drug and wants to keep from having his body and mind from being affected by it; he does things to make himself feel good so that by the end of absorption the energy is not on the drug but what he is doing to stabilize his state of consciousness by loading it.
But what would you say about someone who drinks and can presumably get happy or dangerous. Do you think that since a person who drinks profusely can stabilize their d-SOC by using one or more of the types of stabilization?
Chapter 1 Hughes
These two chapters were definitely interesting and challenging to understand at times but I did like very much the part on Transpersonal Psychology and the Paranormal. It’s interesting to know that conventional psychologists have concentrated on “ordinary consciousness which here is generally perceived to cover transactions with the external objective world” (Hughes pg. 8).
I do like Transperonal Psychology because they have identified many experiences that have been scientifically proved. When I was a child my mom dated a man who will have "special powers" as he used to call it. I never realized that his experiences were real to him (when it comes to the paranormal I mean). He had "dreams" that people who were deceased could tell him when someone will become ill or pass away. He always had this "sixth sense" if you will and many other paranormal experiences. I found it fascinating and we used to have long conversations about the "normal" and "abnormal". Of course I was to young to understand but as a grew older people would have different opinions of him, almost like the book says, " As a free spirit who does not observe existing rules, the creative may be envied and feared as well as admired by the normality" (Hughes, pg.11)
In chapter 3
I really enjoyed reading about now second sights and senses can enhance ones consciousness and perception. One who is blind like Helen Keller would have enhanced senses do to the lack of vision for example, touch and smell. It's incredible to know and learn how our brain functions and how we can alter different personalities like the case about SYBIL who had 16 different personalities, eventually when treated she "became conscious of them and the original traumas that had led her to their existence." (Hughes pg. 43) From my experience I can say that Text Messaging and emails and Instant messaging gives us different personalities because sometimes I wouldn't say things that I say when I am (IMing) or (txing) because my physical self isn't present therefore, allowing me to be more free and aware of my other altered states that I would not be other wise. This is true about many, wouldn't you say.
But what would you say about someone who drinks and can presumably get happy or dangerous. Do you think that since a person who drinks profusely can stabilize their d-SOC by using one or more of the types of stabilization?
Chapter 1 Hughes
These two chapters were definitely interesting and challenging to understand at times but I did like very much the part on Transpersonal Psychology and the Paranormal. It’s interesting to know that conventional psychologists have concentrated on “ordinary consciousness which here is generally perceived to cover transactions with the external objective world” (Hughes pg. 8).
I do like Transperonal Psychology because they have identified many experiences that have been scientifically proved. When I was a child my mom dated a man who will have "special powers" as he used to call it. I never realized that his experiences were real to him (when it comes to the paranormal I mean). He had "dreams" that people who were deceased could tell him when someone will become ill or pass away. He always had this "sixth sense" if you will and many other paranormal experiences. I found it fascinating and we used to have long conversations about the "normal" and "abnormal". Of course I was to young to understand but as a grew older people would have different opinions of him, almost like the book says, " As a free spirit who does not observe existing rules, the creative may be envied and feared as well as admired by the normality" (Hughes, pg.11)
In chapter 3
I really enjoyed reading about now second sights and senses can enhance ones consciousness and perception. One who is blind like Helen Keller would have enhanced senses do to the lack of vision for example, touch and smell. It's incredible to know and learn how our brain functions and how we can alter different personalities like the case about SYBIL who had 16 different personalities, eventually when treated she "became conscious of them and the original traumas that had led her to their existence." (Hughes pg. 43) From my experience I can say that Text Messaging and emails and Instant messaging gives us different personalities because sometimes I wouldn't say things that I say when I am (IMing) or (txing) because my physical self isn't present therefore, allowing me to be more free and aware of my other altered states that I would not be other wise. This is true about many, wouldn't you say.
Tart, Chapters 1 & 3
Tart-
While reading the material by Tart on the "Stabilization of a State of Consciousness," I was very much surprised when he stated the four ways of stabilizing the d-SoC system, and how that relates to controlling others. I thought the way Tart described the loading and thinking process was very clever. He stated that in order to make yourself at ease in the d-SoC stage you don't know your doing this but you actually think clever thoughts about yourself and of which results in self relaxation. I find myself doing this alot not paying close attention to what is going on around me but if one sound or movement occurs out of the ordinary some how that movement or sound catches my attention and I clue into what is going on at that time. What also was interesting in this reading of Tart was the paragraph on Positive Feedback Stabilization. Tart illustrates the negative and positive affects of stabilization in reference to driving home late at night, at which the hypnangogic state intertwines with positive d-SoC and explains how the learning stage acts as a cushion in helping you maintain your alertness while driving.
Chapter 1-
While reading Chapter 1 I came across some interesting topics one of which that struck my attention. The picture on page 8 with the closed caption about telepathic twins. During my summer vacation I had a movie night with some of my friends and we rented the movie " I know who killed me." Lindsay Lohan was the main character and in this movie Lindsay being a teenager is faced with some odd behaviors as to why certain things are happening to her that are un realistic. To make a long story short she feels that their is someone out their experiencing the same feelings as her and she goes out to find this person and when she does not knowing she is born a twin she is re united with her sister. The paranormal also is a quite interesting topic why certain things happen for un known reasons. Creativity is a gift I believe every person has they just have to find it in themselves. I also must agree with Hughes when he speaks, "Creativity begins as an imaginative construct and ends as an external object."
Chapter 3-
Consciousness is constructed out of nothing more than the four of five sense's we has human beings have seeing, hearing, feeling, and smelling. While reading about the sense of smell I came across something I may have never knew. Salmon use their keen sense of smell to back track thousands of miles to where they were born. One other thing that interest me was their is three to four parts to the human brain the brainstem that controls breathing and heart rate, another is the limbric system that controls emotions and primitive reactions, finally the cerebral cortex where we understand and interpret the world around us, store memory, and where speech and sight are controlled. Finally with the brain I was amazed that the right hemisphere of the brain controls the functionings the left side and vice versa. On the topic of, " The divided self" I was very easily confused that one person may have the capacity of sixteen different personalities?? That is a little bit odd and rather strange if you ask me! What I would like to know is how can someone be in that altar state of mind that they try or other words state they don't know who they were and some how easily say their this type of person...
While reading the material by Tart on the "Stabilization of a State of Consciousness," I was very much surprised when he stated the four ways of stabilizing the d-SoC system, and how that relates to controlling others. I thought the way Tart described the loading and thinking process was very clever. He stated that in order to make yourself at ease in the d-SoC stage you don't know your doing this but you actually think clever thoughts about yourself and of which results in self relaxation. I find myself doing this alot not paying close attention to what is going on around me but if one sound or movement occurs out of the ordinary some how that movement or sound catches my attention and I clue into what is going on at that time. What also was interesting in this reading of Tart was the paragraph on Positive Feedback Stabilization. Tart illustrates the negative and positive affects of stabilization in reference to driving home late at night, at which the hypnangogic state intertwines with positive d-SoC and explains how the learning stage acts as a cushion in helping you maintain your alertness while driving.
Chapter 1-
While reading Chapter 1 I came across some interesting topics one of which that struck my attention. The picture on page 8 with the closed caption about telepathic twins. During my summer vacation I had a movie night with some of my friends and we rented the movie " I know who killed me." Lindsay Lohan was the main character and in this movie Lindsay being a teenager is faced with some odd behaviors as to why certain things are happening to her that are un realistic. To make a long story short she feels that their is someone out their experiencing the same feelings as her and she goes out to find this person and when she does not knowing she is born a twin she is re united with her sister. The paranormal also is a quite interesting topic why certain things happen for un known reasons. Creativity is a gift I believe every person has they just have to find it in themselves. I also must agree with Hughes when he speaks, "Creativity begins as an imaginative construct and ends as an external object."
Chapter 3-
Consciousness is constructed out of nothing more than the four of five sense's we has human beings have seeing, hearing, feeling, and smelling. While reading about the sense of smell I came across something I may have never knew. Salmon use their keen sense of smell to back track thousands of miles to where they were born. One other thing that interest me was their is three to four parts to the human brain the brainstem that controls breathing and heart rate, another is the limbric system that controls emotions and primitive reactions, finally the cerebral cortex where we understand and interpret the world around us, store memory, and where speech and sight are controlled. Finally with the brain I was amazed that the right hemisphere of the brain controls the functionings the left side and vice versa. On the topic of, " The divided self" I was very easily confused that one person may have the capacity of sixteen different personalities?? That is a little bit odd and rather strange if you ask me! What I would like to know is how can someone be in that altar state of mind that they try or other words state they don't know who they were and some how easily say their this type of person...
Tart - Chapter 6
Tart begins emphasizing in this chapter how dynamic a d-Soc really is - so much so that there are four types of systems involved that allow and maintain its stability. With these processes continually at work, whether alone or in conjunction with one another, it is no wonder why an altered state of consciousness may be difficult to reach. This upholds Tart's theory that that one must continually work at obtaining a d-ASC.
One of the first things I noticed from the reading was one of Tart's descriptions of an ordinary d-Soc. He offered that this includes dependable relationships. I thought that was so true and would fit into the list we compiled in class for an awareness of normal state of mind. Often in dreams, normal, "dependable" relationships do seem twisted and warped.
When tart explained the thinking process, he provided a positive example and I thought this could surely go both ways. For instance, in a negative outlook, someone might think, not so much about things that please them, but about things that upset, bother, or anger them. This in turn may cause the individual to feel pitiable, these feelings of despair and melancholy leading to anxiety and/or depression. Depression can be a hurtful reminder to the individual of negative influences and circumstances going on in their life which could cycle back to feeling upset or angry.
Tart's reference to hypnagogic thoughts reminded me of when I used to babysit as a teenager. One couple, in particular, that I worked for, had a habit of staying out a couple hours later than what they initially told me resulting in my struggling efforts to stay awake until one or so in the morning. I can still remember the feeling of trying hard to stay awake, drifting off to sleep, catching myself doing so in alarm, and then fighting to stay awake (meanwhile feeling somewhat proud that I didn't succumb to a deep sleep - what Tart refers to as "physical world survival priority").
One of the first things I noticed from the reading was one of Tart's descriptions of an ordinary d-Soc. He offered that this includes dependable relationships. I thought that was so true and would fit into the list we compiled in class for an awareness of normal state of mind. Often in dreams, normal, "dependable" relationships do seem twisted and warped.
When tart explained the thinking process, he provided a positive example and I thought this could surely go both ways. For instance, in a negative outlook, someone might think, not so much about things that please them, but about things that upset, bother, or anger them. This in turn may cause the individual to feel pitiable, these feelings of despair and melancholy leading to anxiety and/or depression. Depression can be a hurtful reminder to the individual of negative influences and circumstances going on in their life which could cycle back to feeling upset or angry.
Tart's reference to hypnagogic thoughts reminded me of when I used to babysit as a teenager. One couple, in particular, that I worked for, had a habit of staying out a couple hours later than what they initially told me resulting in my struggling efforts to stay awake until one or so in the morning. I can still remember the feeling of trying hard to stay awake, drifting off to sleep, catching myself doing so in alarm, and then fighting to stay awake (meanwhile feeling somewhat proud that I didn't succumb to a deep sleep - what Tart refers to as "physical world survival priority").
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Tart, Chapter 6; Altered States, Chapters 1 and 3
One question that arose while I was reading this chapter was about medications that are a part of your daily life, like antidepressants and antipsychotics. Antidepressants add serotonin and other chemicals to the brain and antipsychotics modify neurotransmitters in the brain. These drugs are obviously used to treat patients' mental health, but since people take these drugs that change the chemical make-up in their brain, does that mean they are in an altered state of consciousness while on medicine? Or, after being on medication for a long period of time, does that "altered" state become their conscious state? And were they to stop taking medication, would their natural state (sans medication) become an altered state of consciousness?
Another point brought to my attention while reading was one of my own altered states of consciousness that could probably be considered some type of dissociation. Whenever I have an assignment like this, where I have to read about something and then write about it, I normally don't immediately delve into writing about what I just read. Generally, I lie down, make myself think about the subject, and relax. Sometimes I lie there for 20 minutes, sometimes an hour or two. My mom accuses me of sleeping, but I'm not because I am aware of what's going on around me, but I am much less concerned about it as if I were sleeping. When I "wake-up", I always have a clear understanding of what I was pondering. I always thought this process was weird, but now I understand I am putting myself into an altered state of consciousness to sort out my thoughts on what I am studying.
One altered state discussed caught my attention because a Tai Chi class I am also taking this semester. This altered state comes from the right and left brain hemispheres either working together or shifting more use to the right hemisphere. My Tai Chi teacher constantly talks about how Tai Chi forces both hemispheres to work together, which is why it can be so difficult. When Tai Chi is done properly, you supposedly reach an altered state of consciousness. I just began the class so I'm obviously not there yet, but I think these two classes are probably good to take in conjunction with one another!