Law School Discussion

Living Life From A Third Person Perspective

Re: Living Life From A Third Person Perspective
« Reply #20 on: October 24, 2008, 01:25:57 PM »
The same type of stimulation to the Wernicke's area in the right brain, however, causes a person to hear "voices" or "commands". These are usually of an authoritarian or dictatorial nature, and can be identified as the voice of one who was feared, admired or "looked up to" by the person being stimulated. We call these commands "Wernicke's commands", because they are commands stored in the Wernicke's area of the brain. The two Wernicke's areas are connected to each other by a thin bridge of tissue. This is where the term "bicameral mind" comes from. It seems that the "voices of the gods" were in fact internal dialogue coming from the right half of the brain. If mankind was to become civilised, this simple mind had to greatly improve and consciousness had to develop. However, the bicameral tendency is still present today! It is the bicameral mind, the right side of the Wernicke's area, which we "hear" when we hear those little words of self-invalidation and sabotage.

The 'authorities' who might have put commands into this mind are no longer "gods" - they are anyone that we might have looked up to at some time. These can include parents, teachers, peers, politicians, and doctors. Have you have ever been told to "grow up", "shut up", "eat up", "forget that" or "give up"? Have you ever been told "you're mad", you're bad", "you're stupid" or "you'll never make it"? If somebody you thought was powerful said "you're too fat", "you'll never change", "you'll forget", "you're a slow learner", "eat ALL your food", you're not good enough", "strong enough", "pretty enough", "clever enough" "you'll go to hell" etc. etc. then they may have made an 'entry' in your right Wernicke's area, an implanted command, which is still influencing you to this day! We call these commands "wernicke's commands". Wernicke's commands are not all powerful, but they can affect people, sometimes quite a lot. They particularly affect people during times of stress. When people do any work or therapy to get rid of negative beliefs, the beliefs they try to get rid of things are usually worded as "I..." eg. "I'm not good enough" or "I'm too fat." But "find the truth, and it will set you free". These beliefs are not filed in the brain (which is like a super powerful computer) under an "I" point of view. The commands are entered as said by another person, as if the person is right there, talking to you! For example, the belief may be "I'm no good" but the original command (which is stored in the brain) was "You're no good".

Normal kinesiology has a correction called a Goal Balance which is designed to get rid of negative beliefs. In 1996 Australian kinesiologist David Bridgman made an astounding discovery. He realised how to remove negative beliefs from the brain! The key to removing these beliefs is that they are stored in the brain as though another person said them e.g. "You won't remember". The brain then tries to make sense of a command and translates it, for example, as "I won't remember". This command then interferes with the person. To get rid of the command you must find the EXACT wording of the command, which in this case is "You won't remember". This specific kinesiology procedure enables a person to REMOVE the sabotaging commands from the brain. Instant improvement is generally noted in the person who has done this. These commands can be put in our brain either unintentionally (as by our parents) or intentionally (as by the mind controllers). These commands are hidden in the brain a bit like the way that 'drop down menus' are hidden on the computer screen. Sometimes you can't see the menus, but they are still there. When you do the correct kinesiology procedure, the sabotaging commands "drop down" and then you can delete them. But they do not all appear at once. It can take a number of sessions to get rid of them.

Re: Einstein On Acid
« Reply #21 on: October 24, 2008, 03:09:12 PM »
A stash of mind-altering drugs and a near-death experience... just what a physicist needs to uncover the true nature of the universe, says Stephen Battersby

Great article, manypulate, but where are the graphics?

Re: Living Life From A Third Person Perspective
« Reply #23 on: October 24, 2008, 07:29:01 PM »
Strange, sometimes that happens..

Re: Living Life From A Third Person Perspective
« Reply #24 on: October 26, 2008, 03:45:47 PM »
Study of consciousness mostly from a third-person perspective is the case with the neurological perspective. Phenomenology studies conscience from a first-person perspective. It is the attempt to reflect on pre-reflexive experience to determine certain properties of, or structures in, consciousness.

Re: Living Life From A Third Person Perspective
« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2008, 03:25:43 PM »
gaze, to adopt a first-person perspective on consciousness is typically understood as a matter of inwardly engaging one's awareness in such a way as to make one's conscious states and their properties into objects of awareness. When awareness is thus inwardly engaged, experience functions as both act and object of awareness. Introspection!!! Close enough to "examining life from a third-person perspective"? :)

introspection as a tool
« Reply #26 on: October 28, 2008, 03:53:57 PM »

gaze, to adopt a first-person perspective on consciousness is typically understood as a matter of inwardly engaging one's awareness in such a way as to make one's conscious states and their properties into objects of awareness. When awareness is thus inwardly engaged, experience functions as both act and object of awareness. Introspection!!! Close enough to "examining life from a third-person perspective"? :)

Alan Wallace, one of the preeminent Western scholars of Tibetan Buddhism, has stressed the importance of introspection as a mode of academic inquiry in the first annual Mary Interlandi '05 Lecture on Contemplative Studies. Wallace's lecture, "Observing the Mind: A Buddhist Approach to Exploring Consciousness," focused on the interface between traditional Buddhist methods of introspection and conceptions of the mind, and the modern Western scientific approach to neuroscience and physics. He spent 14 years training as a Tibetan Buddhist monk, ordained by H.H. the Dalai Lama, before studying physics at Amherst College and earning a doctorate in religious studies at Stanford. Wallace has called it "socially irresponsible" to isolate the academic studies of science and religion, which are often regarded as disparate disciplines. Both deeply philosophical and profoundly pragmatic, Wallace's speech emphasized the fruitful implications of studying the contemplative mind, both from a third-person and from a critical first-person perspective. The critical first-person perspective is typically neglected by science because the modern scientific paradigm reveres absolute objectivity and impersonality, rendering the subjective "taboo," Wallace said. This subjective method would include critically examining one's own experience during meditation as a form of academic study.

Wallace fervently argued that this type of subjective, introspective study of the contemplative mind is vital, when coupled with the more traditional third-person mode of scientific research. Furthermore, Wallace said this type of contemplative study should be worked into the formal American higher education system. He cited his personal hero - 19th century American psychologist and philosopher William James, who said that an education that improved the individual's ability to maintain sustained, voluntary attention would be "the education par excellence." Wallace spoke about a groundbreaking study he is currently leading, which he said will "scientifically prove meditation's fruitful effects" through assessing changes in the brain functioning and behavior of subjects who meditate intensively every day for an entire year. Wallace spoke with a high regard for this type of empirical scientific study, but simultaneously noted that this study would only be proving a fact that "Buddhist monks have known for 100 generations already."

Re: Living Life From A Third Person Perspective
« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2008, 09:40:36 AM »
Strange experience indeed - but how about experiencing having amnesia and deja vu at the same time?

Observation 'What Is' Observer Is Observed
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2008, 11:23:06 AM »
So what is the correct action in which there is no will, no choice, no desire - Now is it possible to see, to observe, to be aware of the beautiful and the ugly things of life and not say "I must have" or "I must not have"?. Have you ever just observed anything? Is there an action in which there is no motive no cause-the self does not enter into it at all? Of course there is. There is when the self is not which means no identifying process takes place.... Effortless observation....choiceless observation.... There is the perceiving of a beautiful lake with all the colour and the glory and the beauty of it, that's enough. Not the cultivating of memory, which is developed through the identification process. Right?

You want more and more and more and more, and "the more" means that the past sensation has not been sufficient...A mind which is seeking the 'more' is never conscious of 'what is' because it is always living in the 'more'-in what it would like to be, never in 'what is'. ... meditation is actually seeing 'what is'... when no identification.... not identified by thought....There are only sensation.

So we are asking is there a holistic awareness of all the senses, therefore there is never asking for the 'more'. I wonder if you follow all this? Are we together in this even partially? And where there is this total-fully-aware-of all the senses, awareness of it-not you are aware of it.... the awareness of the senses in themselves -- then there is no centre -- in which there is awareness of the wholeness. If you consider it, you will see that to suppress the senses... is contradictory, conflicting, sorrowful.... To understand the truth you must have complete sensitivity. Do you understand Sirs? Reality demands your whole being; you must come to it with your body, mind, and heart as a total human being....Insight is complete total attention...

I wonder if you know what it means to be aware of something? Most of us are not aware because we have become so accustomed to condemning, judging, evaluating, identifying, choosing. Choice obviously prevents awareness because choice is always made as a result of conflict. To be aware.... just to see it, to be aware of it all without any sense of judgement.... Just be aware, that is all what you have to do, without condemning, without forcing, without trying to change what you are aware of..... if you are aware choicelessly, the whole field of consciousness beings to unfold..... So you begin with the outer and more inwardly. Then you will find, when you move inwardly that the inward and the outward are not two different things, that the outward awareness is not different from the inward awareness, and that they are both the same.

Be alert to all your thoughts and feelings, don't let one feeling or thought slip by without being aware of it and absorbing all its content. Absorbing is not the word, but seeing the whole content of the thought-feeling. It is like entering a room and seeing the whole content of the room at once, its atmosphere and its spaces. To see and be aware of one's thoughts makes one intensively sensitive, pliable, and alert. Don't condemn or judge, but be very alert. To see "what is," is really quite arduous.

To observe 'what is', the mind must be free of all comparison of the ideal, of the opposite. Then you will see that what actually 'is', is far more important than what 'should be'....

What we call living is conflict and we see what that conflict is. When we understand that conflict -- 'what is' is the truth and it is the observation of the truth that frees the mind. There is also much sorrow in our life and we do not know how to end it. The ending of sorrow is the beginning of wisdom. Without knowing what sorrow is and understanding its nature and structure, we shall not know what love is, because for us love is sorrow, pain, pleasure, jealousy. When a husband says to his wife that he loves her and at the same time is ambitious, has that love any meaning? Can an ambitious man love? Can a competitive man love? And yet we talk about love, about tenderness, about ending war, when we are competitive, ambitious, seeking our own personal position, advancement and so on. All this brings sorrow. Can sorrow end? It can only come to an end when you understand yourself, which is actually 'what is'. Then you understand why you have sorrow, whether that sorrow is self-pity, or the fear of being alone, or the emptiness of your own life, or the sorrow that comes about when you depend on another. And all this is part of our living. When we understand all this we come to a much greater problem, which is death. Please bear in mind that we are nor talking about reincarnation, about what happens after death. We are not talking about that, or giving hope to those people who are afraid of death.

...'what is' is not static, it is a movement. And to keep with the movement of 'what is' you need to have a very clear mind, you need to have an unprejudiced (not a distorted) mind...

Watch what is happening inside you, do not think, but just watch, do not move your eye-balls, just keep them very, very quiet, because there is nothing to see now, you have seen all the things around you, now you are seeing what is happening inside your mind, and to see what is happening inside your mind, you have to be very quiet inside. And when you do this, do you know what happens to you? You become very sensitive, you become very alert to things outside and inside. Then you find out that the outside is the inside, then you find out that the observer is the observed.

As long as there is the thinker and the thought, there must be duality. As long as there is a seeker who is seeking, there must be duality. As long as there is an experiencer and the thing to be experienced, there must be duality. So duality exists when there is the observer and the observed. That is, as long as there is a centre, the censor, the observer, the thinker, the seeker, the experiencer as the centre, there must be the opposite.

Re: Living Life From A Third Person Perspective
« Reply #29 on: November 04, 2008, 07:25:36 PM »
"The observer and the observed" is a central tenet of Krishnamurti's philosophy. When we look into ourselves (admittedly an uncommon activity, especially in America), there is a division between 'my thoughts and feelings,' and 'me.' You begin asking, 'what is this observer that stands apart, observing emotions and thoughts in oneself as if they're separate?'  Then one day, there comes an explosion of insight. At a non-verbal level you see that the 'observer' is an illusion that the mind continually fabricates. There is no separation the observer and the observed are one and the same! :)

At that moment the veil is lifted, and you truly see a bird for the first time, without the screen of words and images, knowledge and association. There is only the actuality of the bird, with its vibrant color, form, and being. There was also an inchoate insight into the very roots of human division and alienation.

It's like holding a mirror up to a mirror. At first it seems like an 'infinite regress,' but then the observer spontaneously dissolves. What remains is simply the brain observing the contents of the mind (which include emotions), without the illusory entity standing apart judging and evaluating.

Keep observing, and the past unfolds like a scroll rolling out before one's eyes. First, bits of the movie seen last night might replay on the screen of the mind. Then some old, unresolved emotion may arise. One does nothing, simply watches, and in the watching without the watcher, the past tells its story, and yields to the present.