Has Scn discredited consciousness exploration?

lotus

stubborn rebel sheep!
My reply to PTSD promising substances

I recently stumbled upon articles explaining how severe PTSD and depression alter the brain and chemicals.

Actually it creates deep paths and routed in the brain that lead to those non-stop unavoidable feeling of helplessness, despair, fear, anxiety...it's like a vicious circle that gets more and more severe.

Actually what is of help is to re-create other new feelings and retrain the brain. Guided meditation with afformations may be of help as it creates new cognitions , new path of thinking and those chemicals will realign. Same goes with going out and do exercices = endorphins which make one feel good. Listening to comedy shows are of help to.

I found a few YouTube guided meditations (some call it self-hypnosis) that were or great help in accomplishing so; it doesn't replace a professional support but it help in finding self-help tools.

Édit:

We know for fact how words content may impact negatively a being when constantly submitted to oppressive moral harrassement using words..it does imprint the subconscious and act as the thinking leader and chemical operator..but, the opposite is true as a positive content submitted day after day will to impact it and cause the brain, mind, body to sign with it.

Words used on a regular basis are very powerful and impacting:
( you are a worthy great person vs you are wrong and not worthy)
 
Last edited:

Glenda

Crusader
Like many others, my scientology experience completely put me off any spiritual exploration. However my leaving scientology was deeply spiritual which in some ways made it even more disorientating. Put simply I had what is sometimes called a peak experience or epiphany which changed my whole life and included a clarity about what Hubbard had done. I had to leave scientology. It's a very difficult experience to put into words.

After that I was adrift. Traumatised because what happened was fast and shocking and liberating in a ghastly out of whack simultaneous manner. I didn't even know what a peak experience or an epiphany was. I sure as hell wasn't seeking such a thing.

It's kind of funny now but a few years into my wandering around dazed and confused I met a man who had lived in India. Bit of a wise old dude, he sat with me and we talked for long time. He gently and lovingly helped me with some new language and perceptions. Sort of lined things up a bit for me. He said to me "Glenda you do realise what happened to you is something people spend a lot of their lives trying to achieve?" I gave him one of my "don't talk shit" looks and worried that he was trying to love-bomb me and get me to join some batshit crazy group. I had very powerful protective walls around me. While I had been through a massive "moment of clarity" I was still swimming in scientology language and concepts. It really was a very difficult time.

I went and did some reading about what he had told me. Holy fuck, he opened doors. I laughed and laughed. And cried and cried. And yelled "why the hell has this happened to me?!?????" I felt so disorientated to the world. Partly that was the scientology shit running around in my head and partly it was the way I now perceived everything in the world differently. I had no guidelines to "follow" and even less desire to erect or follow any guidelines. So I did what I tend to do best and made up a tool-kit that works for me. It is very spiritual but given I am a tad allergic to the words "spiritual" and "consciousness" I don't think of my tool-kit as anything with a label. I taught myself how to be quiet internally. Some call this meditating, I simply call it my quiet time. I taught myself how to breathe deeply. I did get some support from mainstream therapists because many of them now use a thing that is being called mindfulness. Yet another word I dodge. I read a lot. I watched a lot of videos. I liken myself to someone who is a on train, stops at various stations, has a look around and then gets back on the train to continue the journey. I stop nowhere permanently and attach and detach to ideas easily after I've poked around and grabbed what I like. Hubbard used to denigrate this type of behaviour as "dilettante". I am an expert dilettante these days. There are some schools of thought I am very fond of e.g. Taoism, Buddhism, but I don't go deeply into any of them. I did attend a beautiful Buddhist meditation class earlier this year. It was wonderful to be in such a calm environment and I really enjoyed being with the people there.

It has taken a lot of time to reconcile what happened both in scientology and what happened to me on the way out of it. I honestly felt like a fish way the hell out of water because I didn't have the language to explain it. Internally I was very messed up on nearly every level. I have pieced together a "new" version of myself from the ground up. For me anything about "conscious exploration" has been very very private and non-attached to anything or anyone.

Please don't think this is "all about me". It isn't. I don't for one moment think what happened to me is unique. I suspect many people have moments of powerful shifts in their lives and then possibly label it hard and end up following the conclusions made. I desperately wanted to go deep inside myself and discover what made me tick. For me it was about becoming the best (potential) version of myself so I could show up in the world and be a decent human. I knew that the scientology version of me was a fake plastic arrogant person and I needed to change that so I could find some peace. I didn't plan having a damn epiphany and the ground under my feet disappearing.

See I told ya. It is a very difficult experience to put into words. :)
 
Glenda - what were the things he gave you to read? What videos did you like the best?

Also:

This video goes into 'shrooms and at some point discusses Paul's overcoming mental difficulties with them. Enjoyable talk. Mimsey

 
Last edited:

scientia

Patron
For me, the point is exploring what our true nature is, and the nature of the universe in which we occupy.
Can we not understand our true nature within the biological sciences? Isn't it the same as the brainwashed spider wasp (zatypota percontatoria), the zombie ant fungus (ophiocordyceps unilateralis) and the human eye-eating acanthamoeba?

Or are you actually searching for a personally agreeable meaning to attach to it? If so, why?
To a large extent I agree with this. :yes:
But there are some benefits that are objective. If someone clearly improves their ability to communicate, then others can see that. It's not just purely subjective.
There are other benefits that are promised that can be objectively verified via the scientific method, but Scientology is allergic to the scientific method.
Self belief can undoubtedly have observable physical effects. One subject that continues to interest me is psychoneuroimmunology and the effect mental health has on one's immune system.

Kinda like PTS/SP tech only a lot more sciencey...
Despite all the many things that can hinder us from this type of exploration though many still choose to explore and find benefits from it.
And maybe THAT is the point.
There's a world of trouble one can get into as well from getting involved in romantic relationships with others. You can expose yourself to all kinds of deception, betrayal, and run the risk of hooking up with a sociopath or other types one shouldn't partner up with.
Should we discontinue that pursuit as well to avoid the pitfalls one can experience?
The difference is in the "truth value" you assign to such experience. Exploring the ether between faith and fantasy may provide therapeutic benefit but assigning truth to delusion seems rather odd to me.

The value of scientology is arguably rooted in the truth value given to the literal interpretation of preconditioned subconscious narratives vomited up during trance-induced dissociative states as directed by a sociopathic drug-addict. A placebo, by definition, is deceptive. Scientology is at its most therapeutically potent when the individual a) is unaware of being deluded, and b) assigns a high truth value to his delusions.

This, I'd wager, is a slippery slope towards insanity.
Several years later is when I got involved in Scientology. My IQ (which also tested high) and logical thinking didn't help me avoid the danger of getting sucked into a cult. There are other kinds of intelligence besides those two things. My EQ (emotional intelligence) was horrific, and was a contributing factor as to what made me vulnerable to scientology manipulative recruitment tactics. There were other factors as well. But my point is that logic and reason, while they may be critical in making correct decisions in life, they are not the total answer.
The only way you can advance in scientology is by denying logic. Each EP is an unsupported proposition - from Life Repair, all the way up to OTVIII. Any reasoned evaluation would expose serious logical fallacies in Hubbard's output and diminish the value of the program.

I guess my point is more of a question: to what degree are you willing to diverge from reason to obtain benefit?
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
Can we not understand our true nature within the biological sciences? Isn't it the same as the brainwashed spider wasp (zatypota percontatoria), the zombie ant fungus (ophiocordyceps unilateralis) and the human eye-eating acanthamoeba?
Scientia, while I don't agree with some of your comments, I like them, and you ask some good questions.

I really don't have time to properly respond to your whole post tonight, but will respond as I can to various parts of it.

As far as this first question I quoted, I believe eventually we will be able to understand our true nature within the biological sciences. At this time though we don't possess the tools in order to address some basic questions by using the scientific method. From a scientific perspective,how exactly would you determine whether consciousness is a real thing or not? If I am conscious, how exactly can I show that utilizing the scientific method?
 
Last edited:

scientia

Patron
As far as this first question I quoted, I believe eventually we will be able to understand our true nature within the biological sciences. At this time though we don't possess the tools in order to address some basic questions by using the scientific method. From a scientific perspective,how exactly would you determine whether consciousness is a real thing or not? If I am conscious, how exactly can I show that utilizing the scientific method?


First you'd have to separate what you call "consciousness" from your own matter. Because consciousness interacts with the physical, it's almost a given the answer lies...in the physical. We know how the body interacts. It's via that colony of relatively autonomous cellular functions we call the brain.

If you can't separate it, if you can't measure it, it may well not be there. For decades, physicists have been searching high and low for a fifth force of nature - there's simply no evidence for it.

But who knows. Maybe time will tell. Brain mapping, supercomputers, AI and the idea of a full human connectome are all making scientists rather moist at the moment so maybe answers are coming. Although I'd argue such answers will only strengthen the physiological argument.

If you believe consciousness is real, distinct and can deliver something valuable then you've already breathed life into the placebo effect (faith/expectation). The answers you find may well provide benefit but how will you know (assuming you care) if they're based in reality?
 
Last edited:

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
First you'd have to separate what you call "consciousness" from your own matter. Because consciousness interacts with the physical, it's almost a given the answer lies...in the physical. We know how the body interacts. It's via that colony of relatively autonomous cellular functions we call the brain.

If you can't separate it, if you can't measure it, it may well not be there. For decades, physicists have been searching high and low for a fifth force of nature - there's simply no evidence for it.

But who knows. Maybe time will tell. Brain mapping, supercomputers, AI and the idea of a full human connectome are all making scientists rather moist at the moment so maybe answers are coming. Although I'd argue such answers will only strengthen the physiological argument.

If you believe consciousness is real, distinct and can deliver something valuable then you've already breathed life into the placebo effect (faith/expectation). The answers you find may well provide benefit but how will you know (assuming you care) if they're based in reality?
Yes, I do believe in consciousness, and yes, I do recognize it's a belief. My concept of it would be as an energy field; how it exactly would react with matter I won't even pretend to be able to answer that question. I'll just say that my belief is based on many experiences I've had during my life.

Even if you put consciousness aside though for a moment, there are so many things about the human body that we don't even understand yet, or are just beginning to understand. There's some interesting research linked to at the Heart Math Institute. Well, interesting to me anyway. YMMV

And while you're correct in that my belief could increase the power of the placebo effect, I don't think that that's a bad thing. :D
Big Pharma finds it pretty irritating when doing their research, but IMO one should do all they can to maximize the placebo effect when in a healing profession. Harvard Medical School has started doing some interesting research on it in recent years. Here's a couple articles about it. I don't know if they're the best ones, but don't have time to search further at the moment:

The Placebo Phenomenon
An ingenious researcher finds the real ingredients of “fake” medicine.
https://harvardmagazine.com/2013/01/the-placebo-phenomenon

The power of the placebo effect
Treating yourself with your mind is possible, but there is more to the placebo effect than positive thinking.
https://www.health.harvard.edu/mental-health/the-power-of-the-placebo-effect

The answers you find may well provide benefit but how will you know (assuming you care) if they're based in reality?
Yes, I do care. And I do have some experiments in mind which will help me decide whether or not they're based in reality and/or provide benefits.
Not something I'm going to get into on this post though, if ever. :cool:
 
Last edited:

Glenda

Crusader
Glenda - what were the things he gave you to read? What videos did you like the best?

Also:

This video goes into 'shrooms and at some point discusses Paul's overcoming mental difficulties with them. Enjoyable talk. Mimsey

That's an interesting question about what the wise old dude gave me to read. Nothing is the answer. He knew I was exhausted and needed to rest more than anything else. He did however give me a strange exercise which was very helpful. He asked me to read a little bit each day - of anything - out loud. He told me it would help calm my mind. I thought it sounded crazy but had nothing to lose so I did. And what happened was quite remarkable.

The first out-loud reading I did I hit the wall of exhaustion in less than 5 minutes and fell asleep on the sofa. I found reading out loud very uncomfortable. The next day I tried again, pushing to try to stay awake. Same thing happened. This wall of exhaustion hit me and I fell into a deep sleep. The wise old dude had told me to go with whatever happened. To let natural processes roll. So I figured after 2x days of falling into a deep sleep I had found a cure for the erratic sleep patterns I was struggling with. I was wrong. After several days of reading (anything) out-loud it hit me how deeply and utterly exhausted I was. I became aware of how my hunger for answers was preventing me finding them. Paradoxes and more paradoxes became apparent. I also discovered that reading out-loud is a way different experience to silent reading. It increases focus and is quite meditative.

To this day I read out-loud sometimes. I like the experience of it. I can now read a whole book out-loud. It calms my mind and I get to participate in the book way more than with silent reading. Reading out-loud is a part of what I call my "tool kit".

I can't think of any videos I "liked best" off-hand. Sorry. I did watch a movie the other night which was beautiful and meaningful and plain glorious. The movie is called Tracks. It is the story of a young woman (Robyn Davidson) who walked across the Australian desert back in the 1970s. It is a story of true courage, stubborn human behaviour, love, facing fear and the exquisite fragility of life. It is very inspiring, with amazing scenery, excellent camera work and a tension-filled story-line. No car chases, no ridiculous representations of the human condition. It is real and raw and lovely.

The film came out in 2013. It is imo beautifully constructed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracks_(2013_film)

This is a vid interviewing Robyn Davidson and also the photographer who was commissioned by National Geographic to photo-essay Robyn's journey.
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
To this day I read out-loud sometimes. I like the experience of it. I can now read a whole book out-loud. It calms my mind and I get to participate in the book way more than with silent reading. Reading out-loud is a part of what I call my "tool kit".
LibriVox is a group of worldwide volunteers who read and record public domain texts creating free public domain audiobooks for download from their website and elsewhere. Back in 2010 I did nearly 100 hours of audio for them: https://www.yawnguy.com/librivox.htm. I know they would appreciate your help if you were to contribute your voice.

I learned something very interesting doing these audio recordings. Some of the works I chose to do were quite dry (e.g. The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, and Sidelights on Relativity by Albert Einstein), but some were quite emotional, like A Tale of Two Cities. I found doing that Dickens work emotionally wrenching, in that to put across a part convincingly one has to really inhabit the character as much as possible. Before doing this, I had thought it wasn't possible for knowingly-false circumstances to have such an effect on the mind/body.

You mention the movie Tracks. I watched that a few years ago, and enjoyed it.

Paul
 
Last edited:

Glenda

Crusader
LibriVox is a group of worldwide volunteers who read and record public domain texts creating free public domain audiobooks for download from their website and elsewhere. Back in 2010 I did nearly 100 hours of audio for them: https://www.yawnguy.com/librivox.htm. I know they would appreciate your help if you were to contribute your voice.

I learned something very interesting doing these audio recordings. Some of the works I chose to do were quite dry (e.g. The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli, and Sidelights on Relativity by Albert Einstein), but some were quite emotional, like A Tale of Two Cities. I found doing that Dickens work emotionally wrenching, in that to put across a part convincingly one has to really inhabit the character as much as possible. Before doing this, I had thought it wasn't possible for knowingly-false circumstances to have such an effect on the mind/body.

You mention the movie Tracks. I watched that a few years ago, and enjoyed it.

Paul
Way cool. Thank you so much. Going to explore this for sure. :)
 

scientia

Patron
Yes, I do believe in consciousness, and yes, I do recognize it's a belief. My concept of it would be as an energy field; how it exactly would react with matter I won't even pretend to be able to answer that question. I'll just say that my belief is based on many experiences I've had during my life.
Well sure, but faith is faith. You may as well replace the word "consciousness" with "God". This is essentially a religious argument.

And while you're correct in that my belief could increase the power of the placebo effect, I don't think that that's a bad thing. :D
I guess not. But if I was debating a catholic, a muslim or a climate change alarmist, I'd still be making the case for reason. Wouldn't you?

Yes, I do care. And I do have some experiments in mind which will help me decide whether or not they're based in reality and/or provide benefits.
Aka "knowingness".

I guess I'm just curious as to what you specifically hope to achieve. So many have scaled this mystical mountain of self-discovery but their pics never look as good as those in the brochure.

You can't cheat death.

We never needed a sci-fi therapy to know we came from distant stars, billions of years ago.

The truth and all its splendour was right in front of us the whole time.

el+universo.jpg


Not something I'm going to get into on this post though, if ever.
That's a shame (I'm fascinated!) but no worries. Nice chattin'. :cheers:
 
Last edited:

Veda

Sponsor
-snip-

Well sure, but faith is faith. You may as well replace the word "consciousness" with "God". This is essentially a religious argument.

-snip-
Not necessarily. The inner space explorers of the 1950s and 1960s rejected religion.
 

Free Being Me

Crusader
No, I don't think $cientology (which people are learning to avoid) has discredited consciousness exploration. Science and philosophy come to mind as fields exploring the concept.
 

Type4_PTS

Diamond Invictus SP
That's a shame (I'm fascinated!) but no worries. Nice chattin'. :cheers:
I'm enjoying this chat scientia, and hope to come back to it at a time when I am not as busy. I'm about to go through a really busy period at work.

Hopefully you're still here when I do come back to it! :yes:
 
Top