What is the "anatomy" of "believing"?

Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
I'm not interested in theoretical debate either.
I'm interested in collaboration about what we 'do' agree about.
I assume others are interested in what helps them relieve, or even avoid (needless) emotional suffering/misery.
( I used to blame others for what I was (unwittingly) doing; namely; reacting to thoughts; (my own and from others.) Sorry, but my best example is the 'bogyman', I used to be afraid of the 'bogyman, {a long time ago} but when I stopped believing my thought was true/real I stopped experiencing fear. If it worked on one thought, it will 'work' on others as well, [if recognized doing 'believing']

Are you familiar with the site, "Uncommon Forum"? ( I was banned from there for repeating the same message) it's a active site.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2012
40
0
New York
I'm interested in theoretical debate as a way resolve needless suffering. Psychotherapy is based on particular theories. These days Aaron Beck's idea that thoughts affect emotion still pervades most forms of therapy. It's clear to me that we need better theories to base better therapy on.

It's also clear to me that you dealt with your bogyman via a modality that happened to follow your thought. If we zero in on that modality, therapy could be far more effective. That's my faith based on experience. I cured (CURED) a year long depression with the experiential processes of yoga and meditation. Talk therapy focused on beliefs wouldn't have cured me and doesn't cure the majority of people using it.

Thanks for the forum tip. I'll check it out.
 
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
How long did it take you via meditation and yoga?
I stopped being afraid of 'bogyman' in a instant; simply by RECOGNITION that I was (my amygdala) reacting to 'believed thought'. (RECOGNITION is the modality, as far as I know).
As I said,(and this bears repeating), I USED TO blame others for what I was (unwittingly) doing; namely; reacting to thoughts; (my own and others).
This has to be your own "insight/recognition", verbalizing ABOUT is not the way.
As Korzybski said; "The map is not the territory". (but we often 'act as if" we believe it is.

I will visit that site, to see how it works for you, I can go there but not able to post there; I hope you check back here occasionally.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
sorter; And could you prove a cause and effect relation between thoughts and emotions? I can't. If there were said:
requote, "all I would have to do is think I'm happy and it would be so-- but it ain't"

Do you see what sorter does not see? It's subtle; that's why 'positive thinking' does not work for most people, they 'don't' do it right; besides 'trying' to do it. 'Try' to blush; look in a mirror and blush intentionally. Blushing is done automatically/involuntarily.
Now remember/think of a time you 'did' blush; your remembering/accessing a 'perception'; our amygdalas do not recognize the difference between a current perception and a remembered perception. "A is A"*, 'a perception is a perception'; amygdalas are hard wired to react to perceptions, that's indubitable.
We're all familiar with 'misperception'; a example is when you 'look' at a piece of rope (in dim light) but you 'see' a snake, and react to your remembered perception. Why did your image of 'snake' turn up at that moment, you did not intentionally summon/access it. The brain was just working via 'pattern recognition'; and made a 'mistake'. Or you see a friend approaching you from a distance, but as they get closer, you see they are not your friend after all, there again 'pattern recognition' failed. Pattern recognition works automatically; when you automate 'believing' the automaticity is at 'work'.

* Aristotle articulated the "Law of Identity", if your not familiar with it, please look it up on the web.

Amygdalas are structured to "err on the side of safety/survival'; "better to be safe than sorry", that's why they react to "perceptual assumptions".
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
Pavlov never conditioned dogs to ring the bell themselves

We were conditioned to and by language.
By using language, we continue to condition ourselves.
When we 'believe' thoughts, our involuntary reacts to them. (even when/if we don't recognize believing nor the thoughts).

Byron Katie said: "When we believe our thoughts, we lose touch with reality".
How succinct.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
WhyDoYouReactToThoughtsYouNeverThoughtOrHeardBefor e?

Because you believe them. "Believing" is the means of instant/on-the-fly conditioning.
Don't blame the bully for your 'hurt' feelings; your the one who believes what s/he says.
Your complicity is why your feelings are 'hurt'.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
" And This Too Is Thought "

Do you resonate to that thought? Does it impact you? Let me know.
I'm trying to see if you have to have already made the 'paradigm shift'. Or does it help you get a 'glimpse' of the shift.
Telling people who believe the earth is flat, that it's really round, has different impact on them.

"And This Too Is JUST A Thought"
Think of a hammer; now, can you hit your 'real' thumb with it? LUDICROUS question? right?
When I was a youngster , I did just that, only not with the image of a hammer but I used a image of 'bogeyman'; and I felt real emotion of fear.
Once I recognized it was ONLY a thought, my amygdala no longer reacted to it. We need to recognize "across-the-board" that thoughts are not empirical facts.
That misbelief is a epidemic, caused by language structure, causes needless emotional suffering/misery; because the 'misbelief' is unrecognized. Even when pointed out, it's so deeply ingrained , it continues.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
'Thoughts' do not come from nothingness

Thoughts come from a medium called 'felt sense'.
We usually prepare a speech, but in conversation, the right words come as we speak. (Impromptu). We have a felt sense of what we want to say before they appear as words.(preverbal).
When you know you know a name but can't say it; how do you know you know it? You have a felt sense of it. You have a felt sense of anything before you say it.
Familiarize yourself with your felt sense, it's as vital as the words.

Felt Sense is knowing without/before words. No matter what you say/think; there's so much more meaning than was said or thought.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
I don't practice meditation; (but I did for awhile)

Meditation, as I see it , is shifting to witnessing/observer mode of perceiving thoughts.
Obviously you see what your observing.
When not meditating; thoughts still flow; but perspective is IN the flow, as part of the stream.
IN that mode, we react to thoughts as if they were objects,( we lose the perspective of meditation; witnessing.)
If we could maintain the observing mode of our thoughts during daily living; the quality of our experiencing would be different. Recognizing thoughts is empowering.

When meditating we don't react to thoughts, but when not meditating we do.

What inhibits 'thought recognition' as we go about our daily living? David Bohm said; "thoughts are not proprioceptive".
When we don't recognize our thoughts, they are still present, tacitly in background. We can't correct erroneous thoughts if we're not aware of them.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2011
1,196
1
USA
David Bohm said

" The 'problem' is insoluble as long as you keep on producing it all the time by your thought".

"We could say that practically all the problems of the human race are due to the fact that thought is not proprioceptive. Thought is constantly creating problems that way and then trying to solve them. But as it tries to solve them it makes it worse because it doesn't notice that it's creating them, and the more it thinks, the more problems it creates- because it's not
proprioceptive of what it's doing."