|
Post by paul on Jul 5, 2013 11:34:29 GMT 9.5
If the mind is in possession of the 5 (or 12) senses then any of those senses may be the means of acquiring mental content.
|
|
|
Post by cognition on Jul 5, 2013 12:01:41 GMT 9.5
So ... there is a thinking process that does not need words in the every day sense. Might our un/sub/conscious mind use its own language? Cognition.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 5, 2013 12:10:27 GMT 9.5
Cognition:
present active cognōscō, present infinitive cognōscere, perfect active cognōvī, supine cognitum
I learn, I am acquainted (with), I recognize (in perfect tense) I know
Surely learning, acquaintance, recognition and knowing, all can take place regardless of mental process?
I think the question of other mental processes remains unanswered
|
|
|
Post by Yes on Jul 5, 2013 12:58:38 GMT 9.5
I think the question of other mental processes remains unanswered Yes. But mind itself is not an organ of sense but an object of sensory input.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 5, 2013 15:08:30 GMT 9.5
>mind itself is not an organ of sense but an object of sensory input
If I had not experienced my mind as a sense organ then I would agree with you.
For example I regularly use my mind to feel along the roadway to detect blockages or slowdowns in traffic quite some distance ahead. After a few hundred experiments I became confident with this sensory process.
It is worth a try - partly because practice is required to develop the skill.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 5, 2013 16:55:09 GMT 9.5
Another good exercise of the mind as a sense organ is to practice visualising a clock when wanting to know the time. For example, one might wake in dark and wonder what time it might be.
After a while it is possible to get quite good - within a few minutes of the actual time.
The clock imagery is also useful for other measuring processes. For some reason I see a clock with 2 hands starting at 6 and moving in opposite directions (generally symmetrically) to measure vitality in various entities and organs.
The gui can be invented to suit the situation.
|
|
|
Post by circadian rhythm on Jul 5, 2013 17:59:45 GMT 9.5
Another good exercise of the mind as a sense organ is to practice visualising a clock when wanting to know the time. For example, one might wake in dark and wonder what time it might be. After a while it is possible to get quite good - within a few minutes of the actual time. The clock imagery is also useful for other measuring processes. For some reason I see a clock with 2 hands starting at 6 and moving in opposite directions (generally symmetrically) to measure vitality in various entities and organs. The gui can be invented to suit the situation. Tracking time demonstrates an awareness of our circadian rhythms which, while beyond the mundane senses, is input by our biological processes in response to our environment. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circadian_rhythm
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 5, 2013 18:13:18 GMT 9.5
>Can you provide empirical proof of your guesstimates being more reliable
Try it for yourself. It is not too hard.
>>within a few minutes of the actual time.
>Tracking time demonstrates an awareness of our circadian rhythms
It seems that the accuracy that can be achieved with practice is an order of magnitude more precise than your proposed explanation.
Try it for yourself. It is not too hard.
Perhaps other posters would like to try, if they are not already using such skills
|
|
pattern recognition
Guest
|
Post by pattern recognition on Jul 5, 2013 18:45:34 GMT 9.5
I can predict the outcome of sloppy scripts. Where people start talking about their happy future together or reminisce about the good old days, tragedy is about to strike. In a Whodunit the guilty party is the prominent actor cast in an otherwise superfluous role. And horror movie clichés are, well, proverbial. www.horror-movies.ca/2013/06/eight-horror-movie-cliches-that-are-getting-old/One does not need to be consciously aware of a pattern to guess what is happening or is about to happen.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 5, 2013 20:24:13 GMT 9.5
Perhaps you would like to try the experiments above. They are terribly simple.
The time cognition one even appeared as a test in one of these island survivor shows last year. It is a pretty mainstream experience.
|
|
|
Post by worldly wise on Jul 5, 2013 22:12:54 GMT 9.5
Perhaps you would like to try the experiments above. They are terribly simple. The time cognition one even appeared as a test in one of these island survivor shows last year. It is a pretty mainstream experience. I agree they are terribly simple and simply terrible experiments. Every normal human demonstrates these skills to some degree. They develop with experience of, coordination with, and inputs from the world.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 6, 2013 6:41:34 GMT 9.5
>Every normal human demonstrates these skills to some degree.
Quite so. The human has a wide range of skills that transcend the physical body.
So what do you think is the basis of these non-physical skills?
|
|
|
Post by inherently human on Jul 6, 2013 21:39:33 GMT 9.5
>Every normal human demonstrates these skills to some degree. Quite so. The human has a wide range of skills that transcend the physical body. So what do you think is the basis of these non-physical skills? Some may superficially appear to transcend the physical body but they are all inherently human and derive from experience.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 7, 2013 6:25:44 GMT 9.5
...they are all inherently human and derive from experience. That appears to me to be a belief and somewhat contrary to the experience of many. For example, it is not uncommon to dream the winning numbers in lotteries. Is that derived from experience? How does it work? Will you argue (without proof) that those people must have dreamed numbers millions of times before but not informed us of their repeated losses?
|
|
|
Post by actuary on Jul 7, 2013 14:23:22 GMT 9.5
...they are all inherently human and derive from experience. That appears to me to be a belief and somewhat contrary to the experience of many. For example, it is not uncommon to dream the winning numbers in lotteries. Is that derived from experience? How does it work? On the contrary, I would think it was extremely rare. Can you provide evidence of its commonality? Do lottery actuaries need to take such events into account?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 7, 2013 18:36:26 GMT 9.5
>Can you provide evidence of its commonality?
I am sure you do not need me to Google for you - but just in case here are a few of the 4 million hits on: dreaming lottery numbers
"While still an undergraduate at Oxford, Irish peer Godley had dreams of winning horses at the race track. In his first dream, he clearly saw the names Juladin and Bindal. The next day he checked the newspaper and found those very horses set to run, at 7 to 1 odds. He told his friends of the dream and they all placed bets. They won. Altogether, he had nine dreams in a row, all winners. To prove his story, he even had a dream of two horses written down and date stamped at the local Post Office. Both horses won. Lord Kilbracken was unable to explain how he was dreaming such winners but had a lucky career, later becoming racing correspondent for a London daily newspaper."
"Another Englishman, also lucky at dreaming of the horses, was able to shed some light on the process. Harold Horwood, an electrical engineer, made history by consistantly predicting winners in the British horse race scene. He explained that on nights before going to sleep, he would enter a state of "intense meditation." He would concentrate on the horses involved in the next day's races. He would often wake up with a dream winner in his mind."
"Last night I played the Texas Lotto with numbers I had gotten in a lucid dream, and half of them were correct. It probably doesn't mean anything. 1:250 odds, for that. Pretty weird, but not burning bush weird. I had gone to bed with the silly plan to do this, based on a whacked-out probably-not-true theory about time and the subconscious. Getting a weird fluke 1:250 event as the outcome of a deliberate experiment with time probably at least merits me doing the experiment again."
"Over a 33-day period beginning in September 1998, Janine Cox amazed and enthralled her co-workers at a Fort Lauderdale, Florida law firm by winning the Cash 3, Play 4, and Fantasy 5 games nearly every day in the Florida state lottery.
What dumbfounded Janine's co-workers even more than her uncanny success was how she managed this feat -- each night she dreamt the next day's winning numbers."
And so on....
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Jul 8, 2013 8:24:14 GMT 9.5
I think I have reported here before that one night I heard a voice in my ear say "These are the winning X-Lotto numbers" which then proceeded to give me a set of numbers. The voice then instructed me to wake up and write them down. My first response was "Why are you telling me the winning numbers, I don't play X-Lotto" and the second response was to repeat the numbers about three times and then tell 'the voice' "it's ok, I will remember them". LOL How dumb am I! Of course I could not remember the numbers and still sometimes wonder. I still find it amusing when I think of it.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Jul 15, 2013 12:22:17 GMT 9.5
A fortuitous coincidence for me - re The Mind.
I was bored with TV on Friday night and decided to check our NDE's on YouTube. I came across one experienced by a scientist who researches the brain. I will post the video below. What was interesting about this NDE is that she distinctly outlines the functions of the TWO PARTS of our brain and then describes how this affected the mind/s as it was shutting down.
(It seems to me that one side of the brain is to do with the symbolism of the Square and Compasses and the other side the Level and Plumbline)
The following day there was an science show on TV focussing on the brain and the mind. As part of that show they were explaining how scientists are now able to insert a small device in a certain part of a patient's brain which enables a quadraplegic person to move artificial hand machines (not attached to the body)merely by thinking about the action.
In this show also, they emphasized how the two parts of the brain operate so differently to each other. One side deals with the here and now, this way that way, while the other side operates in a wider sphere.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Jul 17, 2013 11:02:59 GMT 9.5
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jul 17, 2013 12:29:18 GMT 9.5
It seems to me that his mental parts (higher and lower)have departed.
It would be interesting do an IQ test on him. I expect that he is operating on emotional and physical intelligence.
I think he needs metaphysical aid - and it does not seem to be my business.
|
|