If you are so certain of what you believe... How do you know you are not deceiving yourself? Did you know that self deception is natural brain mechanism?
here is an interesting video for you. enjoy!
How do you know you are not deceiving yourself?
by cyberjesus 8 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
TastingFreedom
There is a book that relates to this topic, "Under the influence", it shows the effect of group dynamics:
-
-
Satanus
Great youtube. I like the part at the end, where chomsky says that china can't be intimidated by the usa, because china has been around for tousands of yrs.
S
-
Satanus
Seems to me, the only way to not decieve ourselves or rationalize stuff is to shut off the mind, periodically. The mind seems to naturally want to do that stuff. Even then, it carries on the manufacturing processes, but at least, a person can spot them for what they are, most of the time.
S
-
Markfromcali
It's actually even closer or more immediate than that. What is the self that is being deceived? What does it consist of? If it is a set of beliefs and there's not the awareness that they're just beliefs, and you are still there in spite of how they change, then the self construct is a deception - it's basically a false self. It's just who you believe yourself to be, not who you are. And belief is a mental process, so it has to be constantly reinforced or revised precisely because it is not who you are, and that process of rationalization is self-decetion.
Aside from clearing your mind the opposite actually works pretty well too. If you constantly try to think in different ways, (NOT just acquire content) you are less likely to identify with any of those perspectives, and anything you do believe in would not be due to blind repetition because you're always changing it up, but rather based on what makes sense given consideration of all of what you've learned.
Of course, the religious mindset is one that is not keen on consideration of other perspectives, if anything it only pretends to considers them in a superficial way, when what is really happening is they are rationalizing or adapting the new information into their existing beliefs, even if it means misrepresenting the other views - not that they are particularly interested in what those are in the first place! And of course if their own beliefs are under scrutiny, they don't actually address any inconsistencies specifically, but generalize perhaps in the form of attacking the person raising the issue, since he's from the "other" group, as Trivers points out. This is of course because it's about ones contrived or conditioned sense of self rather than what is true, that fundamental mistake therefore colors everything that is considered.
-
cyberjesus
ok I think I am self confused :-)
-
Satanus
Mark
" If you constantly try to think in different ways, (NOT just acquire content) you are less likely to identify with any of those perspectives, and anything you do believe in would not be due to blind repetition because you're always changing it up, but rather based on what makes sense given consideration of all of what you've learned."
Would you say that that would BE the natural state for the human mind, in the big picture, w evolution as the background landscape? Or, do you think that there is what could be called a 'natural' state for the human mind, in the context of having ascended to the top position on this planet? Or, are there as many natural states of human mind as there are people? Or, other possibility.
S
-
Markfromcali
Well if there is change and development there can't just be one natural state can there? It would change over time whether you're talking about individual or collective development. One can talk about the nature of consciousness apart from the human experience and say things that are rather abstract, but that would be different and not particularly useful.
As far as the human experience is concerned, I think neoteny is a good description as I recently read Jaron Lanier describe. Human beings do not rely on instinct so much but instead have these juvenile characteristics extending into adulthood, a part of that is it allows us to continue learning but those characteristics can also be leveraged to create a kind of arrested development and foster dependency on outside agencies. Creativity and imagination can enable you to function better, or it can be used to reinforce an immature and simplistic state. (for therapeutic purposes it may be appropriate to revisit those stages for a limited time though)
I think most people can only cope with working with thoughts in the context of one belief/value system, but at another stage of development entire value systems rather than the thoughts in those systems become the objects that you work with, which obviously involves a much greater level of complexity. I do think that there can be an intuitive sense of this though, after all there are all sorts of details involved but that is not necessary to get a sense of where someone is coming from.
So there are natural states, and as you know there is social pressure so the only way for there to be any clarity about that is if you can separate or at least distinguish people from the greater social context to see what's going on and what is possible. When learning through various types of media you'd also want to be aware of the biases of the media, whether it's just reading books or something digital and interactive.
Overall I think this is why it is essential to approach issues like mind control from a developmental point of view, where there is an effort toward psychological maturity to a different order of consciousness and therefore an uplifted mental capacity for the individuals involved. It is fine to describe the processes and techniques involved, but ultimately you'll only be capable of being free from that kind of influence if you are capable of changing perspectives as easily as you change clothes - otherwise there is always the possibility of a more subtle and sophisticated technique taking hold.