MD Sensory Deprived theory

From: Matt poot (mattpoot@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Jan 31 2004 - 03:58:58 GMT

  • Next message: Paul Turner: "RE: MD Objectivity, Truth and the MOQ"

    I don't know how many of you are familliar with Sensory Deprivation, and if
    you are not, please proceed to
    http://kwiclan.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=41&highlight . This could
    prove to be quite useful to all. Mind you, it was written quite awhile ago
    (1.5 years), and I have not reviewed it since.

    It may not seem as I am dealing with quality(forum rules?), but by the end,
    I will. I also am looking for help, comments, and criticism to form this
    theory into something. Whether it just ends up a theory, which is quite
    likely, I would never-the-less like to discuss it openly with others, as my
    friends can't currently provide much help.

    Anyways, for those who are aware of what sensory deprivation is, I will draw
    out the early developments of an idea that came to me, during my time in the
    tank. This idea relates how we communicate with eachother, but it focuses
    more how we go about thinking to ourselves, our internal dialogue.

    Now, when we are conciously thinking to ourselves about anything, we (at
    least I) think in words/language. For example , if I was thinking to myself
    about writing this post, I think "Now, what should I put next?" or "Does
    this make sense?". It does not have to be a question, but you see my point.
      Anyways, as I was floating in this tank with little (sometimes nothing) to
    distract my mind, I noticed how slow I was actually conducting my inner
    dialogue. I was (and still am) thinking at what would be considered, a
    rapid conversation rate. However, considering the ability of our brains, I
    know this is nothing.

    What I then thought about at that point was "how could I speed up my
    thoughts?" not that slow is bad, which it definitely is not, but what I mean
    to say, is could it be possible to raise my level of thought process to a
    higher eschelon. How? well......my answer to this isn't exactly concrete,
    and its probability is unknown for individuals, and unlikely for the masses.

    I thought/think that if we were to somehow 'eliminate' the use of words in
    our thoughts. Or at least reduce them. Anyways, words are just analagous to
    each other. In our mythos, we are taught to speak, read and write as soon
    as we can. So, as a result of this, all of our thoughts are in words. All
    of these analogies, piled up onto eachother, just give a misrepresentation
    of true meaning. I believe that to truly understand, one must use feelings
    and non-verbal thoughts, as opposed to words. I would like to exclude
    nouns, but at this point, I dont know if I could. I wonder whether

    To explain the relation of this to quality is now the important glue to
    this idea however. Quality, being the source, would be the language.
    Before I recognized Quality better , I could not really put any semi-solid
    thesis together.

    To demonstate the difference between word and feeling, I use an example such
    as this. A person (lets just call them 'Jake') who is purchasing a used
    motorcycle from someone they dont know, goes to see it in person. When they
    get there, the bike doesn't look too bad in appearance. However, once the
    seller goes to turn the ignition key, the bike doesnt start(which can happen
    sometimes). After a few times, he manages to get the bike started, and
    right off the bat, you can hear the engine rattling and sputtering, with a
    strange metallic grinding sound.

    The first thing that comes into Jakes mind, immediately after these brief
    occurences is not the words "wow...this bike is messed up", but rather an
    undefinable mix of feelings welling up from the sub/pre-concious, , that in
    one instant , would take paragraphs to say(even more perhaps, depending on
    how well educated Jake is with motorcycle maintenance;).

    Those feelings that precede are what count. Perhaps this is the
    pre-concious quality(something like that...can't remember the exact
    statement) that Pirsig talks about in ZAMM. I often find myself searching
    for appropriate words to explain my feelings, as we all do, and in most
    cases, depending on the topic of conversation, find the word inadequate.
    Even when I use a few sentences to try and explain, it does little more.

    (I have to move quickly here, Im running out of time)
    One interesting theory that popped out of this idea, is telepathy. If we
    were to one day, reach a stage, where we were not trained to think in words,
    and used them only for non-personal uses, than perhaps we will become
    telepathic? maybe that would open up the other unused percentage of our
    brainpower.

    Anyways, I've really got to go, since I have to leave for work in 5 hours.

    I hope you all enjoy this topic.

    Sincerely,

    Matt

    P.S. Sorry for the haste in which this was written, perhaps I _should_ have
    taken more time.

    _________________________________________________________________
    Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
    http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/features&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 31 2004 - 04:00:05 GMT