A Quick Hello From One Who Has Healed

I thought we were discussing whether it was harmful. Necessity implies exclusivity, projecting one's values onto others. ("You can't be well without spirituality.").

I dont see it as a debate, I'm just stating my opinions. Did I say it was harmful? Got a cheese brain cant remember. If so, then I meant religion, because it fosters abuse and stupidity.

Going back to the increasingly anticipated (or dreaded) ability to "offload" human minds (neural networks) to computers capable of processing faster than a human mind, if you could do that and eliminate the biologic copy, would that be you in the literal "being" sense of existence, self-awareness, etc?

Not sure i share your optimism about this happening anytime soon.
Anyhow, its a matter of perspective, when you are realistic you arent the same person anymore you were yesterday, so even less you would be the same person if your data would be transferred into a machine, since your body would be absent and then theres the problem of consciousness. I personally doubt it can be simulated.

I'm having trouble understanding if you believe:

- There is no spiritual side of life. Forming values from consideration of the non-existent is unproductive -- likely counterproductive.
- There may be an undiscovered part of the physical world (which people commonly identify as "spiritual" or super-natural), but because it can't be proven or understood, it can't productively (reliably) contribute to one's values.

Spirituality is a meaningless word. Super-natural is just like it. What does that even mean? More than natural? Over-natural? Not natural? Same thing with Para-normal.
So unless someone creates an accurate definition of what a spiritual realm or dimension might be, or why it should be needed for our everyday living, it is totally irrelevant for me.

I couldn't say as you did that "something larger" is just "something else." The fact that it is still not understood in this day and age when so much has been discovered puts it on the "something exceptional" scale.

For me that is not enough. We also don't know the exact mechanism of action of Ibuprofen or Acetaminophen, still I wouldn't call it exceptional. I don't even understand how my microwave works exactly, still I wouldn't call it spiritual. I also don't find the EEG story exceptional. If its true at all its a coincidence, 1.9 billion people in 1920 is a lot.

Akuma wrote:Not sure i share your optimism about this happening anytime soon. Anyhow, its a matter of perspective, when you are realistic you aren't the same person anymore you were yesterday, so even less you would be the same person if your data would be transferred into a machine, since your body would be absent and then there's the problem of consciousness. I personally doubt it can be simulated.

I'm apprehensive, not optimistic. As far as expecting it, it's not a fringe sci-fi thing. Some of the world's brightest minds believe it is a certainty within the next 40 years. Some say within 20. The exponential speed at which it will happen is the greatest risk. It's human nature not to see the pace of technological advance as it reaches the "curve of the knee" and begins to go vertical. We become acclimated to each "new normal" and don't realize what's happening as it happens.

But, that wasn't why I raised the topic. I feel it gets to the core of what someone may mean when they say a sensitivity to spirituality is merely delusional belief in something non-existent, like superstition or talking to a make-believe friend.

If someone believes that we are simply the product of a physical/testable world, the product of eons of evolution, and "offloading" one's memories to a machine (capable of performing all those evolved functions) would be as much that "person" as the biological person is, then I could understand their position. Looking for values in something non-existent would be delusional.

If, however, they hesitate over things like "there's the problem of consciousness," I say aha! We have some common ground. We recognize there is something more to human life than making logical choices. Something more than just a biological computer processing current input based upon accumulated data.

It leads to what is consciousness? What is emotion? For what purpose did they evolve? Why does a wavelength precisely 131.87cm long (the middle C note) sound nice, while adding 5cm doesn't?

Questions such as those don't lead to answers. They simply recognize that there are unanswerable aspects of human existence which can influence the values we choose to adopt. Values that don't arise from provable, physical, mortal reasoning but can improve our ability to enjoy life, make sense of it, etc. (Or, interfere, depending on the individual.).

You mentioned self-contradictory elements of spiritual belief systems. But, isn't it self-contradictory that we've evolved through eons of self selection, and yet humankind sees beauty in art which has little to do with survival? Condemns acts of genocide rather than celebrating evolution by those who can against those who can't? Why is it less contradictory to form one's values based upon that?

Akuma wrote:So unless someone creates an accurate definition of what a spiritual realm or dimension might be, or why it should be needed for our everyday living, it is totally irrelevant for me.

I understand and respect that it's not relevant to you. My concern is when you say it's not "needed" in "our" everyday life. This implies someone has said it is "needed" (when I believe the most which has been said in this thread is that it can be helpful). And, that what's not beneficial to you is not beneficial to others. That sounds a little dogmatic in its own way.

I've been pursuing this topic because I can understand why the OP would turn to a spiritual side of life. He spent decades in software development which is more like interacting with a microwave than people and the ambiguous values they share (which seem to come from something other than pure evolution). He's in the latter years of his life which may result in a sense of urgency incompatible with weekly therapy for a year or two. Also a greater sense of more to give back to humankind.

His particular circumstance could have been more than he could bear. Without the hope of finding meaning through spirituality, he might not be with us today(?). I think he's undertaken a crash-course into what many make a low-level part of their entire life. I'd like for him to understand how it can be valid (and invalid).

If spirituality to you is equivalent to the unknowns of a microwave or how a pain reliever inhibits COX enzymes, I respect your choice of those values. But, I think the OP turned to spirituality as it's commonly understood because it's associated with the mysteries of life that other unknowns (like how a microwave works) aren't. I don't think it addresses what he believes he's tapped into (the meaning of life).

Regarding the case of Berger's sister having an extra-sensory experience. I agree that it could be the case of "a stopped clock being right once a day." But, that implies people regularly feel such overwhelming sense of premontion. Evidently that wasn't the case. If it had been, Berger wouldn't have undertook decades to discover the scientific source of that experience. He would have simply said, "she does that every week or two." Or, her father wouldn't have bothered sending the telegram, instead recognizing everyone in town sends those telegrams all the time. The odds are significant.

The same holds true concerning what I witnessed with a dog. I took an older dog to the vet for euthanization when it could no longer stand due to age. Every time I took her anywhere (grooming, the vet, the dog park, etc.) the other dog would be waiting eagerly for her when I returned. He'd be at the door, pushing on it, ready to pounce on her and follow her around the house, smelling her, etc. It was high energy and like clockwork.

When I returned from the vet I dreaded how he'd be at the door. But, he wasn't. I immediately thought something happened to him because it was so unusual. I called his name and he didn't come. At that point I was convinced something was wrong because he always came when called. 100% of the time. I walked into the house and he was sitting with his back to me looking down at the spot where she always slept.

"Odds" don't explain that. There may be a physical explanation which hasn't been discovered yet. But, considering how we've discovered so much (being at the "knee of the curve" of scientific discovery), whatever it is must be relatively significant. It seems significant inasmuch as it involves extra-sensory communication.

There are more examples. Dossey compiled a few in his book "The Power of Premonition."

What I like about considering a spiritual dimension to life is best described by the author of that books:

“Humility” comes from the Latin humus, or “ground.” Humility “grounds” us. It makes possible a willingness to say we don’t know everything, that our cultural prohibitions against these phenomena are not final, and that the universe is full of surprises. Humility makes it possible to follow science wherever it leads, and to abandon preformed prejudices when they no longer serve us, when they are in conflict with actual evidence.

I believe that can be helpful to a pwNPD.

I think this topic is interesting!

Truth too late wrote:

Akuma wrote:Not sure i share your optimism about this happening anytime soon. Anyhow, its a matter of perspective, when you are realistic you aren't the same person anymore you were yesterday, so even less you would be the same person if your data would be transferred into a machine, since your body would be absent and then there's the problem of consciousness. I personally doubt it can be simulated.

I'm apprehensive, not optimistic.

Oh whoops there I thought you couldn't wait.

But, that wasn't why I raised the topic. I feel it gets to the core of what someone may mean when they say a sensitivity to spirituality is merely delusional belief in something non-existent, like superstition or talking to a make-believe friend.

If someone believes that we are simply the product of a physical/testable world, the product of eons of evolution, and "offloading" one's memories to a machine (capable of performing all those evolved functions) would be as much that "person" as the biological person is, then I could understand their position. Looking for values in something non-existent would be delusional.

If, however, they hesitate over things like "there's the problem of consciousness," I say aha! We have some common ground. We recognize there is something more to human life than making logical choices. Something more than just a biological computer processing current input based upon accumulated data.

Sure, but that's why I say its narcissistic. It's not actually about something being unknown, or about something being bigger. It's about Me. About meaning for my life.
And from my experience it is always one of those two things, it's either anxiety due to ones own insignificance or impotence and the wish to relieve that via a bigger, protective shelling that holds and protects us, or it is about an ideal that we strive for, which is grandiose, enlightened, transcendend. Both these functions of the mind are typical idealized super-ego stuff, either a perfect protecting father / a perfect holding mother or the wish to become like them, to aspire to their greatness. If there would be a spiritual dimension to life out there somehow - that by itself wouldn't be interesting to people, that's why I brought up the examples of pain meds or the microwave. Imagine there would be a God and he would care about all universes but not ours - noone would pray to him or want to derive "values" from him.
It is only that this spiritual dimension makes them special, gives them worth and security which makes them even care about it and makes them pay a lot of money for somehow getting into contact with it.
Let's take consciousness as an example. If I grab by bag of leftover Buddhist knowledge then from their perspective consciousness is what they call a dharma, a reality-consituent. Basically thats like an atom in our understanding, its just a part of life. You have one, I have one, theyre merely there. But consciousness itself is just like a shining light, like a mirror, it holds nothing personal in it, apart from that in your case it reflects the stream of you-ness and in my case it reflects the stream of me-ness. If we would follow their thought-patterns, this quality is for them actually an aspect of suffering for beings, because this continous reflection is just a sort of turmoil, a neverending stream of impressions that ultimately lead nowhere. For them, neither the stream of dharmas that make up the body nor the stream of consciousness-dharmas actually create a soul or a self, it's just an impersonal stream of stuff. The wish to make this me, myself, or to turn it into something that actually constitutes this sense of stability, is just an aspect of us being beings, not a reflection of reality.
So these are the two opposites to the narcissistic ideal then. If there is a spiritual dimension which doesn't "concern" you - for lack of a better word - it would be my guess that it would be just as uninteresting to you as if you would realize, that you have no self whom it might concern. Just imagine it for a while, it's quite alien at first, but if nothing else, it should be an interesting thought experiment.

You mentioned self-contradictory elements of spiritual belief systems. But, isn't it self-contradictory that we've evolved through eons of self selection, and yet humankind sees beauty in art which has little to do with survival? Condemns acts of genocide rather than celebrating evolution by those who can against those who can't? Why is it less contradictory to form one's values based upon that?

Heinz Kohut, the rather known developer of self-psychology and scholar on narcissism has written papers on the psychology of music.
Genocide on the other hand side has nothing to do with evolution, but with overflowing ignorance. We didn't gas the Jews because we were low on food, we gassed them because we had a distorted value-system based on an equally distorted belief-system.

Regarding the case of Berger's sister having an extra-sensory experience. I agree that it could be the case of "a stopped clock being right once a day." But, that implies people regularly feel such overwhelming sense of premontion.

You look at it in a quite peculiar manner. The question for me is rather, why only him - was he the only human being with a sister who was emotionally close to him who had an accident?
Do the math if you're bored. If something like this would be possible we would have millions of cases.

The same holds true concerning what I witnessed with a dog...

As I've described in a previous answer I myself have had an experience of remote viewing. Nevertheless I have no need and feel no desire to inquire into this with such an urgency as you seem to be. Also I have a feeling that I am starting to repeat myself so maybe we should come to an end here.

Akuma wrote:Also I have a feeling that I am starting to repeat myself so maybe we should come to an end here.

Yes, it's getting long'ish. It's a good conversation though. One thing I wanted to clarify very briefly:

Akuma wrote:Genocide on the other hand side has nothing to do with evolution, but with overflowing ignorance.

That's your value though. What I was getting at is where those values come from. They can be indoctrinated as social norms (group think). But, social norms aren't foolproof. They tend to be as fickle as whose ox is being gored. "In groups" vs "out groups." Social Darwinism epitomizes how self-serving and narcissistic that can be.

I don't think spirituality (openness to something larger than ourselves) has a lock on subjectivity. It's a matter of faith to believe society has it right (for example, the OP's comparison of his choice to live with the homeless vs spending 10 hours in rush hour traffic each week). There's still a question of where society gets its values (to condemn coercion, or to celebrate it as the natural course of evolution).

I'll stop now. If you felt like saying anything to that, please do. It won't keep going.

Thanks for thinking about things. I also hope the OP is doing ok. He hasn't updated his blog in awhile. I'd like to read more about what he's learning.

Truth too late wrote:

Akuma wrote:Genocide on the other hand side has nothing to do with evolution, but with overflowing ignorance.

That's your value though. What I was getting at is where those values come from. They can be indoctrinated as social norms (group think). But, social norms aren't foolproof. They tend to be as fickle as whose ox is being gored. "In groups" vs "out groups." Social Darwinism epitomizes how self-serving and narcissistic that can be.

That's what I think, too. Just that I put a spiritual entity in the same category as social norms. The image of god is bound to the form of society, the religious and cultural history, personal views, its also influenced by political motivations.

I don't think spirituality (openness to something larger than ourselves) has a lock on subjectivity. It's a matter of faith to believe society has it right (for example, the OP's comparison of his choice to live with the homeless vs spending 10 hours in rush hour traffic each week). There's still a question of where society gets its values (to condemn coercion, or to celebrate it as the natural course of evolution).

I dont think society has it right, either. Then again, society is just like spirituality a non-word, since there are many societies with many value-systems.
I'm interested in the basic positive actions though, like giving, sharing - they develop pretty early in life but I have yet to find a book that goes over that development in detail. Same for the development of the older childs conscience.

bitty wrote:TheLord, you wrote that Violet was rejecting the OP's attempt to share his idea of how to heal, and went on to say the following,

TheLord wrote:..........All the genuine efforts of the girl on the mission will be wasted if everyone starts saying this to her. This is called resistence by the people with Personality Disorder for any kind of solution, treatment, cure to the problem. This is the very reason many hate their therapists, call their therapists arrogant, not knowledgeable, and that NPDs know more than their therapist, and that they were able to fool the therapists so, how can the therapist be better knowing than them etc.

And this is why many therapists are not interested in treating NPDs and this is why many NPDs come here complaining that while there are so many support places for the N victims, but not for the NPDs.

I hope I explained this in an inoffensive manner, because offending others was not my purpose but rather bing able to tell what I have observed so far.

I would think that Violet is far from alone in not finding the OP's post a source of help. It didn't help me, although I join Violet in wishing the OP well, and thanking him for his post. This is not the same as someone rejecting an idea that is not their's. Your comments, above, about narcissists, their resistance to solutions, and their attitudes towards their therapists, were therefore irrelevant.

The attitude that you described, of narcissists being resistant to help, does not explain, as you think it does, why there are almost no support places for them. The narcissists who complain of this are, by definition, self aware, and looking for others who can relate to them and offer support. I like to think that ideas are mine, but I've still found this forum extremely helpful and supportive, and don't reject suggestions out of hand; far from it.

TheLord wrote:The problem is that self awareness is just one thing, but being able to not fall into the same lifetime of pattern is another. You can find plenty of examples here people who are aware of their disorders, aware of what they did all their life and still when the situation arrises they react the same way..

I think that many narcissists here, having become aware of their disorder, have changed how they behave. They may have the same instincts, and gut reactions to things, but I think that many of us try to monitor and change how we behave, and I also think that some genuine change happens inside as well. I'm no angel, but I do treat people better than I used to, at least some of the time.

Violet spoke, in the thread that you mentioned, of finally finding understanding and forgiveness. For people wounded by their parents, that is indeed a big step towards healing.

It's very late, so I'll finish there.

I'm not commenting on your hostile reaction, only noting it.

TheLord wrote:I'm not commenting on your hostile reaction, only noting it.

I just spent countless hours trying to cheer you guys up by talking about a meat computer making consciousness like the liver makes bile.

Am I not N? Why are the other forums talkative and fun but nobody likes each other here?

Seriously, doesn't stuff like this make everything seem insignificant:


(Click to enlarge)

If you look way on the bottom-right corner, that's where humans exist within all of life on earth. And the smartest people in that tiny speck are talking about moving consciousness to computers that can out think us.

We're smart and in control, and in the very near future a new dot could appear on that map -- the species replacing us. A new "extinction event" line.

How is that not of a spiritual magnitude? Are we really no more special than all those other dots in that smear of life? That soup wave will continue expanding for eons? Us another forgotten speck, as dumb as the other mammals by comparison?

That's as hard to believe as an unseen dimension (extra sensory, spiritual existence, whatever you want to call it).

Is it just me?

TTL
I find your posts very interesting and as genuine as you can post, but have you been to BPD and ASPD forum?

Constant warning of suicide and not being able to post what you want is part of posting on these forums because if you post something on BOD that they dont like they will talk about suicide and if you post something on ASPD that something they dont like, they will talk about anger and rage and killing others.

NPD forums is much more fun and friendlier, you are not that easily retricted from posting on this forum.

This is good

I just spent countless hours trying to cheer you guys up by talking about a meat computer making consciousness like the liver makes bile.

Am I not N? Why are the other forums talkative and fun but nobody likes each other here?

Congrats! It was the most depressing post I have yet to see on here.

Don't know....not into diagnosing. If you happen to make friends with TheLord I would say no because he wins the award for pissing off the most N's.

I like most of the posters here (NPD ones) (when they can be bothered coming around or even answering via PM). Otherwise, f them.

green m+m wrote:If you happen to make friends with TheLord ....

We already are friends! When I look at that graph and consider the tiny part of that tiny dot which we occupy within all life that's ever existed on earth, every interaction seems like it should be special.

Considering the odds that we should have been crustations, but instead we're the only species to cognitively recognize its ability evolve cognitively and extinguish itself biologically (quantum computing meets robotics), what a special place in time we occupy. It's fleeting, yet remarkable.

Why is that depressing? The only thing depressing to me is that most of my occupation of that particular tiny part of that particular tiny dot was shrouded in cognitive impairment. When I think about how unique this time is, it seems like such a waste to have not engaged life with more passion instead of turning inward as I did.

Whether it's spiritual or evolution, it's hard not to think about something being larger than us. We are the only species who can sit here and talk about how we may go extinct. And the only members of that species to recognize it could be self-induced through our own creation (resulting from our own unique cognitive abilities that occur only in that tiny dot we occupy, which can only be seen from that tiny part of the dot we occupy).