Our partner

Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Schizoid Personality Disorder message board, open discussion, and online support group.

Moderator: Tyler

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby poxalis » Sat Jan 25, 2020 3:06 pm

The role it ("dopamine hypothesis theory") is claimed that dopamine plays a part in, is the more dopamine you have, the faster one's neurons are firing off and the more sensitive to input the brain is and the more likely sensory input is to be miscatagorized.


well that's... i don't know. can't recall reading that one. or perhaps i shoved it under the couch. i'm not schizophrenic of course, related to them though and sensory sensitive more than most... also dopamine deprived and ADHD. give me a pile of aderal and i'll take it as sleeping pills. and if there's one constant among my disordered family it's ADHD. even the psychotic ones.

though i guess i'm potentially simplifying it a bit. however, i have to say that from personal experience this theory rings rather false. the idea of uppers making me psychotic brings a confused frown to my face. it's all the other drugs i don't trust. even weed, which can cause my sensitivity to increase. some highs become mostly an effort to not become overwhelmed by things like dust particles falling like snow inside the room. the light reflecting off them.

i can't even imagine doing something harder than weed. i'd likely break. unless it's uppers. they are a "safe" drug in my mind.
User avatar
poxalis
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 772
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:01 pm
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)


ADVERTISEMENT

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby Oblivion » Sat Jan 25, 2020 7:30 pm

^ Uppers can push me close to the edge. Too much sensory input. Brain working too fast. I can get confused and my thoughts tangle like a string of christmas tree lights.

Weed has never been a problem. I have too much anxiety and have tried everything...benzos (sometimes crushed and snorted), alcohol, meditation, self harm. Nothing works like weed. It comes on quickly, like alcohol, but alcohol (and benzos) only cover up the anxiety: you can still feel it squirming under your skin no matter how whacked you get. Weed distracts me from it.

Now they're saying weed can cause schizophrenia. I don't see how that's possible. Psychosis maybe, but not full-blown schizophrenia.
Oblivion
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:24 pm
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby poxalis » Sat Jan 25, 2020 7:48 pm

Oblivion wrote:^ Uppers can push me close to the edge. Too much sensory input. Brain working too fast. I can get confused and my thoughts tangle like a string of christmas tree lights.

Weed has never been a problem. I have too much anxiety and have tried everything...benzos (sometimes crushed and snorted), alcohol, meditation, self harm. Nothing works like weed. It comes on quickly, like alcohol, but alcohol (and benzos) only cover up the anxiety: you can still feel it squirming under your skin no matter how whacked you get. Weed distracts me from it.

Now they're saying weed can cause schizophrenia. I don't see how that's possible. Psychosis maybe, but not full-blown schizophrenia.


Uppers make my mind quiet and sharp. I find myself capable of organizing the mess of information in my head. I can pick memories from my head like it's effortless. For instance, if I watched jeopardy. The questions and names sound familiar and I flounder around my head grasping at smoke and mirrors trying to pull the information out. If I watch it on some type of ephedrine based upper then the answers roll of my tongue in a trance like boredom. It's quiet and organized up top. Whereas, like right now, I feel like I'm filled with all these blurry impressions crowding my mind.

I understand uppers normally cause anxiety but they calm me down and wipe out any jitters.
User avatar
poxalis
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 772
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:01 pm
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby Oblivion » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:19 pm

poxalis wrote:Uppers make my mind quiet and sharp. I find myself capable of organizing the mess of information in my head. I can pick memories from my head like it's effortless.


Weed does that for me, to a point. I think it's because anxiety freezes up my head. It restricts free thinking. Once relaxed, I can access my thoughts more easily. Anxiety seems to put up a barrier between me and my thinking. I know this to be true because on workdays I do crossword puzzles while commuting to work, but I only am able to get the obvious answers. Later that evening, if I take out the same puzzle after smoking, I'll nail it.
Oblivion
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2018 3:24 pm
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby DaturaInnoxia » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:54 pm

poxalis wrote:
The role it ("dopamine hypothesis theory") is claimed that dopamine plays a part in, is the more dopamine you have, the faster one's neurons are firing off and the more sensitive to input the brain is and the more likely sensory input is to be miscatagorized.


well that's... i don't know. can't recall reading that one. or perhaps i shoved it under the couch. i'm not schizophrenic of course, related to them though and sensory sensitive more than most... also dopamine deprived and ADHD. give me a pile of aderal and i'll take it as sleeping pills. and if there's one constant among my disordered family it's ADHD. even the psychotic ones.


_____________________________________

Wikipedia: (not empirical I know, but if you web search the terms, lots of proper research papers come up on it)

Sensory gating describes neurological processes of filtering out redundant or unnecessary stimuli in the brain from all possible environmental stimuli.


A large interest in sensory gating research is directed at improving deficits among people diagnosed with Schizophrenia... people with schizophrenia can often have an overload of attended stimuli...


The dopamine hypothesis of schizophrenia or the dopamine hypothesis of psychosis is a model that attributes symptoms of schizophrenia (like psychoses) to a disturbed and hyperactive dopaminergic signal transduction...

Evidence for the dopamine hypothesis
Amphetamine, cocaine and similar drugs increase levels of dopamine in the brain and... may produce experiences virtually indistinguishable from the positive symptoms [aka psychosis] associated with schizophrenia.


Yet, while drugs like speed and coke are more likely to cause psychosis as opposed to something like pot, pot is the drug most likely to genetically trigger (those predisposed to it) an ongoing/permanent psychotic disorder.

^
That's a big difference and is counterintuitive to the theory.

Your experience also hits upon points that poke holes in dopamine hypothesis.
I've already said earlier in the thread I don't like it.
Sensory gating atypicalities yes, but not dopamine hypothesis

Also, close to every antipsychotic is a dopamine antagonist, yet anywhere you look, it seems like the numbers are way too low to be as dopamine related as they claim (and it's not considering the people who have developed ways of functioning with psychotic symptoms, but keep it to themselves due to stigma, etc):

51% and 23% on antipsychotics had a “minimal” or “good” response to treatment


https://www.nationalelfservice.net/trea ... coreboard/

I read 1/3 as effectiveness elsewhere.

I'd say I'm a decent example of that.
The ones I remember being on: seroquel, zyprexia, risperidone, chlorpromazine, nozinan, zeldox, abilify, loxapine, haldol

Psychiatrists have noted that, with me, the drugs don't particularly do anything - other than lobotomize me chemically.
Psychosis is a coping mechanism and response to life for me at times.

I acknowledge that antipsychotics can be vital to the treatment for some people and it can be downright dangerous to stop them without medical supervision
Bitches Be Tripping. They're me - I'm Bitches.  ~ unknown
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
User avatar
DaturaInnoxia
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:21 am
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 2:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby 1PolarBear » Sun Jan 26, 2020 12:21 am

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I find this beautiful.
Another culture could be an internal or a spiritual (etc) layer of what is.
They'll look at genius as an abnormality and thus wrong.


Yes, because they don't need the genius, and he is a pain. The culture says:
"a therefore c"
The genius says:
"what about b?"
Answer:
"b? there is no b" or at best "b is irrelevant"

Until b is practically relevant, it will be denied and invisible. But then again, it is how magic works. The magician sees b and know its name, and can use it to do feats of magic, while the crowd only sees what it is conditioned to see.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Since I'm currently on the early childhood development train, I'd say this is true for many with mental health disorders especially at the extremes of and dissociative identity disorder and reactive attachment disorder (even disorganized attachment) - not just those genetically predisposed.


My research team discovered this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bind
Not exactly the same, but would lead to a chaotic world in practice.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I can see this in a variety of ways.

At its more dreaded; fully psychotic, alone, at war with self and others.

Or romanticized; mask after mask after mask, with no human-ness underneath.

At its more aesthetic/artistic, a shapeshifter.

And everything in between.

Do you think you can be "random personified" with a core that's very purposeful rather than random all the way through?


Yes, those are possibilities. Purposeful, probably not in the realistic sense, but it is possible to retreat in one's mind and create an internal structure that is under total control, even if the world isn't. But it would be useless in that world, but then again, everything would be. That is how dancing bears are born. There is just no right or wrong dancing, it is pure potential in act. :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTv4yD6BKlA

DaturaInnoxia wrote:
1PolarBear wrote: Its useful in chaotic environments, or when things change, it allows to find solutions that have never been tried. If you have a filter, then you will loose that ability and you won't even know it and never will. It takes a lot to overcome conditioning, usually a lot of violence.


I'm interpreting this as a theme.
An Inherent vs Aquired lack of imprint as opposed to those having an imprint, and I'm uncertain if I should ask for clarification of the last sentence.


Well, just like in the video above, how many bears died because they were invisible? and what about the people that drive the car, what if it was a moose and not a bear?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xr9Swatg8pY

Now, what if someone had the odd belief that mooses are border crossing fanatics? they might not hit the moose, because they would expect it.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:To tangent, I was looking at how, to many, hurting people is ok when authority says it's the right thing to do, and how most people will obey that with little or no question - even if they don't want to.

And yet, it's immoral or "evil" or sociopathic/psychopathic if one does it out of authority to self or reasons that make sense to self.

People have tried to explain this to me, but have so far not been fully successful.
It may be my own idealism, lack of imprint, and stubbornness (best I don't go too far in that direction since that's not a topic allowed to be examined at the moment).


That would go far for a tangent, I thought about it a lot. My brief answer is that it is because people do it out of empathy. They simply mimic each others, because doing what others do is the safe thing to do since there is strength in number. Its a major theme in the Dark Knight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ChPTKPzB4I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-gf29nuYYA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4GAQtGtd_0

The crime is to do it alone, to be odd, not the actual crime. Although in the end, it is the odd person that saves the day in the boat scene. But there is lots more you can extract from those few scenes.

Also the origin of the Joker in that movie, is that he used empathy, and it back fired, twice. He thought he was doing the right thing, but the persons he empathized with used it against him, so he was in some sort of double bind situations, and he creates those situations in the movie, to show people what it is like.

But there is more to it. Doing what everybody does is in itself a filter, and a big one. Its the appropriate thing to do. Empathy and conformity go hand in hand, for better or worst, and it is a lot stronger than ideals, or reason, because it bypass them. Its a to c, without a b.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I don't see how those things I just mentioned are conscious since I can't think of a culture that doesn't adhere to this one way or another.


Right, they are unconscious, it is what nice people do. Or "civilized people" do. Its what binds them together, which is a religious thing. Its what religion truly is, something that binds together. But if it is only empathy, then it bypass a lot of things, like reality, so it becomes superstition. So in the end it is superstition based on empathy. :|

DaturaInnoxia wrote:▪ I think I do see your point though. I'm examining broad scale issues whilst you're trying to explain this in the context of personality.


Right. Its best to start small on the individual level. Mass psychology is different and it is easy to loose yourself in it.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:So (new term for me) pre-moral would be the processed food aka filter / cultural norms conditioned, implicit or unconscious.


Its the opposite. Pre-moral is raw food, before morality. Its the filter that gives a moral slant to things, although it is pseudo-moral at this point.

So you take some raw food, lets say some prime rib seal buttock. You grind it and process it through the filter. You have processed food, with less nutrients. Add salts and preservatives, and you can can it. Put it in a can, put a label on it, and label the ingredients, this is the values of the food that you are trying to sell. You have to put all the ingredients for it to be legit, and make the container from recycling material. You have to analyse the prime rib in its component values, and it is moral if the content of the can is the same as what's on the label. So its a lot of work for it to be true, and it is less nutritive and natural than raw meat, but that is what people want.

Morally speaking though, simply taking a bite from the live seal is just as moral and true, and is more genuinely satisfying. Blood is still warm, and it gives a fuzzy feeling, while canned food is dead. Primates eat dead things. They cook to try and approximate polar bear morality, but cannot ever get it right. Its warm and not rotten, but that's about it. It does not has the full enjoyment of being in symbiosis with the seal, which is the ultimate act of love.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:So when you say you use fat instead, you describe your own mode of filtering / customs, I'm assuming. I really like how you've created your own type of language.


Its different. It is about preservation itself. If you can goods, you can hoard them and create a private property to hold them, and there is no end to it. Then you have to expand to hoard some more, perhaps by trading some cans for space. And you can be stolen, so you have to protect the cans. This is primate behavior, similar to squirrels without the fur. But squirrels get fat too in winter.

Polar bears are only preserving what they can hold personally, so the food is personal food through and through, not for trading an competition. So there is no need for land, just water and ice. Maybe a small cache of canned food somewhere in the wild, in case a primate might come by, or some other animal. Its optional to bear nature, but caves can be used.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:That sounds like you're describing the neuropsychology behind experience and behaviourism (or conditioning as you called it).


Among other things, but some are hard wired as well, the eye especially, but there is a lot more. The ability to filter is probably somewhat hard wired as well, but not the specifics.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:When I was talking about the sieve analogy, I was referencing sensory filtration.
The extra or too big of holes causing information to become jumbled - but also when managed, a point of creative genius.


Yes, but like I said, it is different, although it might look the same to some degree. It could be the predisposition is the same. But it is different. The first is natural, the other accidental.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Problems with "Sensory Gating" where people with psychotic disorders are believed to not always be able to tune out or categorize information from the environment and their relationship to the overload of incoming information (internal and external).

The role it ("dopamine hypothesis theory") is claimed that dopamine plays a part in, is the more dopamine you have, the faster one's neurons are firing off and the more sensitive to input the brain is and the more likely sensory input is to be miscatagorized.


I agree with the increase in firing, but I believe more in the serotonine hypothesis, which essentially decreases the point of firing, so there is an increase in sensibility generalized. On top of that, there is the issue of decrease in neuron receptors in place like the hippocampus and some other places, which create bottle necks. It that is true, it would also mean it is linked to lower social status, perceived or otherwise. Which makes sense on an evolutionary level, since the lower status person will try to find ways to solve the problem and get peace, assuming it is getting pecked, which is automatic in primates and chickens. So finding creative solutions is necessary, as well as getting rid of feelings, so what needs to be done be done. Since there is no need for communication, this also can be done away. Canned food becomes raw food, and you deal in raw, just like a polar bear that would become reckless and rampaging, which happens here and there.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I was watching something on ADHD where the doctor was talking about how addressing the proper workings of points a, b, and c, would actually have the same effect as treating the kid based on brain chemistry aka drugging the $#%^ out of them.

Speaking of which, I'd love it if you felt like translating (your analogies) how ADHD works if you're at all familiar with it.


I don't think it is the same animal. I would consult deers perhaps, and what ancients called acedia. That's all I can really say. The desert fathers dealt with that, or how to become a camel. But yeah, I can't really tell much about it, and can't really explained how this relate to it, just possible ways.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Do you have an example of what activities can lead being made to go from "a" directly to "c" causing "b" to become invisible and inexistant albeit needed?
Is this in the application of being taught or conditioned?


I gave some already. Teaching and conditioning is the same thing. But it is the same as a physicist looking at anomalies, while others do some other things, like fornicating.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Is it doing what you've been conditioned to do without not fully connecting why and then being expected to use it transferably.
Then you have a go and then really having no idea why and as a result, when other related areas are expected for you to be able to, again, transfer you end up lost as hell?


The first part is right, but it is not transferable, it is in fact taboo. b is taboo subject, you are not supposed to see it, let alone name it, which would mean you have control and power over b, so that makes you a witch or a sorcerer, which is bad stuff. Primates will burn witches if they float, which happens if they have healthy fat, just like a polar bear. So you never float in front of primates, it makes them want to burn you without even eating, which is pretty pointless exercise and immoral.

Here is another example.
https://previews.magnoliabox.com/corbis ... 14_850.jpg

That bear is walking on water, yet you are supposed not to see that, because only Jesus of some magical being walks on water, but not bears. But they do, since ice is water, so bears walk on water. Might be a strange belief for some, and it is taboo. Why? many reasons, and nobody knows why, and it is pointless to know why, because they will deny it. They will deny when you say bears walk on water, and say you are crazy. If you say it is a taboo subject, they will deny. If you explain what I just explain, they will accept bears walk on water, but will deny having denied ever, because of course they do, sort of. But the reality is censured, only bear on ice is allowed, which does not captivate the luminous nature of bears as it should, and their incredible power over nature. And that also is a double bind. Its abusive to bears. I am not saying all cases are this obvious or necessarily true like this one, most are in grey areas.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Do you think primate child rearing has gotten worst or that we're just more aware of the issues correlated to it? Or that the landscape has changed and they haven't (yet?) adapted?


I don't know. I think it is better in some ways, worst in some others. Some parents are simply negligent or bad, it was always the case. What's worst, is that in the past, society could compensate bad parenting, but today, with nuclear individual in humanism, that social layer is gone, so it has to be better, or it is a lot worst.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:
1PolarBear wrote:Its a different issue than dealing with stress. But if someone is in a stressful environment, especially an early one, and grooming fails or does not exist, it will create odd beliefs, because normal solutions don't work.


A different issue? I would think that's just a way a personality forms (how and if someone is groomed)...

And what if one is genetically predisposed to be hypersensitive to stress, and as a result, normal solutions are ineffective and so they end creating odd beliefs to cope?


They could be linked in that way. But the actual issue is still different. How you deal with it will be different. In the first it is about learning filter or how to show a personality that has one, while in the second, it is about managing stress. The second is a lot easier than the former, although the price might be high. Pretending to not see things is harder, because you don't know what other people don't see. Its almost an impossible task. It can only be deduced by observation and communication is of no help, on the contrary, because there will be denial. So talking is out of the question, which interferes with grooming, but then again, grooming will be stopped anyway, because of the taboos. So it is a catch 22 to try it in a normal way, which of course means it is abusive. Its another double bind, which creates what it is supposed to solve. They are separate problems that need to be addressed separately. Whether they have a similar cause or not is irrelevant.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:No reason to go back because by independently thinking, all the cancer-causing, poisonous, monster ingredients they saturate canned food and cured meat with, becomes repulsively visible.
Others do not see it.
Almost ever do they not see it.


Rot. Its rot learning, which creates filters. They take too long to process the food properly, probably because of back logs. There is lots of demand from primates for dead food that can be preserved. Its even unclear what they want to do with it, they just hoard things. Bring it back to the store, that's what I do.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:True; however, I've only seen people go on to thrive if they befriend their mistrust - rather than trying to squelch it or put it in a box under their bed with the other monsters (that also never go away and need to either also be befriended - or lobotomized instead). Regardless, probably shouldn't be left alone, and in private, with things as alluring as trinkets like trust and mistrust.


I am not sure I understand. You mean mistrust is a monster?
You want to make friends with monsters or lobotomize them? how does that work?
Are they emotions?

DaturaInnoxia wrote:That's a good point, unfortunately.

When adopting solutions that should work - and fast do work decent for most - even when some trust is drummed up, but they do not work no matter how hard one tries:
- Does it go back to ingrain personality and not having imprints then?


All I was saying is that other people's solutions, won't work if they have a filter that is different. Empathy works on filters, so you can't trust others in that way in that situation, so it compounds the differences in the long run. I think everybody has imprints, they just are different, or can be, and that creates social problems. It goes back to the start. Different cultures and so on, a sense of alienation and so on and so forth. Aliens will probe you, especially the greys. They like experiments, which are unproven, so you can't trust them. Greens are no better. When they don't understand something, they resort to abductions and bring you on their planet, and there is no bus stop, so you are at their mercy. Greys study filters, they are the experts, and they usually want them to be the same, so everything is grey, no black and white, just grey everywhere. No colors either obviously, they don't eat like polar bears and are a lot less happy to wit.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Ideal, but there's never been a time when actual Sovereignty to God actually existed.

You're describing the way things worked in New Testament as well as present day and time in between.

Authority, customs, courtiers, priests, people who want the king's head, enforcers = Almost all monsters.


That is how they are seen now, but they were all very important and essential in feudal society, and they were not seen as monsters, although some were seen that way sometimes, but that would be only if they stopped following God. That was the constitution of the time, and gave those people power and responsibility.

Not, the constitution is Man, or human. So an individual is either human or inhuman, and that is how people can tell they are monsters. Its just the zeitgest of the time. But a feudal person that is in such a society, will search for authority, but won't see one that is divine enough, that is legitimate, so it gives a lot of resentment, and also he or she will want privilege, something humans can't do because they are equal, and they have rights, not privileges.

They are more than just ideals, they are reality, a political reality. Its how people interact with each others politically. But a feudal and a humanist are on different spheres, and then there are democrats that are coming in the picture, and it is not clear what they look for as of yet.

But the point is that feudal people today, react to democracy with censure, and so do the humanists, and that is clear on the Internet. They want it to be human, while in reality, there are polar bears and all kinds of animals in the forest, so there is repression. Feudals want something godly, which of course is even harder to do and in fact impossible the way it is made. Only network administrators can give privileges, but nobody owns the internet. At best you have sites like this, with aristocrats and such. They can give a plot of land, a thread to the good vassal. They privilege to talk and make a small post. And there is no right, only obligations. Polar bears are forced to hunt on Kings' land. :cry:

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I was seeing it more from the angle of resilience.
The fact that there's an overgrown bridge, full of potholes, covered in grass, where no carts (essential for modern day primates to function) have the ability to access, yet if deemed desirable or necessary, some are able and continue to be able to cross that bridge - even if it's barely held together by rotted, crumbling wooden slabs and shakey sinew.


A primate will go on foot. If there is many of them, they will fix the road, so carts can travel better. Same in the brain, use it or loose it type of thing, except you never really loose anything, it just gets harder to pass, and is slower, but it can be fixed when needed.

I talked about the hippocampus, it gets smaller in psychosis, and they it fixes itself. That is just one example. The same applies to learning, although it is probably more fixed. Habits are hard to loose, especially when you get older. Filters are the same. That is why there are generation difference, the filters are different, slightly.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Of the posts/interactions you've seen me, am I poorly behaved?


Not in this thread, which is what I saw. :wink:

DaturaInnoxia wrote:
1PolarBear wrote:There is no point in living if you are miserable


I'm uncertain I agree; granted there are a lot of things people can do to improve their existence.
Not everyone is bound to earth by a desire to be here - they may still have a point in living, fortunately or unfortunately.

If it was that easy it could be one way of a large scale depopulation of the planet.


Its about liking existence itself, not improving it. Its a given, just like the dancing bear. It does not matter what the reality is. If you can't enjoy it just for there to be a reality, it will never be good enough. That there are people that are alive is a proof they care enough to do so, despite hardship, so it is to people to figure out why that is, and focus on that, and not what is only fantasies or ideals. Not that they cannot be entertained, they put life in things, but at base, it is not what sustains. Its the bear that sustains, not the dancing. Its not the random seal or beluga either, although they add up, and fat is good. 8)

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Two things here.

Firstly, carrion eating animals like crows and (well-fed) komodo dragons sound like very desirable company to keep. And, I'm curious now what a well-fed vulture's disposition is like - some are kind of cute. Seriously.


Sure, but I was more thinking about carrion crawlers, like bugs. I am not in the vulture business myself. We have birds like that, but they can be ignored, because not good to eat.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Secondly, "keep hoping for dead things" is fascinating because a theme in past non-drug-induced psychotic symptoms was seeing flies.
When I meditated upon it, that's why they were there.
Another world I walked in, parallel to what I could see - the world of me, was barren and there was something(s) decomposing.
Decomposition so bad that the flies made it over to my conscious perception of reality.
It was exactly that.

Hoping for dead things.


So you are dead inside, and there are creatures that want to take advantage?

DaturaInnoxia wrote:
1PolarBear wrote:No, I speak with all the animals of the forest. Its just that there are primates everywhere, they breed like crazy. They self-identify with "men", I know who they really are. :roll:


You have a catagory for actual humans too then (what you consider to be real "men")?


Yes, the Aristotelian one. Reason and social, mainly. But they are also animals, and most try to hide it, and the filters are animalistic at base. They are not properly human, it is shared with some other animals. But mostly, although self-identified with humans, a lot are still below the threshold, so primate includes them inside the human family, because they have affinities and stick together. They are like a work in progress.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I wonder if you put a lot of planning into this or if it was a sort of intuitive finding out of how relevant the symbolism was.


I am not a schemer, I let the spirit of the bear guide me. Its like an anchor, and the rest gravitates, so you try one thing and another, but I read things too. Some other people have thought about symbolism for centuries, so it is not a hazard they mesh sometimes. Water is well known.
Ice is like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ8bELWpUjk
The thin one, not the iceberg. :)

DaturaInnoxia wrote:You're familiar with the fact that in less processed cultures, people with schizo and/or psychotic symptoms, lack filters/imprints, have been seen more as "shamans" / "medicine people" / teachers / people who walk between the different worlds?


Yes, I am aware.

I also know Datura is a shamanic plant.
User avatar
1PolarBear
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 4985
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 3:36 pm
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby DaturaInnoxia » Mon Jan 27, 2020 7:47 pm

This all leaves me with an uncanny amount to think about; to sort, polish and/or rearrange some of my perspectives.

1PolarBear wrote: Yes, because they don't need the genius, and he is a pain. The culture says:
"a therefore c"
The genius says:
"what about b?"
Answer:
"b? there is no b" or at best "b is irrelevant"

Until b is practically relevant, it will be denied and invisible. But then again, it is how magic works. The magician sees b and know its name, and can use it to do feats of magic, while the crowd only sees what it is conditioned to see.


"It is dangerous to be right in matters where established men are wrong."
- Voltaire, I think

What a completely stupid and pointless game.
Lucky are those, who can step out of the circle, if it's not too cold and abstract - although I do wonder what it would be like to have the talents of a magician type.

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:Since I'm currently on the early childhood development train...


My research team discovered this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bind
Not exactly the same, but would lead to a chaotic world in practice.


Your? Very interesting, I’ve only been aware of the darker aspects of this in relation to childhood development.

Do you think the abusive / manipulative double bind is only done intentionally? Or can it be unintentional?

I'm very deeply disappointed that I've never gotten to come across this theory in relation to schizophrenic thinking before.
I'm assuming focusing more on things like this would interfere with profiting off chemical lobotomies and use up resources (aka "chaotic world in practice").

I had a brilliant psychiatrist when I was younger. I think he sometimes did things a bit along these lines in a good way. He had a large variety of academic and non-academic education - including also being a hypnotist, but I dont think he necessarily applied his techniques in the traditional "sit still and willingly participate" way.

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:...Do you think you can be "random personified" with a core that's very purposeful rather than random all the way through?


Yes, those are possibilities. Purposeful, probably not in the realistic sense, but it is possible to retreat in one's mind and create an internal structure that is under total control, even if the world isn't. But it would be useless in that world, but then again, everything would be. That is how dancing bears are born. There is just no right or wrong dancing, it is pure potential in act. :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTv4yD6BKlA


What's interesting and worrisome about this, is that I've seen the gorilla version and was anticipating the concept, yet I still missed it here.

Dancing bears wouldn't be useless, they'd be very formidable, if not very dangerous.

Furthermore, in the primate world at least, the ability to dance like that, "no right or wrong," "pure potential in act" are all concepts governed by magician types.

This makes me think of views and languages.
Is the bear in danger or is it powerful.

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:To tangent, I was looking at how, to many, hurting people is ok when authority says it's the right thing to do, and how most people will obey that with little or no question - even if they don't want to.

And yet, it's immoral or "evil" or sociopathic/psychopathic if one does it out of authority to self or reasons that make sense to self...


That would go far for a tangent, I thought about it a lot. My brief answer is that it is because people do it out of empathy. They simply mimic each others, because doing what others do is the safe thing to do since there is strength in number. Its a major theme in the Dark Knight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ChPTKPzB4I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-gf29nuYYA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4GAQtGtd_0

The crime is to do it alone, to be odd, not the actual crime. Although in the end, it is the odd person that saves the day in the boat scene. But there is lots more you can extract from those few scenes.

Also the origin of the Joker in that movie, is that he used empathy, and it back fired, twice. He thought he was doing the right thing, but the persons he empathized with used it against him, so he was in some sort of double bind situations, and he creates those situations in the movie, to show people what it is like.

But there is more to it. Doing what everybody does is in itself a filter, and a big one. Its the appropriate thing to do. Empathy and conformity go hand in hand, for better or worst, and it is a lot stronger than ideals, or reason, because it bypass them. Its a to c, without a b.


That's an explanation that actually makes some sense to me, as disgusting as it is.

Words like right, righteous, empathy, values, morals, principles; all with such romanticized and idealized connotations, are really often little more than the ugliness of obedience and herd mentality dressed up in pretty costumes.

It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, but it's so disappointing and distasteful to use such contradictions - to me.

Sometimes, I wonder if, at times, the "bad guys" are as idealistic as the "good guys" about what (little) is behind it all.

Do you think some people renounce empathy and perspective taking because of their ability to see "b"?

^ I'm thinking of my earlier mentioning of feeling like I enter a forced contract with some people just by socializing with them.

My current theme is seeing things in different languages (or perhaps filters of my own).

1PolarBear wrote: ... they are unconscious, it is what nice people do. Or "civilized people" do. Its what binds them together, which is a religious thing. Its what religion truly is, something that binds together. But if it is only empathy, then it bypass a lot of things, like reality, so it becomes superstition. So in the end it is superstition based on empathy. :|


In my mind, this could also mean religion and superstition were as essential to evolution as conformity and "empathy" etc

The psychiatrist I had, spoke of speaking in language of spirituality/religion vs speaking in the language of science to oftentimes describe the very same things.
And then back as a teen, reading Carlos Castaneda's books where the man of knowledge spoke of "looking" and "seeing" being two very different things.

^ Synthesizing those concepts can sometimes make it easier for me to percieve the world in a less disappointing way, and normally it works, but this is a topic that's really been getting to me.

1PolarBear wrote:Morally speaking though, simply taking a bite from the live seal is just as moral and true, and is more genuinely satisfying. Blood is still warm, and it gives a fuzzy feeling, while canned food is dead. Primates eat dead things. They cook to try and approximate polar bear morality, but cannot ever get it right. Its warm and not rotten, but that's about it. It does not has the full enjoyment of being in symbiosis with the seal, which is the ultimate act of love.


I know it's the laws of nature, but the polar bear isn't in mutual symbiosis with the seal, is it? Does the ever seal benefit?

1PolarBear wrote:I agree with the increase in firing, but I believe more in the serotonine hypothesis, which essentially decreases the point of firing, so there is an increase in sensibility generalized. On top of that, there is the issue of decrease in neuron receptors in place like the hippocampus and some other places, which create bottle necks.


I'm very excited to have a new avenue to check out in relation to this topic

1PolarBear wrote:It that is true, it would also mean it is linked to lower social status, perceived or otherwise. Which makes sense on an evolutionary level, since the lower status person will try to find ways to solve the problem and get peace, assuming it is getting pecked, which is automatic in primates and chickens. So finding creative solutions is necessary, as well as getting rid of feelings, so what needs to be done be done. Since there is no need for communication, this also can be done away. Canned food becomes raw food, and you deal in raw, just like a polar bear that would become reckless and rampaging, which happens here and there.


I'm a bit lost as to why that would mean it's linked to lower social status (although it's undeniable that social determinants of health play a huge role in things like the prevalence of mental disorders).

Interesting because polar bears wouldn't do well in flocks anyways.

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:...Speaking of which, I'd love it if you felt like translating (your analogies) how ADHD works if you're at all familiar with it.


I don't think it is the same animal. I would consult deers perhaps, and what ancients called acedia. That's all I can really say. The desert fathers dealt with that, or how to become a camel. But yeah, I can't really tell much about it, and can't really explained how this relate to it, just possible ways.


Fascinating suggestions!!
The other thing it makes me think is, the connotation of sloth is, again, just a magician's way of bypassing "b"

1PolarBear wrote: The first part is right, but it is not transferable, it is in fact taboo. b is taboo subject, you are not supposed to see it, let alone name it, which would mean you have control and power over b, so that makes you a witch or a sorcerer, which is bad stuff.

Primates will burn witches if they float, which happens if they have healthy fat, just like a polar bear. So you never float in front of primates, it makes them want to burn you without even eating, which is pretty pointless exercise and immoral.

Here is another example.
https://previews.magnoliabox.com/corbis ... 14_850.jpg


It's better to just be crazy or blend in with your surroundings rather than be seen as a foriegn magician.

I guess I should take my bright pink flamingo floaty off my to-do list then :D

Pride.
How to deal with pride and indignation when your intelligence and insights are insulted?

^ Is it a temperament thing? How do you stay quiet and stupid?

1PolarBear wrote: That bear is walking on water, yet you are supposed not to see that, because only Jesus of some magical being walks on water, but not bears. But they do, since ice is water, so bears walk on water. Might be a strange belief for some, and it is taboo. Why? many reasons, and nobody knows why, and it is pointless to know why, because they will deny it. They will deny when you say bears walk on water, and say you are crazy. If you say it is a taboo subject, they will deny. If you explain what I just explain, they will accept bears walk on water, but will deny having denied ever, because of course they do, sort of. But the reality is censured, only bear on ice is allowed, which does not captivate the luminous nature of bears as it should, and their incredible power over nature. And that also is a double bind. Its abusive to bears. I am not saying all cases are this obvious or necessarily true like this one, most are in grey areas.


I've never taken a perspective like that before, fascinating.

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:True; however, I've only seen people go on to thrive if they befriend their mistrust - rather than trying to squelch it or put it in a box under their bed with the other monsters (that also never go away and need to either also be befriended - or lobotomized instead). Regardless, probably shouldn't be left alone, and in private, with things as alluring as trinkets like trust and mistrust.


I am not sure I understand. You mean mistrust is a monster?
You want to make friends with monsters or lobotomize them? how does that work?
Are they emotions?


1) No, some monsters are warped Urges and Instincts - byproducts of dealing with the other monsters.

Byproducts of when "grooming failed" or "did not exist," when "authority and customs failed" so they're related to Mistrust but can be malignant to oneself and others.

They can be harmful because they're often quiet and camouflaged.
They may hide from oneself until something shameful or regrettable happens.

2) Mistrust and Trust aren't monsters, they're wholesome and healthy if authentic and taken care of properly.

But, they're vulnerable pretty little Trinkets or China Dolls not to be left alone with monsters.
On the other hand, sometimes the fragile little Trinkets are emotions too - like Grief.

For some people, Rage or Hatred can be monsters.

Imagine leaving Mistrust alone and for Rage and Hatred to take it out to town unsupervised.

Imagine the back alleyways they could find themselves in - and bystanders that only looked at them the wrong way.
or how, in a man's body, Lust could be even worst given how much more rowdy it can be rather than Mistrust.

3) However, one's own monsters aren't the only ones that wait under the bed - especially in our society's obsession with spiritual bypass and pop-psychology that tells people to suppress anything that doesn't "serve them" and "the power of positive thinking"

1PolarBear wrote: Not only that, but trust can disappear...


Smart monsters make their homes under those types of people's beds.

Now, imagine Trust and Grief huddled together amongst the dust bunnies only separated from a monster by a light switch and the trinket owner's presence.

• As for "befriend mistrust":

- Admit Trust abandoned ship.
Admit that you're happy you don't have to pretend to get along with Trust or like it anymore.

- Get to know Mistrust and let it participate in all you do.
Keep it in the open, honor it, consult it.
Allow it to rest on your shoulder along with the Id/Devil and Super-Ego/Angel ---- you should probably also ask Owl to sit on your shoulder too when you're in search of truth! :D

• It's up in the air as to whether or not you'll succeed at befriending a monster under your bed that's not yours; however, befriending your own "byproduct" monsters (Mistrust's cousins) is essential.
It is the authentic form of strength, perseverance, courage, and "doing what's right"

1PolarBear wrote:Different cultures and so on, a sense of alienation and so on and so forth. Aliens will probe you, especially the greys. They like experiments, which are unproven, so you can't trust them. Greens are no better. When they don't understand something, they resort to abductions and bring you on their planet, and there is no bus stop, so you are at their mercy. Greys study filters, they are the experts, and they usually want them to be the same, so everything is grey, no black and white, just grey everywhere. No colors either obviously, they don't eat like polar bears and are a lot less happy to wit.


I'm assuming greys translate to shrinks and such.

-I'm trying to understand what green aliens would translate to?

I can't say I'm up to date of life outside our ozone layer.

And on another tangent, it hurts and insults my heart to know that innocent, misunderstood reptiles on Earth are associated with evil alien overlords. :cry:

Lizards, alligators, (especially) snakes, etc are wonderful, straight-forward (if you know their nature), untainted beings.
Those negative connotations are filters as far as I'm concerned. Evolutionary too, like spiders.

1PolarBear wrote: So an individual is either human or inhuman, and that is how people can tell they are monsters. Its just the zeitgest of the time. But a feudal person that is in such a society, will search for authority, but won't see one that is divine enough, that is legitimate, so it gives a lot of resentment, and also he or she will want privilege, something humans can't do because they are equal, and they have rights, not privileges.


It seems that primates have abandoned their search for divine authority, settled for magician's puppets, and they're still absolute scum.

You think humans have rights as opposed to a division of oppression vs privilege?
Oppression that spills over to other animals as well.

1PolarBear wrote: They are more than just ideals, they are reality, a political reality. Its how people interact with each others politically. But a feudal and a humanist are on different spheres, and then there are democrats that are coming in the picture, and it is not clear what they look for as of yet.

But the point is that feudal people today, react to democracy with censure, and so do the humanists, and that is clear on the Internet. They want it to be human, while in reality, there are polar bears and all kinds of animals in the forest, so there is repression. Feudals want something godly, which of course is even harder to do and in fact impossible the way it is made. Only network administrators can give privileges, but nobody owns the internet. At best you have sites like this, with aristocrats and such. They can give a plot of land, a thread to the good vassal. They privilege to talk and make a small post. And there is no right, only obligations. Polar bears are forced to hunt on Kings' land. :cry:


Perhaps I'm getting caught up in technicalities and terminology: reality yes, ideal no.

I think, for some, there is some true idealism in both the Godly and humanism. I believe in both some authentic principles of humanism and Godly, but I can see how both could cause problems for some.

Yet, both those terms, in reality, are nothing more than how the terms "doing what's right" and "morals" are, in actuality, meant as "stick with the crowd" and "do what you're told."

It's 110% true humanism is, especially nowadays, used to to censor, and you can not question it because if you do, you're the oppressor.
That's a double bind then, you say?

Sweet Jesus, I hope hunting is for benign things like conversations.

What a fantastic way of describing it here!
I think of this particular area as a den of sorts. One of the more hidden ones.

Speaking of which, I know there's snow, water, ice, seals, and the like, but are there caves where polar bears live?

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:I was seeing it more from the angle of resilience.
The fact that there's an overgrown bridge, full of potholes, covered in grass, where no carts (essential for modern day primates to function) have the ability to access, yet if deemed desirable or necessary, some are able and continue to be able to cross that bridge - even if it's barely held together by rotted, crumbling wooden slabs and shakey sinew.


A primate will go on foot. If there is many of them, they will fix the road, so carts can travel better. Same in the brain, use it or loose it type of thing, except you never really loose anything, it just gets harder to pass, and is slower, but it can be fixed when needed.


A primate going on foot through something like that? Do you honestly think many are capable of that in this day and age?
I don't think brain types of roads are able to be repaired by others even if there are many to work on it.
I'm in agreement with the roads can be fixed or navigated when needed though, and that was what I was trying to imply.
Maybe I should speak for myself though: Navigating those types of bridges and paths are more of a talent or gift rather than something most primates can do (alone or with the cooperation of a team) – at least the ones I face.

1PolarBear wrote:I talked about the hippocampus, it gets smaller in psychosis, and they it fixes itself. That is just one example. The same applies to learning, although it is probably more fixed. Habits are hard to loose, especially when you get older. Filters are the same. That is why there are generation difference, the filters are different, slightly.


I was aware of brain shrinking, but I had no idea it could also recover.
Again, information that I wish I'd been given instead of being taught partial truths.
It wouldn't benefit the politics of pharmaceuticals though.

The most I learned is that there's debate as to whether it's even the psychosis rather than the stress and cortisol release.

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:...to improve their existence.

Not everyone is bound to earth by a desire to be here - they may still have a point in living, fortunately or unfortunately.


Its about liking existence itself, not improving it... despite hardship, so it is to people to figure out why that is, and focus on that...


When I say still a "point in living," I mean "it is to people to figure out why that is, and focus on that;" however, it is not because of "a desire to be here" or "liking existence" it is about being "bound to earth" and killing time and "improving" existence by focusing and acting on "why that is"

That's why I find Freud's possible existence of Thanatos and Eros interesting. Doesn't appear to apply to everyone though, at least in a surface level.
Do you know if Freud thought animals outside of humans had a death drive?
I'm not sure if polar bears can particularly understand/believe in anything other than embracing being alive on this topic.

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:Secondly, "keep hoping for dead things" is fascinating because a theme in past non-drug-induced psychotic symptoms was seeing flies.
When I meditated upon it, that's why they were there.
Another world I walked in, parallel to what I could see - the world of me, was barren and there was something(s) decomposing.
Decomposition so bad that the flies made it over to my conscious perception of reality.
It was exactly that.

Hoping for dead things.


So you are dead inside, and there are creatures that want to take advantage?


Not quite. I never was able to die "inside" - not while my body lives - so I gave up on it a number of years ago and started, as we just mentioned, "focusing on why that is."

Hoping for dead things (that were by then terribly decomposing in the parallel realm) were a result of bereavement - as well as a personification of a few different enchanting times, circumstances and situations in my life that will never be recaptured.

I kept hoping for them.

I think other things in that realm have to do with monsters, but it's all too preconscious and subconscious, so I can't say much about it.

I've learned that in order, to escape things like the flies, I need to focus on why I'm here (or why I may be here).
That's where "use it or lose it" in regards to the mind applies to me.

_______________________________

I've been recently learning about Aristotle.
His ideas of the composition of the heavens and the earth are so beautiful (for the most part) to think about.

I wish I knew when alchemy began in relation to when he existed (before or after etc)

_______________________________


1PolarBear wrote:I am not a schemer, I let the spirit of the bear guide me. Its like an anchor, and the rest gravitates, so you try one thing and another, but I read things too. Some other people have thought about symbolism for centuries, so it is not a hazard they mesh sometimes. Water is well known.
Ice is like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQ8bELWpUjk
The thin one, not the iceberg. :)


The video is foreboding and over my head.
It leaves me with the thought, that the wrong things happen to the wrong people.
It's people who try to make the existence of "b" disappear that should suffer.

I resonate with letting the spirit of the bear guide you and it being an anchor and gravitating towards you.
That is for me, ♡ Spiders ♡ - since I was very young. I suit them well although I didn't welcome them to begin with.
They were, and still are, my friends when I was isolated and left with monsters. Luckily the monsters I was left with, were nicer than the ones who put me there. But that's something to be left to sleep rather than roused by forced remembrance and discussion. :)

1PolarBear wrote:
DaturaInnoxia wrote:You're familiar with the fact that in less processed cultures, people with schizo and/or psychotic symptoms, lack filters/imprints, have been seen more as "shamans" / "medicine people" / teachers / people who walk between the different worlds?


Yes, I am aware.

I also know Datura is a shamanic plant.


Yes, I've been drawn to the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms for almost as long as I can remember, but because I have some Indigenous friends who have suffered greatly at the hands of invasive primates (so lowly that they were worst than what's found in rotting flesh), I feel more comfortable trying to learn to speak in the language of Hermeticism. Although I can't say it does the relationship between self and nature justice. In case you're not familiar:
As above, so below...

there is a harmony agreement, and correspondence between the several planes of Manifestation, Life and Being...
...

The Great Mental Plane comprises those forms of "living things" known to us in ordinary life, as well as certain other forms not so well known except to the occultist.

The classification of the Seven Minor Mental Planes... They are as follows:

I. The Plane of Mineral Mind.
II. The Plane of Elemental Mind (A).
III. The Plane of Plant Mind.
IV. The Plane of Elemental Mind (B).
V. The Plane of Animal Mind.
VI. The Plane of Elemental Mind (C).
VII. The Plane of Human Mind.


http://www.kybalion.org/kybalion.php?chapter=VIII
Bitches Be Tripping. They're me - I'm Bitches.  ~ unknown
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
User avatar
DaturaInnoxia
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:21 am
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 2:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby DaturaInnoxia » Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:54 am

Its the whole point of authority and customs, to have something that works decent for most, but if someone falls in-between the net, the whole thing fails for that person.


Most of my instructors rely heavily on emotional appeal.
I've always gotten angry or disgusted when people force emotional tourism and sentimentalism upon me because it seems like just because they get off on it, they want to subject me to it as well ---- the same way people enjoy watching Hollywood dramas and romances.

Now, I've been realizing it's a custom; a generally effective one at that.

Giving people this sentiment to wallow in, and feed off, romanticizes and increases empathy or captures the sympathy of their students to their cause. Not that I disagree with the cause most of the time. The idealism is ridiculous though; I think it goes back to the aforementioned romanticizing, empathizing and sympathizing.
Bitches Be Tripping. They're me - I'm Bitches.  ~ unknown
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
User avatar
DaturaInnoxia
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 1425
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:21 am
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 2:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby 1PolarBear » Tue Feb 04, 2020 4:57 pm

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Do you think the abusive / manipulative double bind is only done intentionally? Or can it be unintentional?


To do some real damage, it pretty much has to be intentional at some point. How much people are aware of it though, is hard to tell. I don't believe there is justification at any rate, so the answer is moot.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:What's interesting and worrisome about this, is that I've seen the gorilla version and was anticipating the concept, yet I still missed it here.


:)

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Dancing bears wouldn't be useless, they'd be very formidable, if not very dangerous.


It's useless to see the dancing bear, unless there is a reason to, so bypassing it is energy efficient.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Furthermore, in the primate world at least, the ability to dance like that, "no right or wrong," "pure potential in act" are all concepts governed by magician types.


More like the fool type. :)
https://labyrinthos.co/blogs/tarot-card ... d-meanings

Or the joker type these days, which is trendy. Or in some other terminology, the bard. Usually the bard has minor magic powers, but not like the magician who is dedicated and less hands on.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:This makes me think of views and languages.
Is the bear in danger or is it powerful.


Can be when the time is right.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Words like right, righteous, empathy, values, morals, principles; all with such romanticized and idealized connotations, are really often little more than the ugliness of obedience and herd mentality dressed up in pretty costumes.


When they are false, or don't deliver their promises, it can become a superstition. Its the whole idea of masks, oftentimes they are different, but not always.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_LGhj958Bw

Masks can be ugly as well, and mask something different. One such that people believe these days is competition, but that competition has "rules" hidden underneath. The mask the joker takes off in that scene is that competitive mask. The one that may of may not hide rules.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:It makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, but it's so disappointing and distasteful to use such contradictions - to me.


I don't believe they are contradictions. The only contradiction is if they actually mean something or not, or if they have the power of a magician, instead merely the appearance of an illusionist. They look the same from the outside.

People do need rules in order to have a society, but some cheat, in both ways. Its not the mask that is the problem, its the people behind. It used to be called, a dead faith.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Sometimes, I wonder if, at times, the "bad guys" are as idealistic as the "good guys" about what (little) is behind it all.


I think so.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Do you think some people renounce empathy and perspective taking because of their ability to see "b"?


That is pretty much what I was saying. Let's say "b" is the real person underneath the mask. Then you can choose to interact with that person or the mask, but the person is taboo. So you are in a double bind. Whatever you do, you will be screwed.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:^ I'm thinking of my earlier mentioning of feeling like I enter a forced contract with some people just by socializing with them.


Its an unfortunate side effect. I suppose you can see it as something underneath the mask, but then you have to ask yourself if you don't expect people to simply interact with a mask and not the person, therefore creating the problem I just mentioned. In other words, socializing is a contract, so buyers beware, but it is known, or should be known.

Its only fairly recently that this new idea came to the for and the new mask. I talked about humanism, but the first ones justified themselves by idealizing a social contract. They did this to replace religion which was the contract. So it was a new contract based on individualism instead of transcendent ideals, but the individual is also an ideal. As humanism "perfects" itself, the mask changed, and the idea of a contract simply became a new taboo. So it is now a new superstition, and a false mask. Whether that mask is competitive or socializing, it is still a fraud. It didn't start as a fraud, but became one eventually, just like religion became a fraud eventually.

So the world is ripe to emancipate themselves of those ideas, there is no choice that are winning choices.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:In my mind, this could also mean religion and superstition were as essential to evolution as conformity and "empathy" etc


They are part of human nature, just like modesty, or everything. Evolution has a broad back, and does not mean much. What is meaningful is how people deal with reality. Religion is accepting it, and superstition is making it up. Irreligion is denying it. If the goal is true, then those tools are good, but if it is false, then they will cause problem. But yes, acting as a group is always stronger than just as an individual, so it was essential to evolution, same as language which was designed to coordinate behavior.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:And then back as a teen, reading Carlos Castaneda's books where the man of knowledge spoke of "looking" and "seeing" being two very different things.


Same difference as knowing and understanding, signifiant and signifier.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I know it's the laws of nature, but the polar bear isn't in mutual symbiosis with the seal, is it? Does the ever seal benefit?


The seal gets love. :D

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I'm a bit lost as to why that would mean it's linked to lower social status (although it's undeniable that social determinants of health play a huge role in things like the prevalence of mental disorders).


The amount of serotonine is linked to social status. In one way because primates can sniff it somehow, and know social status. In the other way, having a lower status affects the level as well, so it is a circular thing, which reinforce itself. If you go up, you go up, until the pressure is too much, while if you go down, people will keep you down at all cost, unless you can pull a Count of Monte Cristo plan.

One way to keep people down is of course the double bind. Tell them it is their duty to not be where they are, and stop them from doing it, though morals and stuff.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Interesting because polar bears wouldn't do well in flocks anyways.


There is nothing like the fresh air. :)

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Fascinating suggestions!!
The other thing it makes me think is, the connotation of sloth is, again, just a magician's way of bypassing "b"


Spiritual sloth. When the monks talked about "work", they mostly meant work for a divine good, usually caring, or charity, which was the ultimate work. And caring is ultimately what makes life worth living, and that is work in its purest sense.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Pride.
How to deal with pride and indignation when your intelligence and insights are insulted?

^ Is it a temperament thing? How do you stay quiet and stupid?


You simply let people learn from their mistakes and leave them be? You can enjoy the show as well. I knew a guy that refused to talk about difficult subjects in public, but could quite shatter about superficial things, which is probably what wisdom might look like in that regard. Or just look confused, that can work. :lol:

The thing to realize is that it is unlikely you will get anything from someone that wants to disagree with you. If they realize you are right, they will either be resentful or will accuse you of causing their own problems. Or they will try to destroy you because you force them to think outside their prejudice, which goes against their culture, most probably. So it is a loosing proposition. Its like having pride in loosing. It does not make too much sense.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:• As for "befriend mistrust":

- Admit Trust abandoned ship.
Admit that you're happy you don't have to pretend to get along with Trust or like it anymore.

- Get to know Mistrust and let it participate in all you do.
Keep it in the open, honor it, consult it.
Allow it to rest on your shoulder along with the Id/Devil and Super-Ego/Angel ---- you should probably also ask Owl to sit on your shoulder too when you're in search of truth! :D

• It's up in the air as to whether or not you'll succeed at befriending a monster under your bed that's not yours; however, befriending your own "byproduct" monsters (Mistrust's cousins) is essential.
It is the authentic form of strength, perseverance, courage, and "doing what's right"


There is a reason trust or belief, or faith, is considered a grace. You need to come across something trustworthy, but also have to be open to it if it happens, and this is something that needs to be cultivated and be discerning about. Mistrust is the reasonable thing to do, there is no reason to believe anything, but all people do anyway in the end. There is just no reason to live without it. Although, if you trust in things that can disappear, change or die, it can cause trouble and grief, which is why it was always discouraged. Those things are only cared about indirectly, insofar as they all partake in something that can be trusted.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I'm assuming greys translate to shrinks and such.


I guess, and moral relativists in general, of which those people are an example, or at least it is their mask, the reality is that they do probes and investigations, and judge based on their own morals, which are not kosher.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:-I'm trying to understand what green aliens would translate to?


People that care about the environment and don't like farms and farm animals, or generally people.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:And on another tangent, it hurts and insults my heart to know that innocent, misunderstood reptiles on Earth are associated with evil alien overlords. :cry:

Lizards, alligators, (especially) snakes, etc are wonderful, straight-forward (if you know their nature), untainted beings.
Those negative connotations are filters as far as I'm concerned. Evolutionary too, like spiders.


It comes from the theories about reptilian brain, not any different than demons, and ID, and so on. Except they are cold blooded and can be calculating. :roll:

Basically the Hollywood psychopath.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:
1PolarBear wrote: So an individual is either human or inhuman, and that is how people can tell they are monsters. Its just the zeitgest of the time. But a feudal person that is in such a society, will search for authority, but won't see one that is divine enough, that is legitimate, so it gives a lot of resentment, and also he or she will want privilege, something humans can't do because they are equal, and they have rights, not privileges.


You think humans have rights as opposed to a division of oppression vs privilege?
Oppression that spills over to other animals as well.


Animals have human rights these days, they are just as human as primates, if not more. :mrgreen:

What I meant is that the in politics, there are humans. When an animal of the forest engage in the political sphere, they are engaging as humans, that is the contract in a republic based on humanism. And they can do this because they have the right to do so. Those rights are protected, but all animals have those same rights. That's how modern states operate since the 19th century, or most of them adopted that approach. Rights are individual, and not something that binds the individual, only the State.

That is in opposition to feudalism, which gives privileges to certain groups or people, along with their allegiance and duties. So guilds, or aristocrats, or religious groups for example, are given privileges, which is their social role, which they can invoke to make the ruler do something, or that can be invoked to make them do something as well.

Now, just because the society and the State are based on humanism, does not mean people in it have emancipated themselves. Some, many, still cling to feudal thinking, so they act in a delusion, as if there was still a king, but at the same time afraid of possible kings, or as if there was still religion while being afraid that there might be one. So they ask for privileges from people or institutions that don't exist anymore, so they are regressive. They need to emancipate themselves, and learn to be individuals, just like others did. They are too afraid to go forward, so they go backward, since some others actually do see the need to go forward and finish off humanism. Like I said above, there is not too many choices at this point.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Perhaps I'm getting caught up in technicalities and terminology: reality yes, ideal no.

I think, for some, there is some true idealism in both the Godly and humanism. I believe in both some authentic principles of humanism and Godly, but I can see how both could cause problems for some.


They are ideals, which work for a time, until things get corrupted by greed mostly. Its like a dog chasing its tail. One fix the other that was there to fix another, and a new one will fix the latter one, until you reach the maximum potential, and then it crumbles to a lower form of wealth, and you start over again.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Yet, both those terms, in reality, are nothing more than how the terms "doing what's right" and "morals" are, in actuality, meant as "stick with the crowd" and "do what you're told."


They are more than that, they are what binds people together. Without it, there is no society, just anarchy. Like I said, it is not something that can be evaded, unless someone is able to hide from everything and everybody, which as far as I know, never happens, if possible. But its an ideal as well, the ideal of the polar bear.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:It's 110% true humanism is, especially nowadays, used to to censor, and you can not question it because if you do, you're the oppressor.
That's a double bind then, you say?


yes, because part of humanism is actually that it gives the right to free speech. But feudal people cannot abide to this, so they push all the more for censure, just for the humanist cause.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Sweet Jesus, I hope hunting is for benign things like conversations.


Its perfect love. :D

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Speaking of which, I know there's snow, water, ice, seals, and the like, but are there caves where polar bears live?


There are made up caves in the snow. Stone caves are optional, not much better than snow caves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwZH_aT0FGI

DaturaInnoxia wrote:A primate going on foot through something like that? Do you honestly think many are capable of that in this day and age?


Its how people learn in all ages. Part of nature. What I meant is that it takes efforts to learn something new, whether it is totally new or was abandoned. If it is one off, it will be done on foot. If it is a new habit, it will get faster and repaired.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I don't think brain types of roads are able to be repaired by others even if there are many to work on it.


Not by others directly, but if something is used, it gets repaired or constructed.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I'm in agreement with the roads can be fixed or navigated when needed though, and that was what I was trying to imply.
Maybe I should speak for myself though: Navigating those types of bridges and paths are more of a talent or gift rather than something most primates can do (alone or with the cooperation of a team) – at least the ones I face.


Maybe we are talking about different things. The analogy was simply a brain analogy. There are single neurons that can make a link, in which case, information is slow. Or there can be plenty, which makes an information highway. One way to go faster is to filter out bridges that are not needed, which is when polar bears use them. 8)

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I was aware of brain shrinking, but I had no idea it could also recover.


https://psycheducation.org/depression-i ... -reversed/
It usually doesn't for diseases and such, but things like acute stress or depression, I believe it can.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:The most I learned is that there's debate as to whether it's even the psychosis rather than the stress and cortisol release.


Stress is the cause of both, which is why they come together.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:When I say still a "point in living," I mean "it is to people to figure out why that is, and focus on that;" however, it is not because of "a desire to be here" or "liking existence" it is about being "bound to earth" and killing time and "improving" existence by focusing and acting on "why that is"


You can do that, but it is not the basis of it. The real reason you live is because you are. So caring about being is the first step, and the basic faith. Improving conditions of life are not a permanent thing, and it is chasing chimeras more often than not. Wealth is somewhat of an illusion, even if we all want it to differing degree, the only question is how much is enough, and that, is the how, which is more important than the why.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:That's why I find Freud's possible existence of Thanatos and Eros interesting. Doesn't appear to apply to everyone though, at least in a surface level.


The first rule of morality is to seek the good and avoid the bad. I suppose it is what he meant.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Do you know if Freud thought animals outside of humans had a death drive?
I'm not sure if polar bears can particularly understand/believe in anything other than embracing being alive on this topic.


Being alive and being moral are the same thing. Not being moral mean you die. :)
But yes, one way is to avoid the bad, like penguins. :x

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Hoping for dead things (that were by then terribly decomposing in the parallel realm) were a result of bereavement - as well as a personification of a few different enchanting times, circumstances and situations in my life that will never be recaptured.

I kept hoping for them.


Right, and hoping for things that do not exist in reality is rarely a good path, whether it is something that was lost, or a longing for something that never was. Best to focus on the present reality, or what is highly probable and sure. That is what grieving is supposed to do, refocus on the present and what you have, if done properly. Caring has to be based on a true hope.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I've learned that in order, to escape things like the flies, I need to focus on why I'm here (or why I may be here).
That's where "use it or lose it" in regards to the mind applies to me.


I would focus on the how, more than the why. Practical wisdom is morality, and what makes you live. Speculative wisdom is useless in itself. You could know everything, and still live a useless life with no hope. Of course, that can be a goal in itself, in which case, the searching is the life, and that can be.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I've been recently learning about Aristotle.
His ideas of the composition of the heavens and the earth are so beautiful (for the most part) to think about.

I wish I knew when alchemy began in relation to when he existed (before or after etc)


A lot later. In the West, both came together after the Crusades, so they discovered Aristotle and alchemy, and both were entertwined for some reason. Himself, he was a philosopher, and would have considered alchemy as an art, not philosophy. Just like living is an art, it is practical wisdom, while the philosopher deals with words and causes instead. Arts use philosophy as guidance and intuition, but that is about it.

So Aristotle was in 300 BC, alchemy in the 12th century AD, a bit earlier in the Muslim world.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:I resonate with letting the spirit of the bear guide you and it being an anchor and gravitating towards you.
That is for me, ♡ Spiders ♡ - since I was very young. I suit them well although I didn't welcome them to begin with.
They were, and still are, my friends when I was isolated and left with monsters. Luckily the monsters I was left with, were nicer than the ones who put me there. But that's something to be left to sleep rather than roused by forced remembrance and discussion. :)


So I guess, you will be a spider. :wink:

You know, they aren't bothered by flies, they seek them, they love flies.

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Yes, I've been drawn to the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms for almost as long as I can remember, but because I have some Indigenous friends who have suffered greatly at the hands of invasive primates (so lowly that they were worst than what's found in rotting flesh), I feel more comfortable trying to learn to speak in the language of Hermeticism. Although I can't say it does the relationship between self and nature justice.


I believe they tend to go too far, at least the modern interpretations. Most of it comes from Aristotle and/or scholasticism, but they don't make the same mistakes of trying to put form and matter together. Lots of it comes from pseudo-Dionysus I believe, so it is poetry, not science or philosophy.

-- Tue Feb 04, 2020 12:00 pm --

DaturaInnoxia wrote:Now, I've been realizing it's a custom; a generally effective one at that.

Giving people this sentiment to wallow in, and feed off, romanticizes and increases empathy or captures the sympathy of their students to their cause. Not that I disagree with the cause most of the time. The idealism is ridiculous though; I think it goes back to the aforementioned romanticizing, empathizing and sympathizing.


Sure, it is a custom, which may or may not apply to your reality, but it is important to know and understand nevertheless, especially if you want to improve on it.
User avatar
1PolarBear
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 4985
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 3:36 pm
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Maladaptive Daydreaming vs. Schizoid Thought Life

Postby 1PolarBear » Tue Feb 04, 2020 10:39 pm

About humanism.

https://www.facebook.com/PhilosophyOver ... 622275835/

It was quite known in Europe 50 years ago, and fairly accepted concepts. The only thing is that talking about the death of Man was quite premature. Its still premature even today, and people certainly won't do it only to be "free".
User avatar
1PolarBear
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 4985
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 3:36 pm
Local time: Tue Aug 11, 2020 5:37 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to Schizoid Personality Disorder Forum




  • Related articles
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests