--- turquoiseb <no_reply@...> wrote: > > This article/research is not exactly a surprise, and not > even new. There have been similar studies in the past that > proved that when it comes to the question of "Which comes > first, perception or belief?," the answer is pretty much > *always* "Belief." > > That is why I was uncomfortable with an exchange here > earlier this month, in which people were throwing around > the word "charlatan" to describe someone (I honestly don't > remember who at this point), and seemingly expecting me to > pile on. I can't do that, even with Maharishi or Fred Lenz > - Rama. I don't consider either of them "charlatans" in > the sense that most people use that word, because it > describes someone who knowingly deceives others, and > doesn't believe the things he is saying. > > I think both of them believed pretty much every word that > they said. I think they believed it so strongly, in fact, > that these beliefs caused them to delude themselves into > "seeing" and "feeling" things that supported those > beliefs. Their beliefs *programmed* their own brains into > "seeing" things that weren't there, and that had no > relationship to reality as most people perceive it. > > MJ has a harsher view of MMY, and seems to favor the idea > that MMY was indeed a charlatan, telling people things > that he didn't believe or that he knew weren't true, just > for the money, or for the ego-strokes, or for the > attention, or just because. I don't. I think that he spent > so much time in trance states that he believed were > "higher" or "more real" than other people's perceptions > that he could pop himself into one of them pretty much any > time he wanted, and thus "program" his senses into seeing > things that *agreed* with his beliefs, even if those > things weren't really there. > > The classic example is the one-liner that even TBs laugh > at, because (except for a vocal and even more delusional > few on this forum who never spent *any* time around > Maharishi) they've all seen it, too. "How many have had > this experience? [Three hands go up in a room full of > hundreds of people] See? Almost everyone." IMO he really > DID see a room full of waving hands, because he believed > that was what "should" have happened. Therefore, for him, > it really *did* happen. > > But it didn't. > > Understanding this mechanism of belief driving perception > (and NOT vice-versa) is in my experience key to developing > a more compassionate and balanced view of the world of > "holy men" and shysters who proliferate on this backwards > planet. My bet is that even the worst of them -- like > Satya Sai Baba -- *believed* that he was "manifesting" the > vibhuti powder he had so carefully palmed and hidden under > a tray before his cheap parlor magic acts. You can > actually *see* him doing this in videos on YouTube. But > just as his TB followers watch those videos and fail to > see the obvious palming, preferring their belief in him as > a "god man" to reality, my bet is that he found a way to > delude *himself*, even as he was palming the objects. The > important thing for him was the belief that he *was* > magical; therefore he was. I suspect that his belief in > himself as "special" and "magical" was so strong that he > even found a way to believe that about himself when he was > molesting his followers' young children. > > Part of the secret of developing compassion for such > deluded individuals, again in my experience, is developing > a similar compassion for *oneself*. I can do that easily, > because I've been there, done that. I've listened to > Maharishi talk utter nonsense myself, but was such a TB at > the time that I not only believed it, I talked my brain > into "seeing" the nonsense the same way he did. I just got > over it. Many here on FFL never have. > > They have, for example, convinced themselves that the > *minor* altered states of consciousness they experienced > as a result of TM or the TM-sidhis were *major* shifts of > consciousness. And why? Because they were TOLD that they > were, and they preferred to *believe* that rather than > deal with the possibility that these were just simple > brain farts that had no inherent "meaning" at all, or that > they were very common experiences that happen to many > people who don't meditate at all (such as "witnessing" > during either sleep or waking). > > I think it's more sane, and balanced, to approach one's > experiences in life with an underlying sense of distrust, > rather than trust. SURE, you experienced such-and-such, > but 1) did you *really* experience it or did you just > program your brain to make it think you had, and 2) does > having experienced it "mean" what you were TOLD it > "means," or do you just prefer to believe that because it > makes you feel more "special?" > > I suspect that some here will react badly to the article > and research that Salyavin posted this morning, and will > fly into "defensive mode," trying desperately to find some > way to poke holes in the research or its methodology or > even the "motivation" behind it. To them, the idea that > "belief drives perception" (as opposed to its opposite) is > *challenging*, almost an affront. After all, many of them > probably still believe that their experiences with TM were > "innocent," even though they were TOLD in two introductory > lectures not only what to expect with TM, but what it > "meant." > > If some people react this way, I feel sorry for them. They > are depriving themselves of a very liberating experience. > The knowledge that belief drives perception is NOT a > "challenge" to their experiences, but just another way to > see them. And another way to see the people who TOLD them > what to expect, and what those experiences may "mean." > > I think that research such as this is potentially as > liberating for True Believers as it is for True > Skeptics...IF what they are really seeking is some sense > of truth. For the TBs, it should serve as a reminder to > never trust one's subjective experiences *fully*, because > they could *always* be delusions caused by pre-suggestion > or belief. > > For the skeptics, it should free them from having to think > of the teachers who sold these delusions as "charlatans" > operating from a platform of deceit. I don't think they > were. They were merely operating from a platform of > belief, which is often even more delusional. >
This is what Edward de Bono states about Perception. The neural network or pattern in a man's brain is like a unique fingerprint. No two patterns are the same. However, once the patterns are formed, information coming in from outside, flows through these patterns like a river flowing across a terrain. The river path become more etched. The individual is simply unable to lift himself from those views and see things from a new perspective. De Bono states that this trait of the brain was probably necessary for our survival in the stone age enviornment, but now it hinders further progress by a tendency to become dogmatic. A very good article, Salyavin. > > --- "salyavin808" wrote: > > > > Delusional People See the World Through Their Mind's Eye > > > > A mechanism for how the brain creates and maintains > > delusions is revealed in a new study. > > > > Having delusions, such as a belief in telekinesis, can > > influence how people see the world - literally. > > > > Human beliefs are shaped by perception, but the new > > research suggests delusions -- unfounded but tightly > > held beliefs -- can turn the tables and actually shape > > perception. People who are prone to forming delusions > > may not correctly distinguish among different sensory > > inputs, and may rely on these delusions to help make > > sense of the world, the study finds. Typical delusions > > include paranoid ideas or inflated ideas about oneself. > > > > "Beliefs form in order to minimize our surprise about > > the world," said neuroscientist Phil Corlett of Yale > > University in New Haven, Conn., who was not involved in > > the study. "Our expectations override what we actually > > see," Corlett added. > > > > The prevailing thinking holds that people develop > > delusions to predict how events in their lives will > > occur -- just as Pavlov's dog learned to predict that > > the sound of a bell ringing meant dinnertime was > > imminent. Humans update their beliefs when what they > > predict doesn't match what they actually experience, > > Corlett said. > > > > But delusions often appear to override the evidence of > > the senses. To test this idea, German and Swedish > > researchers conducted behavioral and neuroimaging > > experiments on healthy people who harbor delusions. > > > > In one experiment, volunteers were given a questionnaire > > designed to measure delusional beliefs. Questions > >included: Do you ever feel as if people are reading your > > mind?; Do you ever feel as if there is a conspiracy > > against you?; Do you ever feel as if you are, or > > destined to be someone very important?; and Are you > > often worried that your partner may be unfaithful? > > > > The participants then performed a task that tested their > > visual perception: They were shown a sphere-shaped set > > of dots rotating in an ambiguous direction, and asked to > > report which direction it was rotating at various > > intervals. > > > > People who harbored a greater number of delusional > > beliefs (those who scored higher on the questionnaire) > > saw the dots appear to change direction more often than > > the average person. The result confirms findings from > > previous studies that delusional individuals have less > > stable perceptions of the world. > > > > In a second experiment, the volunteers were given > > glasses, which they were told would bias their view so > > that the rotating dots would appear to go in one > > direction more often than the other direction -- a > > delusion, because these were actually ordinary glasses. > > The volunteers performed a similar dot-watching task, > > with a learning phase and a test phase. During the > > learning phase, the dots clearly rotated in one > > direction, but during the test phase, the direction was > > ambiguous. > > > > While wearing the glasses, the volunteers reported > > seeing the dots rotate in the biased direction, even > > during the test phase. They clung to the delusion that > > the glasses altered their vision, even though the visual > > evidence contradicted this idea, suggesting they used > > their delusional beliefs to interpret what they were > > seeing. > > > > A third experiment was similar to the second, but brain > > scans were taken using functional magnetic resonance > > imaging. The scans showed that when people were deluded > > about the direction of the dots' rotation, their brains > > were encoding the delusion as if they had really seen > > the dots move that way. In other words, people weren't > > just ignoring what they saw; they were really seeing > > something else. > > > > Furthermore, the brain scans revealed connections > > between a brain area involved in beliefs, the > > orbitofrontal cortex, and an area involved in visual > > processing, the visual cortex. (Both became active > > during the delusional observations.) > > > > Corlett finds the results exciting. The study "gives us > > a nice explanation for the relation between belief and > > perception and how it might go awry," he said. > > > > But he cautioned that drawing inferences about people > > who are clinically delusional, such as those with > > schizophrenia, may be premature. Time will tell whether > > the same brain mechanisms are at play for these > > patients, he said. > > > > > > http://www.livescience.com/39038-how-delusions-shape-perce > > ption.html > > > >