TED Conversations

Luis Javier López Arredondo


This conversation is closed.

Where do thoughts come from?

Where do thoughts come from?
A thought active connections in the brain or vice versa?
If I control my thoughts, do I control my brain connections?
Consciously I do not control my brain... Are my thoughts random emanating of pure subconscious?
Do I really control my thoughts?

Topics: mind philosophy

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Nov 19 2012: My first wife was the victim of abuse. I didn't know how seriously it had affected her until after we were married.

    We used to play cards (rummy). She kept telling me what cards to put down, and she never named a card that I didn't have in my hand. I asked her how she knew. She said the cards are not marked if that's what you mean. I said what do you mean. She said I just know what the cards are, it wouldn't matter if the cards were marked or not.
    One day I went and bought a brand new deck of cards. I took them out of the box, shuffled them under the table so my wife couldn't see them. Then I glanced at the first card and said "what's this card?" She named it correctly. I glanced at the second card. She named it correctly again. I went through 16 cards like this. She missed two. I didn't have to go through the rest of the deck. I realized that she had already demonstrated a mathematical impossibility.
    I put the cards on the table and said "do you mind telling me how you are doing this?" After a brief pause, she said "they tell me." I said "who's they?" She said "these people inside." I said "what people inside?" She said "I don't know how to explain it. There are these people inside, and they tell me things, and I just know."
    I didn't know what to ask her after that. But that day would forever change my concept on where thoughts come from.
    I asked her how this had come about. She said that her abusive childhood drove her to withdraw from life. One day a door to a different world opened up to her and she would eventually become part of this other world.
    Like Adriaan said, we are connected to a spiritual world. I don't understand that world. But I no longer deny that it exists.
    • Nov 19 2012: Are you saying that thoughts are not our own, but they come from somewhere else? Or rather that she gets told ideas from some other thing besides her own thoughts? In other words, how do you jump from "my wife gets information from someone/somewhere else" to "our thoughts are spiritual"? I might be willing to trust you on the story, but I am not that willing to jump to conclusions about thoughts being "spiritual."
      • thumb
        Nov 19 2012: Think of it this way. We think upon the signals streaming into the brain by the senses. My wife had developed different senses that were internal and not external. I believe that our brains are capable of transmitting and receiving signals internally, similar to a cell phone built into the brain. It's not that simple, but it's the closest simile that I can compare it to. She didn't need to physically see something to know of its existence.

        What I am reading now in science is telling me that the visible world only makes up 4% of the universe. If we base our knowledge purely on what we can observe, that leaves 96% unaccounted for. We live in a culture that is very much analytical. Ancient cultures that developed information on spiritual insights were very much associative. It uses different brain functions.

        Another important point is the fact that everything that exists is made of the very same substance (protons, neutrons, electrons) and the only difference is the manner in which the substance is assembled. We devote great effort into particle accelerators because we know that if we can unravel the structure of the fundamental particles of matter, that we can begin to understand the workings of the entire cosmos. Every single atom, including those in your brain cells, contains the universal code. What knowledge can the brain impart from this? Is this the source of inspiration and intuition? We can only wonder.

        Now put all three of these ideas together and see what insights you can glean from them. It is truly fascinating and mind boggling. I am not saying that all our thoughts are not our own. But we must consider that fact that some may not be.
        • thumb
          Nov 19 2012: Interesting... Quantum physics says that we cannot determine precise location and speed of any particle. We can only talk about probability of a particle being at any given place at any given time. This means that when we consider the space occupied by our body, we can say that all particles in the universe are present in that space with different probabilities. This idea washes away concepts of "here" and "there", "now" and "then", "I" and "not I". In this context, the question "who controls what" looses its meaning.
        • thumb
          Nov 19 2012: "What we see as death, empty space, or nothingness is only the trough between the crests of this endlessly waving ocean. It is all part of the illusion that there should seem to be something to be gained in the future, and that there is an urgent necessity to go on and on until we get it. Yet just as there is no time but the present, and no one except the all-and-everything, there is never anything to be gained--though the zest of the game is to pretend
          there is."

          Alan Watts (1915 - 1973)
        • thumb
          Nov 19 2012: "We do not "come into" into this world; we come out of it, as leaves from a tree. As the ocean "waves," the universe "peoples." Every individual is an expression of the whole realm of nature, a unique action of the total universe. This fact is rarely, if ever, experienced by most individuals. Even those who know it to be true in theory do not sense or feel it, but continue to be aware of themselves as isolated "egos" inside bags of skin."

          Alan Watts (1915 - 1973)
    • thumb
      Nov 19 2012: That's fascinating!

      Rupert Sheldrake has done some studies that show some remarkable things - such as: we almost always know if someone is watching us. Dogs often know when you are coming home - as soon as you make the decision, and even if it is at random times.
      He calls it "morphic resonance".
      I suspect that this is attributable to chaos resonance - where chaotic systems, in their chaos phase, will influence each other and synchronise while still remaining chaotic (i.e. no periodic frequency). This presumes a common media .. a media that is undiscovered, as yet, by science. But this is understandable in light of the fact that science has never really looked at it. I think Sheldrake is one of the few brave enough to try. He seems like a nutter surrounded by nutters, but they are all intelligent ones.
      • thumb
        Nov 19 2012: You may want to look up Schumann resonance. There are resonant waves between the earth and the ionosphere that are in the same frequencies as brain waves.
        • thumb
          Nov 19 2012: Yes, I've seen some of that, but it does not seem to have a causal influence .. perhapse there is some corrolatory influence. Sheldrake observes that the phenomenon is generally demonstrated by people who have close relationships.
          Autobiographical-self quadrad convergence(familliarity) could explain that to some extent.
          This is why many of the lab-tests fail to pick it up - they tend to exclude fammilliar persons as part of the control - and, hey-presto - no statistical result.
          But, this does not seem to be the case with "knowing when someone is watching".
          The being-watched effect can occur even with geographical separation - such as being watched via CCTV.
          It could well be that the Schuman frequency might be acting as a carrier in some way .. or perhaps something else. There is definitely something there.
          I have personally observed that humans can access dormant abilities in life-threatenning situations. Science does not like to examine these things.

          Be careful about people who sprout-off about "brain-waves" it is nowhere near as simple as that. However, the "carrier" notion might be a fruitful area to explore - but carrying what? One would have to measure field interaction as a starter. Do you know if any such study has been done?
          Assuming that one needs only synchronise brain-frequency with Schumann resonance, one could, conceivably subtract the delta of the sine wave as a signal. However, one is then left with the problem of how to interpret the resulting signal. It is certainly possible that familliarity would allow association of observed behavior with specific electromagnetic signal - and just "learn" it. But .. then, how would one tune-out all the other signals? There are 7 billion of us. Also, there would be the old inverse square problem - and these phenomena seem to be unafected by distance.
          I'm more inclined to think that longitudinal tesla-style propogation is at work .. no carrier required. Such a thing might produce chaotic resonance.
        • thumb
          Nov 19 2012: I'll also add this:
          The example of your first wife with "they".
          In schizophrenics "they" are dissociated autobiographical selves (A-selves).
          We create A-selves with each relationship that develops with others.
          These A-selves are used as "actors" to run simulations of the relationship by casting them through scenarios in ones "world view" (accumulated causal maps).
          In each relationship, we create a pair - one to represent self and one to represent other - these then evolve to represent the relationship. The evolution results in a convergence, where, in context of the relationship, the model for self learns how to interact harmoniously with the other.
          The centering function that keeps these A-selves functional arises in the proto-self where our body-state is monitored.
          If the A-self convergence results in simulation outcomes that only result in harm to proto-self (as in an intensely abusive relationship) - and no harmonious convergence is possible, the core-self will wall-off the personal A-self to stop it triggering fight/flight continually - which will lead to eventual stress-death.
          You cannot un-think anything, the A-self might be disconnected but it will not go away - it will continue to evolve beyond the control of the core self.
          Such a dissociated A-self may very well discover some of the dormant abilities - particularly if the abuse continues. It may finally find the key - the way-out - the path to a harmony, but it is walled off - and has to hijack the auditory channel to let the core self know.
          We also see this in the split personality thing. But I suspect that this arises from casting multiple relationship A-pairs with each new life-threatenning abuse event.
          It's great food for thought!
        • thumb
          Nov 19 2012: Question: did your wife know the cards before you saw them?
          Ooops - sorrry - you already said that - you saw them for her to know them.
          She was reading you, not the cards.
      • thumb
        Nov 19 2012: Mitch,
        I understand the schizophrenics portion of your post. I came to that same conclusion as to her other personalities in which I was aware of at least three, and a charismatic counselor told me that she had at least seven. What I can't explain is how these "other" selves could see outside the normal parameters of sensory input. I takes the level of thought beyond the limits of the space between our ears.
        • thumb
          Nov 19 2012: Hi Roy,

          The senses are just energy detectors - they produce raw data. They flow through a noise-reduction layer which produces refined data which then goes through at least 2 layers of sortation (perception) - that converts it to "information".
          Information uses the causal maps(world view) in various "memory" locations and, in combination with observation, updates the world view. The core self is aware of the world view, but it also conducts a narrowing of the field of "awareness" to maintain contextual framing.
          Generally, the core self is concerned with integration - it knits together information coming from the proto-self, the senses and the A-selves - in order to evaluate what should be passed to the motor systems.
          The A-selves operate as simulation agents that play-out these simulations directly against the world-view - these simulations are then available to the core self as predictions.
          The core self accesses that information by bringing the A-self channel into contextual awareness. It's a bit like opening a door, behind which the A-self resides.
          Now, If this door has been locked, teh core self will not go there. But the A-self continues to operate in the world view and has access to all the perceptional information flowing into it.
          The question remains "where is the A-self getting signal energy from?" In the normal fall of events, the signal energy flowing through A-selves arises from the awareness signal eminating from the core self (when it "opens the door").
          It has been observed that a lot of what happens in a brain is to do with mutual supression of network "nodes". Thus "awareness" is a supressive process - supressing everything which is outside the field of context.
          If you close a door to an A-self, you also close the supressive action - and it never turns off.
          However, if the door is locked, these dissociated A-selves remain outside of core awareness.
          Multiple abuses and multiple abusers results in multiple rogue A-selves.
        • Nov 20 2012: Roy, I do hope you have seen, and used, this link before.
          It is a combination of two books. One about God and one about His governing humanity.

          How He is, causes how we are.
          If we knew how the mind works, we would know how God works. This whole books is about affections and love. Explained is how our affections are like the bricks our love consists of. Hopefully those 'bricks' are building a temple, not a garbage dump.

          This could easily be seen as a scientific approach to spirituality. A very systematic system, point by point, is used to explain who we are and why. It is also called the "Science of Correspondence."

          I also wanted to mention that my wife and I often have the same thoughts come up. In fact she then 'complains' about a lack of privacy :)

          We are never alone as spirits, as we are as bodies. In fact Swedenborg saw it happen that a person, when he was separated from spiritual influences, fell in a swoon as dead.
          We are so much and intimately connected, spiritually, that the emotions we feel are caused by those in the spiritual world around us.
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Nov 19 2012: Don,
        Abuse buries itself in the subconscious in the form of suppressed pain. Because it is there, it expresses itself in various ways. But because it is subconscious, the victim is not aware of its source. Anything that triggers it becomes seen as the object of its source regardless of intention. And those triggers can be totally obscure; you don't know what you did or said that set it off and neither does the other person.

        The book "Dianetics: the Modern Science of Mental Health" by L. Ron Hubbard seems to explain the process well. I say this with reservation because Scientology, which is the church founded by L. Ron Hubbard, has issues. I would recommend reading the book, but stay away from the church.

        Another book on the same lines is "The New Primal Scream" by Doctor Arthur Janov. He has a parallel work, which will give you another view for comparison, and explains why improperly trained counsellors can do more harm than good.

        Pure love, prayer, and a thirst for understanding the problem is the only means in which to deal with it. I found a charismatic counsellor that walked me through the problems with my first wife up until her death. I still reflect back on the lessons that it has taught me.
    • thumb
      Nov 19 2012: My take it is that spirit is one and we all share that spirit being alive in any particular way like a current in a stream.

      If one current dissociates its cause can connect with different, even multiple currents and focus on one or the other at a time.

      Nothing is hidden from spirit for spirit is all that is.
      • thumb
        Nov 19 2012: Frans,
        I really LOVE the simplicity of your comments! You speak about "spirit", I call it energy, and I think we are talking about the same thing? I also believe that energy/spirit moves through the body/mind, we are all interconnected with this spirit/energy, and at different times, multiple channels, or currents, (including and not limited to intuition, instinct, ESP, subconscious, universal consciousness, etc.) may be open or closed.

        Whether or not we choose to recognize the many opportunities to see, hear, feel and "be" on different levels, depends on how open or closed we are to the possibilities. In my humble perception, being mindfully aware in each and every moment facilitates these connections

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.