Mystery's Big 3
- Thread starter Raqimus
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2014
- Messages
- 624
Topcat,
Kinda, sorta. Instead of really imagining a scenario that elecits the emotion i do more of a overwhelming onslaught of the emotion in my head. I overwhelm the bad emotion by showing it with good emotions.
If you tell yourself enough times anything you will begin to believe it.
For example: when i was trying to get over my ex i had to repeatedly tell myself.. I'm good, I'm great, I'm happier now, I don't need her. Then go back and tie that emotion to a reference point or event that solidfies that emotion. In that instance it was the instant releif that i now had to answer to no one and i could do anything i wanted. The more reference points you can tie to the emotion the more solid it becomes in your mind.
If i have a bad night and i feel down and not confident. I start by overwhelming the negativety with positivey. I am good looking, I am good with girls, I have a lot of great things going on in my life! Then tie actual events in the past to that confidnce. such as picking up a really cute girl or gettin compliments on my look/ style.
Eventually you can keep piling them on until you find that mental frame is unbreakable.
You can do this with anything you believe in even if it's untrue.
I think Mr. Rob mentions he does this with visualizing women as sexual creatures. He tells himself enough different ways that women love sex, that if he goes out and and someone tells him thats not true... someone would have their face laughed at. In that instance it's true, but it's just another example.
I could go on for days if you want examples
Kinda, sorta. Instead of really imagining a scenario that elecits the emotion i do more of a overwhelming onslaught of the emotion in my head. I overwhelm the bad emotion by showing it with good emotions.
If you tell yourself enough times anything you will begin to believe it.
For example: when i was trying to get over my ex i had to repeatedly tell myself.. I'm good, I'm great, I'm happier now, I don't need her. Then go back and tie that emotion to a reference point or event that solidfies that emotion. In that instance it was the instant releif that i now had to answer to no one and i could do anything i wanted. The more reference points you can tie to the emotion the more solid it becomes in your mind.
If i have a bad night and i feel down and not confident. I start by overwhelming the negativety with positivey. I am good looking, I am good with girls, I have a lot of great things going on in my life! Then tie actual events in the past to that confidnce. such as picking up a really cute girl or gettin compliments on my look/ style.
Eventually you can keep piling them on until you find that mental frame is unbreakable.
You can do this with anything you believe in even if it's untrue.
I think Mr. Rob mentions he does this with visualizing women as sexual creatures. He tells himself enough different ways that women love sex, that if he goes out and and someone tells him thats not true... someone would have their face laughed at. In that instance it's true, but it's just another example.
I could go on for days if you want examples
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2014
- Messages
- 190
DrexelScott said:
I used to posit a difference between mind and will, but now I'm not so sure. Now it seems more like saying Iran needs to conquer Iran. It's completely pointless, because you're already there to begin with. It's only by thinking you're not there that you hypnotize yourself into thinking you need to exercise your will over your self.
It's like saying the yin must conquer the yang, even though if that were to happen you would no longer be able to know the yin, because you can only know yin in terms of yang, as they imply one another.
Historically, this attitude is near the heart of a worldview that leads to deep insecurities, feelings of alienation, and fascism.
It's a vestige of the Judeo-Christian myth that the kingdom of heaven (i.e., your mind) is monarchical, which led to the mind-body dialectic as well as the shallow anthropocentrism of the nature-man dialectic. But I say, let there be democracy in the kingdom of heaven!
Trying to force control is defensive, and you waste enormous amounts of energy trying to force everything to your will. It's a prisoner's dilemma, of sorts. A person can focus much more on the things that will "improve" them (affirmations, exploring your interests, meeting new people with a genuinely open mind, etc.) when they aren't hypnotized into a fragmentary sense of self.
But really, who is this separate 'you' commanding your subconscious, and why is trying to do so useful? Perhaps you're talking about converting subconscious happenings into conscious ones?
-Howell
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2014
- Messages
- 190
DrexelScott said:
No doubt about it, knowing what you are doing and doggedly pursuing your goals is extremely useful for leading people and getting whatever it is you think you want. However, my point here isn't that having focus isn't extremely useful, but essentially this: the concept of will, as well as the idea that one must impose one's will on perceived internal and external happenings, is completely unnecessary, and it is only when one adheres to an ideology where the idea that there is a non-you that is fundamentally unintelligent and hostile does conceptualizing a separate you that needs to impose it's will make any sense.
I will try to show you why I think this is:
The concept of will implies a separation of man and nature. And therefore we ask the question: do we have free will or are we determined? In other words, are you a bus or a tram? Yet both concepts are off the point -- because both of them presuppose a fundamental separation of the individual from the universe. Does the universe kick you around or do you kick it around?
However, to quote the Upanishads: "tat tvam asi".
Basically, if you think in this way you lose energy, just as your toe would lose energy if you separated it from your foot.
