4 ms·

The idea that your mind is not you. That "thinking", as a process, is just a tool of your body, just like eyesight, for example. Listening to meditation and m

The idea that your mind is not you. That "thinking", as a process, is just a tool of your body, just like eyesight, for example. Listening to meditation and mindfulness practitioners like Jon Kobat-Zinn and Eckhart Tolle, I found it absolutely groundbreaking, for myself, to realize that the mind is an instrument that needs training and tuning, and sometimes can lead you astray, and can't be trusted unconditionally. Disassociating from my mind and understanding that my thinking is not my being has helped me in innumerable ways.

avmich 6y ago
Do you think your premise is arguable? If yes, is it defendable?
wazoox 6y ago
Related : you are more what you do than what you think. What you think mostly comes from what you do, and that determines who you are; act more, think less. Do things, don't overthink it.
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
  This reminded me of Revealed Preference Theory[1], which is about observing consumer choices, but the idea is broadly summed up as "It is not what you say, it is what you do that reveals what you want." or who you are. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
TACIXAT 6y ago
The other more Daoist end of this spectrum is that your mind and body are you. Through the power of will you control both of these. As a long time meditator the "I am not my body, I am not my mind" mantra has always bothered me. I am both of those and will shape both of those in my image. Dissociative practices will not bring me closer to my goals. The comparison to eyesight is strange too. If your eyesight is poor you can not really train it to be better. Through regular meditation practice, and practice in other areas (self-discipline) you can absolute shape your mind and change your thought patterns.
- jariel 6y ago
  In such practices your mind and body are 'not you' they are just the expression which can be materially perceived, as a shadow of the 'greater you'. It's less obvious in Abrahamic traditions as they use different words, but it's there as well. A 'life-changing insight' can just be figuring that one out, which is odd because it's conceptually simple enough a child could totally get it. For some people it's innate, for some it's a 'revelation' for some they never get (or even try to get) that perspective.
- didroe 6y ago
  While there are obvious flaws with the analogy (like any analogy), I think the comparison with eyesight (or touch, etc.) is about making people think of the mind as more of a sensory organ. One that gives you input that may or may not be useful to you, rather than as something that defines you. I don't really see that as a dissociative practice, but more as the prerequisite for being able to start on the long term journey of challenging and changing your thought patterns.
  - hexaga 6y ago
    From my perspective, thoughts are the sensory experience of 'my mind moving'. Similar to arm movements - when you move your arm, where does the motion come from? I'm reminded of a time in my childhood when I realized that I could consciously direct my eyes without turning my head. I was struck with wonder at the time, having not known such a thing was possible, because nobody told me. I still remember it vividly by the impact it had on me. The more I converse on this topic, the more I see people considering the mind as I had considered my eyes prior to my childhood realization. The point I'm trying to get to is that I believe the dichotomy of mind and the body is a false one. I think the abstraction level of 'mind' is different from the level of 'body'. It should rather be 'mind' and 'arm' and 'eye' (and etc.). The command of these in concert is somewhere outside of my perception, or so deep inside of it that I am blinded by its normality. Calling something we can't perceive by the name of something we can, I think, is magical thinking and folly. Why are my thoughts this way? Because my Mind. Why do planets orbit stars? Because Science. Why are we alive? Because we have élan vital. Looking at it this way, the impossibility of controlling thoughts is lifted. When thoughts are solely something that happen to you, the very notion of controlling them except indirectly is incoherent. But re-framed, I can train my mind as I would train skill or form in body. I know that I can't play the cello with any skill, as I am now. If I try, it will grate on the listener and cause more displeasure than pleasure. It's not an inherent failing of mine, simply that I haven't devoted the requisite time and energy to train myself in it. But it does define me, at least in part. Would that skillful thinking was perceived the same as skillful cello playing. Instead, educational institutions must suffice to verify that you have the tools (in the form of knowledge, or acquired frameworks), but say little of skill achieved. Imagine a 4 year cello playing course in which a passing grade is earned if you but present a cello at the end. I think that if this concept is fully integrated, outcomes would be better. If the mind is viewed as an intangible thing that blasts thoughts in your general direction, from where can it be improved? I know my body can be improved, by strenuous exercise. I know my skill at cello can be improved, if I simply practice. But my mind? If I'm hamstrung by its conception as a pure source, I'll forever stay at whatever minimal level is required to survive. And that's a tragedy. This went a little off into conjecture-land, but I think I'll leave it for the time being. tldr: imo minds are limbs, not monitors
chartpath 6y ago
This is especially useful for those of us who have grown up thinking of ourselves as smart and becoming very identified with intelligence as personality. It can lead to anxiety disorders because sometimes rumination and thinking harder just can't help explain things. Listening to nature and letting it happen to us is such a sweeter ride than trying to carry around a simulation of everything.
hnick 6y ago
I don't have a quote handy but one idea I'm partial to is that that mind is not one. It's a noisy group of sub-minds all clamouring for attention, with different goals.
lutorm 6y ago
This has echoes of Stoicism, as well, which teaches that emotions and feelings, to a large extent, are not under your control, but are fleeting impressions created by your mind. How you think about and act upon those impressions, though, is under your control. I have an exercise I like to do when I experience pain, which is to tell myself that this sensation I'm experiencing is just a signal in some nerve. It does not actually hurt me in any way. Interestingly, this usually makes the pain a lot more bearable.
ninjakeyboard 6y ago
This whole thread is great. It's amazing how many people seem to be gaining the same inner wisdom I've found, of disidentifying with the mind, yet feeling more whole with all of who I am in the moment.
bytematic 6y ago
Alan Watts has a ton of stuff on this

avmich 6y ago

Do you think your premise is arguable? If yes, is it defendable?

wazoox 6y ago

Related : you are more what you do than what you think. What you think mostly comes from what you do, and that determines who you are; act more, think less. Do things, don't overthink it.

TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
This reminded me of Revealed Preference Theory[1], which is about observing consumer choices, but the idea is broadly summed up as "It is not what you say, it is what you do that reveals what you want." or who you are. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revealed_preference
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

TACIXAT 6y ago

The other more Daoist end of this spectrum is that your mind and body are you. Through the power of will you control both of these. As a long time meditator the "I am not my body, I am not my mind" mantra has always bothered me. I am both of those and will shape both of those in my image. Dissociative practices will not bring me closer to my goals. The comparison to eyesight is strange too. If your eyesight is poor you can not really train it to be better. Through regular meditation practice, and practice in other areas (self-discipline) you can absolute shape your mind and change your thought patterns.

jariel 6y ago
In such practices your mind and body are 'not you' they are just the expression which can be materially perceived, as a shadow of the 'greater you'. It's less obvious in Abrahamic traditions as they use different words, but it's there as well. A 'life-changing insight' can just be figuring that one out, which is odd because it's conceptually simple enough a child could totally get it. For some people it's innate, for some it's a 'revelation' for some they never get (or even try to get) that perspective.
didroe 6y ago
While there are obvious flaws with the analogy (like any analogy), I think the comparison with eyesight (or touch, etc.) is about making people think of the mind as more of a sensory organ. One that gives you input that may or may not be useful to you, rather than as something that defines you. I don't really see that as a dissociative practice, but more as the prerequisite for being able to start on the long term journey of challenging and changing your thought patterns.
- hexaga 6y ago
  From my perspective, thoughts are the sensory experience of 'my mind moving'. Similar to arm movements - when you move your arm, where does the motion come from? I'm reminded of a time in my childhood when I realized that I could consciously direct my eyes without turning my head. I was struck with wonder at the time, having not known such a thing was possible, because nobody told me. I still remember it vividly by the impact it had on me. The more I converse on this topic, the more I see people considering the mind as I had considered my eyes prior to my childhood realization. The point I'm trying to get to is that I believe the dichotomy of mind and the body is a false one. I think the abstraction level of 'mind' is different from the level of 'body'. It should rather be 'mind' and 'arm' and 'eye' (and etc.). The command of these in concert is somewhere outside of my perception, or so deep inside of it that I am blinded by its normality. Calling something we can't perceive by the name of something we can, I think, is magical thinking and folly. Why are my thoughts this way? Because my Mind. Why do planets orbit stars? Because Science. Why are we alive? Because we have élan vital. Looking at it this way, the impossibility of controlling thoughts is lifted. When thoughts are solely something that happen to you, the very notion of controlling them except indirectly is incoherent. But re-framed, I can train my mind as I would train skill or form in body. I know that I can't play the cello with any skill, as I am now. If I try, it will grate on the listener and cause more displeasure than pleasure. It's not an inherent failing of mine, simply that I haven't devoted the requisite time and energy to train myself in it. But it does define me, at least in part. Would that skillful thinking was perceived the same as skillful cello playing. Instead, educational institutions must suffice to verify that you have the tools (in the form of knowledge, or acquired frameworks), but say little of skill achieved. Imagine a 4 year cello playing course in which a passing grade is earned if you but present a cello at the end. I think that if this concept is fully integrated, outcomes would be better. If the mind is viewed as an intangible thing that blasts thoughts in your general direction, from where can it be improved? I know my body can be improved, by strenuous exercise. I know my skill at cello can be improved, if I simply practice. But my mind? If I'm hamstrung by its conception as a pure source, I'll forever stay at whatever minimal level is required to survive. And that's a tragedy. This went a little off into conjecture-land, but I think I'll leave it for the time being. tldr: imo minds are limbs, not monitors

chartpath 6y ago

This is especially useful for those of us who have grown up thinking of ourselves as smart and becoming very identified with intelligence as personality. It can lead to anxiety disorders because sometimes rumination and thinking harder just can't help explain things. Listening to nature and letting it happen to us is such a sweeter ride than trying to carry around a simulation of everything.

hnick 6y ago

I don't have a quote handy but one idea I'm partial to is that that mind is not one. It's a noisy group of sub-minds all clamouring for attention, with different goals.

lutorm 6y ago

This has echoes of Stoicism, as well, which teaches that emotions and feelings, to a large extent, are not under your control, but are fleeting impressions created by your mind. How you think about and act upon those impressions, though, is under your control. I have an exercise I like to do when I experience pain, which is to tell myself that this sensation I'm experiencing is just a signal in some nerve. It does not actually hurt me in any way. Interestingly, this usually makes the pain a lot more bearable.

ninjakeyboard 6y ago

This whole thread is great. It's amazing how many people seem to be gaining the same inner wisdom I've found, of disidentifying with the mind, yet feeling more whole with all of who I am in the moment.

bytematic 6y ago

Alan Watts has a ton of stuff on this