5 ms·

> No self-censorship. This is a very common belief, but I don't think it's strictly true. Sometimes people inadvertently speak what they're thinking, so an eve

> No self-censorship. This is a very common belief, but I don't think it's strictly true. Sometimes people inadvertently speak what they're thinking, so an even surer way to prevent being punished for your ideas is to prevent yourself from even thinking them in the first place. It's a kind of defense-in-depth against wrongthink punishment and one I think most people understand intuitively.

fleddr 4y ago
It may go even further than that. Some philosophers claim that the idea of a "self" is an illusion. Your brain produces all kinds of thoughts inconsistent with your "stable self" and then "magically" adapts them into something that feels consistent. Leading you to believe that you have an identity. Some type of personality, belief system, what have you. Your brain is feeding you lies or half-truths all the time. It's job isn't to find objective truth, it's to keep you alive.
nicbou 4y ago
You can’t prevent yourself from speaking in your sleep. That’s how they get you.
- fleddr 4y ago
  I'm also quite paranoid about any chips planted in my brain.
- xwkd 4y ago
  I’ve found this to be profoundly true. I’m embarrassed by the number of times I’ve been taught by a dream what I fail to express in words.
  - sandkoan 4y ago
    There might be a reason for that: https://nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/the-kekul-problem https://nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/the-kekul-problem.
    - 100721 4y ago
      Your link didn't work for me (Chrome on Android). This one does: https://nautil.us/the-kekul-problem-236574/ https://nautil.us/the-kekul-problem-236574/
    - seba_dos1 4y ago
      Fascinating article, but I'm surprised at how non-relatable it is to me in some places where it clearly was supposed to be. For example: > We can see this in dreams. Those disturbing dreams which wake us from sleep are purely graphic. No one speaks. Either I'm misunderstanding something, or that's not what I have (ever?) experienced. My dreams (and nightmares) are stories; people talk to me and I talk to people there. I "hear" my thoughts forming into words as usual. Sometimes I may see myself from a third person perspective, or there may be some unspecified narrator, or perspective may suddenly change from one to another... but there sure is language, there are sounds, there are thoughts and it's definitely not "purely graphic". Other people often describe their dreams as similar "stories", so why does the article seem to assume that no one speaks there? I never heard someone describing their nightmare as just "falling" or "snakes eating their tails", but rather something like "we were at this event together and you were very mean to me and my parents that somehow appeared there as well were even worse and then I suddenly found myself driving a car and crashed". Movies also seem to depict dreams in this way, and there are common tropes such as "this was all just a dream" or dreams where you dream of waking up and starting your day as usual, so what's up with this paragraph? Does the author only have non-verbal dreams? Another example: > A picture can be recalled in its entirety whereas an essay cannot. Can anyone really recall a picture "in its entirety"? I can recall a ghastly thing that has some overall characteristics of the whole picture. No details whatsoever except some specific things that somehow caught my attention. This is absolutely not unlike an essay, which I'm also able to recall in general ideas and maybe some single phrases that caught my attention. I may learn to remember and recall a specific highly-detailed picture if I put a lot of conscious effort into it, but I can also learn to recall an essay the very same way. Why does the article assume that one is obviously not like another? Anyone else had this kind of cognitive dissonance while reading this article? (there's a working link in a sibling comment) It seems to somewhat undermine several of the points it makes, so I'm not sure what to think about it.
InCityDreams 4y ago
>an even surer way to prevent being punished for your ideas is to prevent yourself from even thinking them in the first place. Genuinely intrigued: could you expand on this? I'll start by asking: is it possible to not think of something once you start thinking about it? And that realy is the best i can phrase the question at the moment.
- burnished 4y ago
  Sure. I used to play a game with friends called "Rule number one is 'dont visualize', rule number two is 'dont visualize'" where we would make up awful shit and the only defense was to not think about it.
- noisy_boy 4y ago
  This is purely subjective, not sure if others share the feeling: there is a sense of "pre-thought", like hairs standing on your neck in the anticipation of something. I have stopped at that point and diverted my mind to something else to avoid the full formation/visualization of a thought that was on its way and I didn't want to fully experience it.
- Delk 4y ago
  At the more extreme end there's thought suppression: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_suppression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_suppression I there could be milder versions as well: catching oneself getting into thoughts that lead to something you don't want to think about and consciously divert from that. I think I recognize that.

fleddr 4y ago

It may go even further than that. Some philosophers claim that the idea of a "self" is an illusion. Your brain produces all kinds of thoughts inconsistent with your "stable self" and then "magically" adapts them into something that feels consistent. Leading you to believe that you have an identity. Some type of personality, belief system, what have you. Your brain is feeding you lies or half-truths all the time. It's job isn't to find objective truth, it's to keep you alive.

nicbou 4y ago

You can’t prevent yourself from speaking in your sleep. That’s how they get you.

fleddr 4y ago
I'm also quite paranoid about any chips planted in my brain.
xwkd 4y ago
I’ve found this to be profoundly true. I’m embarrassed by the number of times I’ve been taught by a dream what I fail to express in words.
- sandkoan 4y ago
  There might be a reason for that: https://nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/the-kekul-problem https://nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/the-kekul-problem.
  - 100721 4y ago
    Your link didn't work for me (Chrome on Android). This one does: https://nautil.us/the-kekul-problem-236574/ https://nautil.us/the-kekul-problem-236574/
  - seba_dos1 4y ago
    Fascinating article, but I'm surprised at how non-relatable it is to me in some places where it clearly was supposed to be. For example: > We can see this in dreams. Those disturbing dreams which wake us from sleep are purely graphic. No one speaks. Either I'm misunderstanding something, or that's not what I have (ever?) experienced. My dreams (and nightmares) are stories; people talk to me and I talk to people there. I "hear" my thoughts forming into words as usual. Sometimes I may see myself from a third person perspective, or there may be some unspecified narrator, or perspective may suddenly change from one to another... but there sure is language, there are sounds, there are thoughts and it's definitely not "purely graphic". Other people often describe their dreams as similar "stories", so why does the article seem to assume that no one speaks there? I never heard someone describing their nightmare as just "falling" or "snakes eating their tails", but rather something like "we were at this event together and you were very mean to me and my parents that somehow appeared there as well were even worse and then I suddenly found myself driving a car and crashed". Movies also seem to depict dreams in this way, and there are common tropes such as "this was all just a dream" or dreams where you dream of waking up and starting your day as usual, so what's up with this paragraph? Does the author only have non-verbal dreams? Another example: > A picture can be recalled in its entirety whereas an essay cannot. Can anyone really recall a picture "in its entirety"? I can recall a ghastly thing that has some overall characteristics of the whole picture. No details whatsoever except some specific things that somehow caught my attention. This is absolutely not unlike an essay, which I'm also able to recall in general ideas and maybe some single phrases that caught my attention. I may learn to remember and recall a specific highly-detailed picture if I put a lot of conscious effort into it, but I can also learn to recall an essay the very same way. Why does the article assume that one is obviously not like another? Anyone else had this kind of cognitive dissonance while reading this article? (there's a working link in a sibling comment) It seems to somewhat undermine several of the points it makes, so I'm not sure what to think about it.

InCityDreams 4y ago

>an even surer way to prevent being punished for your ideas is to prevent yourself from even thinking them in the first place. Genuinely intrigued: could you expand on this? I'll start by asking: is it possible to not think of something once you start thinking about it? And that realy is the best i can phrase the question at the moment.

burnished 4y ago
Sure. I used to play a game with friends called "Rule number one is 'dont visualize', rule number two is 'dont visualize'" where we would make up awful shit and the only defense was to not think about it.
noisy_boy 4y ago
This is purely subjective, not sure if others share the feeling: there is a sense of "pre-thought", like hairs standing on your neck in the anticipation of something. I have stopped at that point and diverted my mind to something else to avoid the full formation/visualization of a thought that was on its way and I didn't want to fully experience it.
Delk 4y ago
At the more extreme end there's thought suppression: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_suppression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_suppression I there could be milder versions as well: catching oneself getting into thoughts that lead to something you don't want to think about and consciously divert from that. I think I recognize that.