3 ms·

It seems reasonable that people would adopt schizophrenic hallucinations that are in line with their demographics. As an anecdotal counterpoint, my girlfriend

It seems reasonable that people would adopt schizophrenic hallucinations that are in line with their demographics. As an anecdotal counterpoint, my girlfriend is schizophrenic, and is mostly afflicted with auditory hallucinations (she hears voices). Weirdly, despite coming from a Vietnamese family (and being a blend of Đạo Mẫu and Mahayana Buddhist), the voices she hears are of a Christian-like "God".

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
otisfunkmeyer 12y ago
I think this is one of the most interesting aspects of insanity. There are so many strangely fascinating (fractal-like?) pathways that don't quite add up. For instance, a Buddhist hearing a Christian God. It's enough to make one think there's something to it all :) My favorite lecturer on said ideas, Terence McKenna, quoted Jacque Vallée, who said that these experiences are almost always non-evangelizable. It's as though they are almost custom made for the person having the experience. Explaining them at face value to another person either gets a "you had to be there" or just sounds like the rantings of a crazy person.
- judk 12y ago
  I would describe a dream the same way (but only have dreams when I am at least half asleep). O wonder how neurologically similar are hallucinations and dreams.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
schizo 12y ago
Replying to this deleted comment: "Weirdly [...] the voices she hears are of a Christian-like "God"." Not so weird if you get the causality around the right way. That such visions caused the idea of God is a much more parsimonious explanation than the reverse. reply .... That's so very, very true from what I can tell. It actually feels like a precursor to modern day thought; like a more basic/basal form of though/reasoning. In a way it's more comprehensive than normal thought but it's also fundamentally incompatible with the current style of thinking though, because it brings us a much greater degree of being able to manipulate reality. That reminds me I really still need to read the bicameral mind book...
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  Do read it. The first 30-40 pages feel a bit directionless and even annoying as you get used to Jaynes' authorial tone, but once it gets going it's a great read. It's tricky to falsify and I'm not sure if he meets the threshold of explaining the origin of consciousness, but even if he's wrong it's a great guide to the origins of culture.
- baddox 12y ago
  It doesn't explain why a huge portion of humans now believe and for much of history believed in a similar God.
  - schizo 12y ago
    In the schizophrenic consciousness God is very similar to the scientific method for today's consciousness: it's the most obvious and useful representation for reality. Basically; if you integrate everything into a coherent worldview as a schizophrenic then you arrive at one of the gods; whether it's the teachings of Allah, Buddha or Jahweh. It's essentially about defining your 'self' as 'the universe / all that is' and then following that path to it's eventual conclusion.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

otisfunkmeyer 12y ago

I think this is one of the most interesting aspects of insanity. There are so many strangely fascinating (fractal-like?) pathways that don't quite add up. For instance, a Buddhist hearing a Christian God. It's enough to make one think there's something to it all :) My favorite lecturer on said ideas, Terence McKenna, quoted Jacque Vallée, who said that these experiences are almost always non-evangelizable. It's as though they are almost custom made for the person having the experience. Explaining them at face value to another person either gets a "you had to be there" or just sounds like the rantings of a crazy person.

judk 12y ago
I would describe a dream the same way (but only have dreams when I am at least half asleep). O wonder how neurologically similar are hallucinations and dreams.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

schizo 12y ago

Replying to this deleted comment: "Weirdly [...] the voices she hears are of a Christian-like "God"." Not so weird if you get the causality around the right way. That such visions caused the idea of God is a much more parsimonious explanation than the reverse. reply .... That's so very, very true from what I can tell. It actually feels like a precursor to modern day thought; like a more basic/basal form of though/reasoning. In a way it's more comprehensive than normal thought but it's also fundamentally incompatible with the current style of thinking though, because it brings us a much greater degree of being able to manipulate reality. That reminds me I really still need to read the bicameral mind book...

anigbrowl 12y ago
Do read it. The first 30-40 pages feel a bit directionless and even annoying as you get used to Jaynes' authorial tone, but once it gets going it's a great read. It's tricky to falsify and I'm not sure if he meets the threshold of explaining the origin of consciousness, but even if he's wrong it's a great guide to the origins of culture.
baddox 12y ago
It doesn't explain why a huge portion of humans now believe and for much of history believed in a similar God.
- schizo 12y ago
  In the schizophrenic consciousness God is very similar to the scientific method for today's consciousness: it's the most obvious and useful representation for reality. Basically; if you integrate everything into a coherent worldview as a schizophrenic then you arrive at one of the gods; whether it's the teachings of Allah, Buddha or Jahweh. It's essentially about defining your 'self' as 'the universe / all that is' and then following that path to it's eventual conclusion.