Do you 'Hear Voices'

A spiritual perspective on phenomenon

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

Re: Do you 'Hear Voices'

Postby Luck » Mon Dec 27, 2010 3:50 am

Interesting conversation, especially when talking about non-verbal cues that people send out all the time; it reminds of the idea of emotional intelligence.

When I was much younger, I used to hear voices when drifting off to sleep, but after reading Julian Jaynes, I tend to think of it as a remnant of a brain function that was present before the evolution of consciousness.

More recently I believe I had experienced auditory hallucinations from a prescription medication. The events were always very short. I always heard the door open or someone say a greeting about 15 minutes before guests arrived, whether they were expected or not. It is very possible that I had them at other times, and I don't really put a lot of faith in it as a psychic phenomena. When I stopped taking the medications, the sounds stopped; but it was still an interesting experience.
I think the surest sign that there is intelligent life out there in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." (Calvin and Hobbes/Bill Waterson)
User avatar
Luck
Reality Is In Sight
Reality Is In Sight
 
Posts: 239
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 2:19 am
Location: Midwest


Re: Do you 'Hear Voices'?

Postby franspeakfree » Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:56 pm

ryguy wrote:A lot of this is also perception - how you perceive a situation given pre-existing beliefs about how and why things happen. Just to flip things upside down (please keep an open mind here) - let's look at these scenarios from another perspective.


I agree wholeheartedly


This shows that you read social cues and situations well. You pick up on small clues (often times without even realizing it) so well that you can pretty accurately predict what people are going to do next based on past experience with different personality types. Still - I call this evidence that you are extremely intuitive, but see nothing shocking or surprising about the prediction or the fact that it came true.


I agree, there is much to our minds that we are not aware of.


However - if you were sitting there out of earshot from a guy that was just sitting in his chair quietly reading a book, and you said, "You know, I think we're going to get to know him well," and then he stood up and unexpectedly came over to talk to you....now *THAT* would be unexpected and unpredictable (and could be entertained as borderline paranormal...)

See the difference?


Yes I see the difference and I agree.


This is the power of suggestion. Try this exercise - go around to a random 5 people you know and ask them, "why didn't you tell me you were so depressed and sad?" I guarantee that most (if not all) of those people will start opening up to you about how depressed and sad they are about *something* in their lives. Seriously - who can't think of something they're sad about?

It's the suggestion that there's something wrong that caused the interaction to take place - do you see what I mean?


I see what you are saying and I take it on board but in this instance I have to disagree, because I know him, not only did I feel his 'sadness' I 'experienced it through my mind, power of suggestion can only go so far.



What makes you watch TV, use a computer or read a book?


Fair point but theres more to it, but far to complex to go in to now.


Again - your strong intuition. You likely saw things in his demeanor, his face, his stance, his walk - implying there was a degree of sadness. So you asked.

Intuition, yes - but I see nothing too surprising about these events as described.


Intuition yes I agree, but there is more to it, I have started opening up in my thread which goes in to a little more detail.


Your question about what was bothering him. People are usually more than willing to share grief with someone that asks.


If you met my friend you would not say this ;)


True - but the problem is that many people don't even understand their own abilities - they are non metaphysical, non-paranormal, and completely mundane....but that doesn't mean they aren't special. The ability to so carefully "read" other people is a powerful skill, but what makes it dangerous is when you start to ascribe metaphysical/paranormal characteristics to it. At least of these two examples, I see no evidence to suggest that.


Again your own perception is using the label 'metaphysical', in essence nobody has said they are.


That's not to say that maybe you have had the sort of unexplained, unexpected phenomenon take place, but the two examples you provided don't indicate that at all IN YOUR HONEST OPINON


Indeed, these are just 2 examples which can be packaged up and labelled as you require, but there comes a time where it is impossible to do so and that is what confuses the most brilliant minded individuals and instead of looking at these things closer they dismiss them as 'irrelevant' or 'unknown' this is the problem we hu-mans have and that is always wanting to be at the TOP.


There's also a constant danger - a human nature - to read a lot into coincidences that take place. Once you start to read into them, your perception changes and incidents (like those you've described) are quickly perceived in the future in a way that confirms what you've come to believe. But if you're willing to set those beliefs aside and really examine what happens from an outside standpoint, you'll see how these events aren't even coincidence, they're perfectly explainable.


I understand what you are saying and why you are saying them, perhaps at this point I should point out that the ones that cannot be explained so easily by science and psychology this is what makes me question and try to understand it as best as I can, these experience make me who I am today.


Please don't take my analysis as negative - what I'm hoping is that you might share some additional examples of any incidents that are *truly* unexplainable. Such as saying something is about to happen and then, without your prompting, it happens. I've spoken with people where such things happen, and it's difficult and sometimes impossible to explain away!


If you got to know me you would see clear examples of this.
franspeakfree
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:42 am

Re: Do you 'Hear Voices'

Postby bewildered » Wed Aug 17, 2011 6:59 pm

chrLz wrote:Just for the statistical record :D, I can't say I've ever 'heard' or even 'felt' voices, in the forms being described here. However, I also can't even begin to imagine what it is like to be in another's head, if you get my drift, nor to be able to describe my own... The way in which we perceive, think, experience, dream, wonder, imagine, etc, has to be a personal thing, and of course we don't have anything approaching a methodology of trying to compare our internal thought processes.

This is where science and logic must, almost by definition, break down. All we can observe and measure is the outcomes and actions, and that really isn't addressing the issue at all. So.. unlike my usual down to earth logical approach, this is surely the perfect area where each individual's attempt to explain how they feel and think is the only 'valid' data.

In a way, I'm sad to report that my own thinking seems to be mostly devoid of anything unexplainable, but .. there are times.... :? I'll ponder this and see if I can elaborate further. But voices? Not really..


I'm entering into this thread rather late, but I feel chrLz makes a fantastic point here that is relevant to any meaningful study or discussion of the experience of cognizance. I feel the subject matter of this thread relates directly to this vast and admittedly bewildering (hint: the source of my forum name :wink: ) topic. It's a gigantic question mark that sits perched upon our little dirtball in this solar system within a galaxy that is hurtling through the terrifying void of intergalactic space.

I mean, come on, right? Cognizance? Consciousness? Sheesh, you'd think I'd be content with woodworking or writing a good, coherent story. No, I find myself irresistibly drawn to perhaps the most confusing and murky arena of the human experience: the human experience itself. Mysteries attract my attention like the proverbial moth to the flame, and so I find myself pondering why I ponder.

This statement by chrLz sums up our predicament rather succinctly:

This is where science and logic must, almost by definition, break down. All we can observe and measure is the outcomes and actions, and that really isn't addressing the issue at all. So.. unlike my usual down to earth logical approach, this is surely the perfect area where each individual's attempt to explain how they feel and think is the only 'valid' data.

We are faced with something that we do not understand. It is the nature of cognizance to "fill in the blanks" when presented with voids in perception, much like our brains do as it pertains to blind spots in the field of vision supplied by our faulty eyes (our rods and cones are backwards! :shock: ). Extrapolation such as this seems to be the effect of the cause of "mystery." When faced with the unknown, it is the nature of cognizance to engage in guesswork. This is indicative of an underlying framework of "laws" that appear to drive the engine of our cognizance. As mysterious and inexplicable as it may seem on the surface, it *does* make sense. By studying the outcomes (and the outcomes alone), we can reasonably assume mechanics similar to what influences the portions of the universe that we do understand are at play.

In studying the outcomes, the source of what's not externally verifiable comes into focus: consciousness itself. It's the effect of a cause we can't pin down. Looking at it more closely it seems to me that in essence, consciousness is a point of view (enter the mystery, folks). It appears to be somewhat independent of cognizance itself, due to the demonstrable fact that cognizance seems to change depending upon one's state of existence: the varying degrees of hypnagogia (definition here) whether induced involuntarily by sleep, certain substances such as drugs, or intentionally induced by hypnosis. Meditation can serve as an effective form of self-hypnosis as well (in fact, there may be little or no objective difference between the two).

The key word is objective, or what can be externally verified (such as a mountain, lightning, etc). The opposite of that is subjective: that which cannot be externally verified (what you imagine, your opinion). What's subjective is the point of view. There's no question in my mind that the subjective is indeed influenced by the objective...after all, that's what drives the pursuit of psychology. How it does this is my question. What does it also comes along for the ride. Cognizance plays a role here, as it seems to me that the point of view is directly impacted by the input received by it. This is such a horrifically complicated subject to entertain. In order to understand it all we would need to perceive and measure absolutely every possible variable that affects a human being at any given moment. That's simply not possible, at least not right now.

My own explanation of the "voices" some of us might experience relates to cognizance and our experience of it. These voices are a byproduct of cognizance, or the interface between consciousness and our bodies. Like all of my musings here, this is merely the product of my own extrapolation and guesswork. Identity is not as static nor constant as many people like to believe, as it is understood to medical science in the form of disassociation. In the form of a disorder, it is taken to an extreme: cognizance is effectively splintered, compartmentalizing the mind into distinct areas virtually independent of one another. In a more stable model of cognizance, it is a natural byproduct of feedback and does not create such compelling compartments. These "voices" are artifacts of the process of our mysterious interface linking the objective to the subjective, much like naturally occurring anomalies as they might surface in photographs. Another way of considering these "voices" might be as echoes from our unconscious. Our cognizance is always working 24/7, as proven by the reaction of comatose patients to certain external stimuli. In my opinion, as long as our organism exists, cognizance functions. Whether we are aware of it or not, we are always thinking.

I don't rule out the possibility of the existence of a phenomenon similar to "telepathy." However, I urge great caution in this area due to how much we don't know in regards to the myriad of variables that affect the human being at any given moment. Scientific data does not support the existence of what is commonly regarded as "telepathy." The idea that internally experienced "voices" are the byproduct of our unconscious mind as manifested in cognizance is far more plausible. We should allow our extrapolations be grounded in objectivity as much as possible. Otherwise, they are nothing but stabs in the dark. Unless something such as what someone might fancy as "telepathy" can be verified externally and reproduced consistently using a standard set of protocols, it is reasonable to assume (read=extrapolate) that any sort of mentally perceived voices you might be experiencing are a product of your own mind. Experiencing such a thing is not necessarily abnormal unless it invades upon your essential functioning and replaces objective perception.
bewildered
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: Do you 'Hear Voices'

Postby m0r1arty » Sat Aug 20, 2011 3:28 pm

Nice post bewildered which covers a lot of ground.

I think the hardest part of communicating what we 'perceive' to others and then agreeing on a 'truth' with them is the simple premise of someone gaining power over the value of that newly formed label or axiom.

This thread, to my mind at least, has shown polite conversation over the nuances of what one person finds to be a binding chord with the universe and another finds to be enhanced social intelligence - with varying degrees between. Whilst my opinion about this phenomena comes down to the explainable I, or indeed anyone else, cannot be truly objective about this as we are each human and have all the working components (misfiring or otherwise) which categorize us as so.

Pareidolia, filling in the blanks or calling it god have always been human traits across the world. Us seeing this trend doesn't make us immune from it though. The key word (and it's antipode) you mentioned was objective (and subjective) which is hard to do without there being another form of intelligence communicating and pointing out our own traits to us (and would of course have us pointing their's out to them). Which brings me to this last point;

Unless something such as what someone might fancy as "telepathy" can be verified externally and reproduced consistently using a standard set of protocols, it is reasonable to assume (read=extrapolate) that any sort of mentally perceived voices you might be experiencing are a product of your own mind. Experiencing such a thing is not necessarily abnormal unless it invades upon your essential functioning and replaces [b]objective perception[\b].


'Objective perception' is that agreed truth that we started out on in this post. Labeling something as true, via shared subjective perceptions, does not necessarily make it thus. When X amount of people state that Y is something and that they have evidence to support that claim then an argument can be put forward, however if further down the line additional evidence, or supported theories, crop up then the established 'truth' will have to be altered and with it those who gained from the value of that truth will lose out.

The objectiveness of perception is paradoxical, it's the journey from subjective to supposed objective perception; via culture, media, family, work, friends, education etc. which gives play for communication via language, fashion, ticks & tells and tone or any perceivable notion which feeds each of our minds 'individually'. What that mind has been through + what shape it's in will determine it's own subjective and objective balance through cognitive dissonance and whilst it can still feed itself and work within the confines of social norms it will be welcomed by the masses.

But for no reason think that 'Experiencing such a thing is not necessarily abnormal unless it invades upon your essential functioning and replaces objective perception.' because for everyone, everywhere it is perfectly normal, in it's own unique way.

Not been near a computer in a bit so sorry if my writing is a bit dusty!

-m0r
Thanks to BIAD for the avatar!
User avatar
m0r1arty
Reality Is In Sight
Reality Is In Sight
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 1:54 pm

Previous

Google

Return to Spirituality and the Paranormal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron