States of Consciousness and Choice: Are Experiences Self-created?

[JackDaydream]

I have been reading, 'Trances People Live': Healing Approaches in Quantum Psychology'' by Stephen Wolinsky(1991). This is developed on the basis of the neuro linguistic therapy of Milton Erickson. Here, I am not introducing the ideas in the context of the therapy, but in relation to the philosophy of choice and its foundations. The basis of this is the understanding that, 'how we subjectively experience events, interactions, and our own inner self is observer-created...'

He points to feedback loops in experiences in interpersonal interaction and problems. He sees this as a starting point for understanding thoughts and emotions, as a witnessing experience. He speaks of states of mind as transient trance states. He describes trance states in the following way, 'trance is viewed as a self- generated, self- created reallty" and he is speaking of emotional states of mind and subjective identity.

Wolinsky points to the possible awareness of such states of consciousness in the following way,
'What is exciting about recognising and experiencing the multitude of trance states we create throughout the day is that it leads to a transcendent experience of oneself. Each trance state has a beginning point, a middle point, and an end point. As you begin to step outside of your trances by identifying these components parts, what you begin to see is that the only common factor is you'. Also, he suggests, 'You are not that which passes through your consciousness, you are not your thoughts, your emotions, your ideas, memories, fears.'

He was writing in the context of hypnotic practice in understanding trance, dreaming and fantasy states and saw the importance of choice in the creation of states of consciousness. He links this with beliefs. He says,
'The organising principle is a central constellation of core beliefs- the hub of our intraspersonal wheel- out of which all our experience radiates Reinforced countless times as the child grows into the adult, the Organising Principle functions as a window through which "reality" is viewed, to the exclusion of other perspectives.'

I am aware that I am taking these ideas out of the therapy context as an aspect of philosophy, but am doing so because such ideas may be important for the understanding of subjective experience. Also, the outlook does suggest the potential for choice in the development of conscious awareness. So, I am asking is this viewpoint is useful in the understanding of choice in the development of one's states of consciousness and self-awareness? How do you understand the process of becoming more self aware as a human being? To what extent do we choose our states of mind and even life experiences in daily experience through intention?

[stevie]

"self-created" if "self" here is understood as the material aggregate producing it in its own sphere. If however "self" is understood as personal self (referring to felt self as "I", "me") then experiences are other-created.

[The Beast]

Hi Jack. It resonates and it is helpful.
“He was writing in the context of hypnotic practice in understanding trance”
“Choice is important.”: Inherent method.
“There is an organizing principle.”: Inherent method.
I could understand why people gather around the circle and pass the joint. (The joint is the hypnotic element). The trance is shared in the wave of the shared music… or philosophy. (a common element) It is a well-known trance. (The feeling we want) But there are differences in the hypnotic practices of Hitler vs Castro. It may be that consciousness has the peculiarities of language. For example, the Trump cadence and repetitious language together with a subjective choice. “Be a Trumpist” the same as “pass the joint.” The inherent method or the organizing principle around the objective truth is now a corrupted principle in the judgement of the facts and the choice to this is: “I don’t care about any facts if contrary or fake news” Do we know of any good trances? Anything popular? as an example of good trance not inducing a bad trip or a mass suicide.

[JackDaydream]

Hi Jack. It resonates and it is helpful.
“He was writing in the context of hypnotic practice in understanding trance”
“Choice is important.”: Inherent method.
“There is an organizing principle.”: Inherent method.
I could understand why people gather around the circle and pass the joint. (The joint is the hypnotic element). The trance is shared in the wave of the shared music… or philosophy. (a common element) It is a well-known trance. (The feeling we want) But there are differences in the hypnotic practices of Hitler vs Castro. It may be that consciousness has the peculiarities of language. For example, the Trump cadence and repetitious language together with a subjective choice. “Be a Trumpist” the same as “pass the joint.” The inherent method or the organizing principle around the objective truth is now a corrupted principle in the judgement of the facts and the choice to this is: “I don’t care about any facts if contrary or fake news” Do we know of any good trances? Anything popular? as an example of good trance not inducing a bad trip or a mass suicide.

I am glad that you seem to be aware of the basic perspective of trance formations. It is particularly relevant to life choices and shared meanings and narratives. I am seeing it as a philosophy position but do also see it as one in hypnotherapy. I have never had hypnotherapy and the only person who I know who tried it was not able to be hypnotised, as not everyone seems to be able to.

My own interest in the perspective is based on a wish to understand and be aware of the underlying trances. One aspect of this may be of blaming oneself or others for certain aspects of life. It is also about all the different fears and assumptions in life. There are probably links with it to the basic model of cognitive behavioral therapy. However, it may be harder to apply it in practice, unless one is under a therapist, which is why I am seeing it as being a contribution to philosophy primarily. I am interested in self hypnosis though as I would like to find better scripts for living as I am not sure that the ones which I have really work as I find that I come across so many obstacles and think that many other people do too.

Perhaps, on cultural level, there are many problematic trance formations. A lot of this may be due to how people are often almost numbers and the way in which cultures have been fragmenting. Often, I feel like it is myself battling against the world. There are so many people and life where I am, in London, is like the law of the jungle.

I was actually reading the book because I found out last week that I have to find somewhere to live by the middle of August. It seems that the landlord was subletting and hadn't paid agents and he has vanished out of the country. So, really I shouldn't be spending too much time reading and writing. But, I had spent so much time earlier trying to find accommodation and it is hard because everything seems to be online. The internet is a trance formation which can be hard but I am trying to work on my own state of mind in order to cope with the virtual world and life's ups and downs.

[JackDaydream]

"self-created" if "self" here is understood as the material aggregate producing it in its own sphere. If however "self" is understood as personal self (referring to felt self as "I", "me") then experiences are other-created.

The author, Wolinsky, is not really discussing the issue of causality and physicalism, but working from a quantum physics approach to subjectivity in terms of experience of mental space. He sees the and states of mindset and scripts as having a basis in social interaction, especially the family. However, once the basics have been formed they have a certain amount of independent subjectivity, but in negotiation with other people in the various aspects of social interaction.

[Pattern-chaser]

How do you understand the process of becoming more self-aware as a human being?

I understand it as an exercise in honesty. Honesty with oneself, in this case. There are things within myself of which I am unconscious, unaware, and I must ignore them, even if I'd rather not. They are beyond my perception. But there are other things (about myself) of which I am aware, or can become aware. I believe that honest acceptance — and careful consideration — of what I find there is the path to "self-awareness".

Just my two-pennyworth.

[JackDaydream]

How do you understand the process of becoming more self-aware as a human being?

I understand it as an exercise in honesty. Honesty with oneself, in this case. There are things within myself of which I am unconscious, unaware, and I must ignore them, even if I'd rather not. They are beyond my perception. But there are other things (about myself) of which I am aware, or can become aware. I believe that honest acceptance — and careful consideration — of what I find there is the path to "self-awareness".

Just my two-pennyworth.

Being honest with oneself is probably an essential part of self awareness, especially in understanding strengths and weaknesses. Often, it is possible to have blindspots in self knowledge. You may be right to say that in some ways it can be good to ignore certain things about oneself because everyone has weaknesses. I have found that some people have pointed out my weaknesses, which is helpful to some extent. I know that I am inclined to be untidy and chaotic, but changing this is not easy. I also know that I get stressed out and I try to find ways to keep calm. Acceptance of faults, and strengths may be the starting point for so much else though.

It is an ongoing process as well, because I find that when I work on one area, accepting and trying again to negotiate ways around it, a new area seems to loom ahead. It is the path of individuation, but it is different from the path of perfection. I know people who are perfectionist and, if anything, I wish that I had a streak of that tendency.

[Pattern-chaser]

How do you understand the process of becoming more self-aware as a human being?

I understand it as an exercise in honesty. Honesty with oneself, in this case. There are things within myself of which I am unconscious, unaware, and I must ignore them, even if I'd rather not. They are beyond my perception. But there are other things (about myself) of which I am aware, or can become aware. I believe that honest acceptance — and careful consideration — of what I find there is the path to "self-awareness".

Being honest with oneself is probably an essential part of self awareness, especially in understanding strengths and weaknesses. Often, it is possible to have blindspots in self knowledge. You may be right to say that in some ways it can be good to ignore certain things about oneself because everyone has weaknesses. I have found that some people have pointed out my weaknesses, which is helpful to some extent. I know that I am inclined to be untidy and chaotic, but changing this is not easy. I also know that I get stressed out and I try to find ways to keep calm. Acceptance of faults, and strengths may be the starting point for so much else though.

It is an ongoing process as well, because I find that when I work on one area, accepting and trying again to negotiate ways around it, a new area seems to loom ahead. It is the path of individuation, but it is different from the path of perfection. I know people who are perfectionist and, if anything, I wish that I had a streak of that tendency.

I was referring to the things about ourselves that we cannot know because we are unaware of them. They are there, we think, but they are what we call "unconscious". We don't know of them because we can't know of them. So it isn't a conscious choice, to set aside that which might be upsetting (?), it's a simple acceptance that we must ignore them, because we can't and don't know what they are.

As to your main point: yes, it is probably healthy not to concentrate too much on our own faults, to preserve a little self-esteem. It's a bit dishonest, but the reasons for it are reasonable and understandable. We need to preserve a balance in these matters, I think.

[JackDaydream]

How do you understand the process of becoming more self-aware as a human being?

I understand it as an exercise in honesty. Honesty with oneself, in this case. There are things within myself of which I am unconscious, unaware, and I must ignore them, even if I'd rather not. They are beyond my perception. But there are other things (about myself) of which I am aware, or can become aware. I believe that honest acceptance — and careful consideration — of what I find there is the path to "self-awareness".

Being honest with oneself is probably an essential part of self awareness, especially in understanding strengths and weaknesses. Often, it is possible to have blindspots in self knowledge. You may be right to say that in some ways it can be good to ignore certain things about oneself because everyone has weaknesses. I have found that some people have pointed out my weaknesses, which is helpful to some extent. I know that I am inclined to be untidy and chaotic, but changing this is not easy. I also know that I get stressed out and I try to find ways to keep calm. Acceptance of faults, and strengths may be the starting point for so much else though.

It is an ongoing process as well, because I find that when I work on one area, accepting and trying again to negotiate ways around it, a new area seems to loom ahead. It is the path of individuation, but it is different from the path of perfection. I know people who are perfectionist and, if anything, I wish that I had a streak of that tendency.

I was referring to the things about ourselves that we cannot know because we are unaware of them. They are there, we think, but they are what we call "unconscious". We don't know of them because we can't know of them. So it isn't a conscious choice, to set aside that which might be upsetting (?), it's a simple acceptance that we must ignore them, because we can't and don't know what they are.

As to your main point: yes, it is probably healthy not to concentrate too much on our own faults, to preserve a little self-esteem. It's a bit dishonest, but the reasons for it are reasonable and understandable. We need to preserve a balance in these matters, I think.

I am not sure what cannot be known about oneself at all.
It does link to the question of what is the unconscious exactly? This issue is raised and discussed in Wolinsky's 'Trances People Live'. He discusses Milton Erickson's idea of the unconscious and his own. He says,
'The notion of separation between parts of ourselves is reinforced in the Eriksonian literature, where the unconscious mind usually receives the bad rap as the part that undermines the healing resources stored in the unconscious mind.
In my view, there is no such thing as an unconscious mind. There is a being who chooses not to remember certain things while choosing to remember others...for me the mind, metaphorically, is like a darkened library. I, the individual who has the mind, walk in with my flashlight and decide where I want to put my awareness? What do I want to know about?
Grasping this notion of the "you behind the trance" is the corridor to the no-trance state of expanded awareness, where who you are remains a fluid and ongoing experience.'

Wolinsky's discussion of the unconscious does appear to question how the unconscious is and to what extent it is separate from the conscious. In doing so, he is querying the boundaries between the unconscious and the conscious. Psychoanalytic theory often speaks of the subconscious in between. However, it may be that the term the unconscious is often vague and almost suggests a hidden or 'secret self'. Jung's idea of the unconscious, especially the collective unconscious is more a way of seeing it as a source beyond the individual psyche. My own thinking about the unconscious is that it may be about potential. That is in relation to the future but, perhaps, it includes aspects of the distant past too. But, the underlying philosophy question is what does the concept of the unconscious imply about the nature of the mind?

[stevie]

"self-created" if "self" here is understood as the material aggregate producing it in its own sphere. If however "self" is understood as personal self (referring to felt self as "I", "me") then experiences are other-created.

The author, Wolinsky, is not really discussing the issue of causality and physicalism, but working from a quantum physics approach to subjectivity in terms of experience of mental space. He sees the and states of mindset and scripts as having a basis in social interaction, especially the family. However, once the basics have been formed they have a certain amount of independent subjectivity, but in negotiation with other people in the various aspects of social interaction.

"The author, Wolinsky" and the words that seem to be "his" are just an instance of "your" experience that is either self- or other-created.

[JackDaydream]

"self-created" if "self" here is understood as the material aggregate producing it in its own sphere. If however "self" is understood as personal self (referring to felt self as "I", "me") then experiences are other-created.

The author, Wolinsky, is not really discussing the issue of causality and physicalism, but working from a quantum physics approach to subjectivity in terms of experience of mental space. He sees the and states of mindset and scripts as having a basis in social interaction, especially the family. However, once the basics have been formed they have a certain amount of independent subjectivity, but in negotiation with other people in the various aspects of social interaction.

"The author, Wolinsky" and the words that seem to be "his" are just an instance of "your" experience that is either self- or other-created.

It is important to think about whose thoughts, and words, are expressed in writing, as in all situations, as an example of what he describes as 'trances'. The ideas and even the words written are dependent upon shared learning, including those of grammar and even the alphabet. They are socially learned initially. Ideas taken for granted, including scientific ones are often shared ones. There is scope for independent thinking and originality, but it is still in connections with the thoughts of others.

Nevertheless, even though thought is an intersubjective process there is still the question do we choose our beliefs? Some of the biggest aspects of thought, including religious beliefs may be partly based on socialisation and rational principles but there may be choice in the selection of what ideas to hold onto and which to reject. This also applies to political ideas.

[The Beast]

The peripersonal space, as it is defined, in the brain’s multisensory processing has structures designed as such. The represented functions of sensing, feeling, thinking and intuition in the methods of mind attached to the organic and metabolic data representation give me the idea of an unconscious mind larger than the conscious portion of the psyche. In the function of thinking, the methods are directed by the point of view in the attention method. It is a dynamic boundary with many areas of semi-conscious elements. It is doubtful that the area of understanding can accommodate the unconscious in the totality of just the thinking method by just a trance addition in its operation. It may incorporate new elements of knowledge and some growth in the understanding that are reversable to unconscious content. However, the heighten understanding of the underlying unconscious could result in one or another form of psychosis as the attention is directed to areas not visible in the normal peri personal functional methods of mind. Another result is the inability of the psyche to process logical outcomes congruent with social attitudes as methods of thinking have no clear boundaries, and other functions are also involved. This shaking of the point of attention in an otherwise normal personal data balance might have positive effects as well if the understanding permits it.

[Pattern-chaser]

I am not sure what cannot be known about oneself at all.
It does link to the question of what is the unconscious exactly?

The "unconscious" is a simple distinction. There are things about our own minds that we cannot discover by introspection, or any other technique. Those aspects are not 'visible' to our own mental 'inner view', and so we are unaware of them. We put all these things in a container marked "unconscious".

It's interesting to note that others can see in us, using implication and inference, some of the things that are unconscious to us.

As for the 'unconscious mind' being somehow "separate", I can't see that at all. We have minds. Our minds are not homogenous; they have internal structure. We discern or infer different functions within our minds, and we apply labels to them. But the application of labels, and the distinctions we draw, are not real, but only a convenience for us all. The unconscious parts of my mind are just as much a part of it as are the bits I can mentally examine myself.

[JackDaydream]

I am not sure what cannot be known about oneself at all.
It does link to the question of what is the unconscious exactly?

The "unconscious" is a simple distinction. There are things about our own minds that we cannot discover by introspection, or any other technique. Those aspects are not 'visible' to our own mental 'inner view', and so we are unaware of them. We put all these things in a container marked "unconscious".

It's interesting to note that others can see in us, using implication and inference, some of the things that are unconscious to us.

As for the 'unconscious mind' being somehow "separate", I can't see that at all. We have minds. Our minds are not homogenous; they have internal structure. We discern or infer different functions within our minds, and we apply labels to them. But the application of labels, and the distinctions we draw, are not real, but only a convenience for us all. The unconscious parts of my mind are just as much a part of it as are the bits I can mentally examine myself.

It does seem likely that there is not a clear division between consciousness and the unconscious. Dreams are an important aspect of this. Also, it can be that new situations bring out parts of ourselves which were not previously known. I know that in some situations I have acted or said things, both negatively and positively, which have surprised me. In this way, self knowledge and awareness may be more retrospective, with the possibility for the future being unknown. In some ways, the biggest challenge may be how one reacts in the worst possible scenarios.

As far as aspects of oneself which are seen by others, it can be that feedback is useful. It is easy to dismiss it if it is not what one wishes to hear. Of course, some views may be more about what the other is projecting. What may be important is comments which come from a number of people rather than one opinion. However, I have found receiving feedback which challenges one's perception of self can be a difficult experience but it is probably worth listening to as an aspect of self awareness.

[JackDaydream]

The peripersonal space, as it is defined, in the brain’s multisensory processing has structures designed as such. The represented functions of sensing, feeling, thinking and intuition in the methods of mind attached to the organic and metabolic data representation give me the idea of an unconscious mind larger than the conscious portion of the psyche. In the function of thinking, the methods are directed by the point of view in the attention method. It is a dynamic boundary with many areas of semi-conscious elements. It is doubtful that the area of understanding can accommodate the unconscious in the totality of just the thinking method by just a trance addition in its operation. It may incorporate new elements of knowledge and some growth in the understanding that are reversable to unconscious content. However, the heighten understanding of the underlying unconscious could result in one or another form of psychosis as the attention is directed to areas not visible in the normal peri personal functional methods of mind. Another result is the inability of the psyche to process logical outcomes congruent with social attitudes as methods of thinking have no clear boundaries, and other functions are also involved. This shaking of the point of attention in an otherwise normal personal data balance might have positive effects as well if the understanding permits it.

Yes, it does seem that the multisensory is a way into the unconscious. It may be that the unconscious goes beyond mind and body. It can be about opening up to the unknown aspects of one's nature. Your point about the 'inability to process logical outcomes' may be important because it may be that aspects of the unconscious cannot be equated with logic entirely. I am thinking of the paintings of the surrealists and how they challenge realism. With dreams, narrative structure seems different from in real life. One example which I am aware of is that a figure in a dream can change from one person to another. The boundaries within the unconscious, of inner experience, are more fluid than in daily reality as they go beyond the three dimensions of the outer world. However, the inner and outer experiences coexist and are likely to influence each other in the ongoing development of self awareness.