If we are willing to go back and forth a bit between being philosophers and psychologists for a moment, there are far more interesting things to talk about regarding "altered states".... here are the some of the issues:
1. When someone claims to be responding to something, we should believe they are responding to *something*. 2. People generally suck at stating what they are responding to, even in highly mundane situations. 3. It is worth studying any types of experiences that lead fairly reliably to other certain future experiences, because in such situations one has a chance discover what it is people are *actually *responding to. 4. As we are complex dynamic systems, human development is affected by all sorts of things in non-obvious ways. 5. There is no *a priori *reason to discount the insights one experiences under "altered states of consciousness", but also no *a priori* reason to give them special credence. 6. The degree to which a someone has a sense of certainty about something is not generally a reliable measure of how likely that thing is to hold up in the long run, unless many, many, many other assumptions are met. 7. There is likely good reason to think that altered states of consciousness are less reliable in general than "regular" states. 8. There are many examples that suggest certain insights-that-turn-out-to-hold-up-pretty-well, which were first experienced when under an altered state, were unlikely to have been experienced without that altered state. Is that the type of stuff we were are poking at? ----------- Eric P. Charles, Ph.D. Department of Justice - Personnel Psychologist American University - Adjunct Instructor <echar...@american.edu> On Sat, Feb 22, 2020 at 2:30 PM Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote: > Agreed > > --- > Frank C. Wimberly, PhD > 505 670-9918 > Santa Fe, NM > > On Sat, Feb 22, 2020, 12:25 PM Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com> > wrote: > >> Frank writes: >> >> >> >> <It would constitute proof that Marcus exists if he were to admit that I >> was correct in our years-ago argument when I said that gender defines an >> equivalence relation on the set of people.> >> >> Definitions. Notation. Argh, who cares. Where’s that neuralyzer, let >> me get rid of them. >> >> (That should at least be evidence of continuity!) >> >> >> >> Marcus >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
