Monday, October 28, 2013

In this blog post I ask about the ultimate source of our actual behavior. What moved me ultimately,


In this blog post I ask about the ultimate source of our actual behavior. What moved me ultimately, but as yet to break a chocolate, even though I have not hungry? What is a "design"? What is the will (volition)? What is willpower or weakness of will? Are all these perhaps only mentalist, introspective tivist terms that you should quickly banish from a scientific psychology?
Let's start with a little experiment: Tap with your finger continuously on the table. Say it again and again to the finger "finger, you move * not *!" - While the finger is moved still further. - Build a visual mental image of your finger * resting * on, and look to the moving finger while you imagine these fingers baileys visually in peace. - Finally, build a idea of how it would feel if the finger at rest would be (which it is not).
Wants even though I * consciously finger * Do not move, but keep in peace, I do not feel its continued movement as uncontrolled or dissociated (as the twitch in a single-focal epileptic seizure): still I feel like I'm there moving this (my) fingers. And I move the finger, but just because I * want * basically - whatever that may then be that "conscious will".
Something in me invalidate the mental-conscious intentions, preventing them to be effective in behavior - without that I have this "interruption" would turn explicitly instructed baileys by the consciousness to the will of me mentally.
Or quite the other way around: Conscious intentions are never causally effective anyway. At best, they are consistent with underlying volition baileys (pulses) baileys happily agreed, so we keep our conscious intentions in an illusionary way for the real cause of our behavior - but while we * do not * know the latter basically.
From this little experiment here seems clear to me that a self-regulation of behavior by explicit thoughts is illusory - it may be that the mental self-instruction with my actual will coincide, but they turn carries nothing of their own more to the will (and behavior) at. Would the idea, for example, deviate from my will, they could not achieve anything: thoughts are not the original will, they are not even the reliable expression.
What then is the original strength in me that wants to? Is it at all accessible to my consciousness? Or consciousness always comes too late? Is it even * my * power - or only some "force" which I mentally appropriating me in hindsight (which is no longer possible in epileptic baileys seizures or dissociative-hypnotic behavior)? Am I - I really - at the end the same as "my will" (and behavior)? And it is not what I know and think who I was? We drive basically always baileys and without exception on autopilot - even when we reflect on our actions, generate intentions, baileys etc.?
When thoughts of the behavior ultimately controlling force ("will") is not very far - (as) is then an influence baileys of the will and the behavior of others by thought possible?
More specifically asked: How does the hypnotist to seduce ordinary people "against their will" to an unusual behavior baileys (eg sexual acts on stage)? How can a woman seduce a man "against his will"? How can a psychotherapist the behavior of their clients effectively steer in a new direction (they can do that?)? baileys
Succeed in all these cases, only the link to the actual motivation that lies hidden just below the surface of the mentally expressed pseudo-will, baileys the seducer only make it to - or manipulate this desire actively in their own way? Is that why I manipulated the so involuntarily, because the power of thought against willpower can do nothing?
Only the other instructions effectively influence my behavior, but not my own? We are when we drive in everyday life on auto-pilot through life, perhaps in rapport with the will of other people who manipulate our will on their behalf and for their benefit, without us even noticed this at all?
Blog Thunderstorms: On this side of reproducibility - or: where science is on it, there is no science in it for a long time | thoughts and reality
83 Comments on "W

No comments:

Post a Comment