Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 147 posts

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#71

Post by mikekchar »

icebraining wrote: post #51
nkohari wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quote refers to an idea in Zen Buddhism called shoshin , or "beginner's mind". The general idea is that the more you believe you are an expert on a subject, the more closed off you become to new ideas and ways you can improve. Instead, shoshin encourages you to approach all things with eagerness of a beginning. If you're interested, you should read Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind, which is a short book collecting some…

I understand the quote, but I still don't get the relevance to the first post, sorry. Can you describe it more explicitly?

Not the OP and not in any way an expert, but the way I read it: the original post is completely correct -- insofar as it has been written. One could think, "I have examined it and determined it to be completely without merit". Having done so, there is no further need to examine -- because it is without merit. This is obvious.

On the other hand, you can think of it like the proverbial box, of which we are often encouraged to think outside. You can examine the entire box and discover that it holds nothing. But if you never look at the outside of the box, perhaps you will never see what others find valuable.

To bring it back to more concrete terms, to the extent that the original poster is looking to find a pavlovian response, they will find it. And from there, the rest follows by simple logic. But if you are looking for something else (or, in fact, nothing), then perhaps you will find something else.

I often find this when I talk about more technical topics; TDD, for instance. TDD is often a waste of time when applied the way many people apply it. Having studied a lot about TDD, many people are wedded to the definition they have created. Eventually they get disillusioned when it doesn't work. When they examine it, they realise that it can't work. That is the expert's mind. But the secret is that they are not doing TDD. If they throw away the expert's mind (in other words, don't do it the way that doesn't work), they have a chance of discovering TDD that works.

Disclaimer: I meditate and enjoy it. TDD helps me be more productive. YMMV.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#72

Post by moretai »

lukev wrote: post #32

I normally wouldn't weigh in here, since I am the furthest thing possible from an expert, but after even a little dabbling in meditation I can see some major misconceptions in the other comments. It isn't about being bored, or about any of the benefits that may or may not occur. Meditation is a useful discipline because it is about training the mind to (a) become conscious of and "reify" individual thoughts and sensa…

>Once you have these skills you can (presumably) use them for other things and to achieve various effects. But it starts there.

They said the same thing about brain exercises like Luminosity. The brain is way more complex, and you can't just hack your way to becoming the ultimate programmer. Perhaps there are legitamate factors that lead to unproductive and stressed out workers.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#73

Post by vanderZwan »

moretai wrote: post #68

Psychedelic Therapy will be the next one.

Which is sad, because I get the impression that in the situations where it does seem to work (alcoholism for example), it's both very effective and one of the few therapies that work at all.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#74

Post by occultist_throw »

owebmaster wrote: post #45
occultist_throw wrote: post #37

"Mindfulness" is an occult method. End of discussion. It can be, and has been studied not by science, but by people working with the occult. And mindfulness is more of a byproduct of meditation, controlled breathing, or other techniques that Shiva told Shakti. We'll eventually be able to analyse these things in the words of science. But not yet. If you're looking for proof, you will be looking for a very long time, u…

As we say in Brazil: "monkey that can't eat a banana will say it's unripe". Some people try medidation and succeed, some don't and think that the ones succeeding are faking it. > And then, N=1 research usually isn't looked highly upon. Genius!

What's interesting is that "mindfulness" via what westerners think of meditation is only one of 110 different techniques. Some of them don't work now (wrong time), some wont work in the future, and some won't work for certain people.

When going this route, its best to try different techniques until you feel a change. Once you do, start working with the technique for a time. 3 minutes starting, then 3 days, then 3 months, then 3 years. That provides mastery... Then you can work on another one.

And no, meditation via breath doesn't work on me. I've tried with lamas. Nope. However when I started working with visualizations (think Hololens without hardware), I had other people near me that could tell me the shapes I was projecting. That was -- neat.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#76

Post by moretai »

submeta wrote: post #41

There is no need for scientific proof. I observe that being mindful changes things for me: The way I listen to people, the way I eat, the way I handle rejection or anger or any other feeling. I realize that being mindful (vs mindlessly and blindly doing things) sharpens my senses, makes me think clearer, makes me change perspectives, create more categories or realize that I think within categories. I got in touch wit…

If you need a book to meditate, you are probably doing it wrong.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#77

Post by jokoon »

Not really surprised. How do you even do measurements in a brain to see if it has any effect?

It's already quite tricky to make sure anti depressants work, so I would not trust meditation.

At best you just make people believe doing it will make them better, so as long as they believe it, it might be reassuring enough.

I don't tell people to do meditation, I tell them to go to a quiet place outside, in a park or woods, to sit and do nothing and let their thoughts go around. No phone, no book, no toys. The mere act of doing nothing is already doing a lot to relax you, and people have lost the simple habit of relaxing. Stop being busy, that's what people need.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#78

Post by nkohari »

icebraining wrote: post #51
nkohari wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quote refers to an idea in Zen Buddhism called shoshin , or "beginner's mind". The general idea is that the more you believe you are an expert on a subject, the more closed off you become to new ideas and ways you can improve. Instead, shoshin encourages you to approach all things with eagerness of a beginning. If you're interested, you should read Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind, which is a short book collecting some…

I understand the quote, but I still don't get the relevance to the first post, sorry. Can you describe it more explicitly?

> where people claim to let go of their ego only to look down on anyone who is not as “open minded“ as they are

These people are not practicing beginner's mind, and may be missing opportunities to learn.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#79

Post by bitexploder »

sevensor wrote: post #62

> Major commercial players in the meditation space The sheer insanity of this phrase astounds me. There's an industry devoted to meditation. For such a thing to exist, you have to start by convincing people that they're not meditating right. Which means some people are better at it than others and you should worry about not being as good. What's next, competitive meditation?

Guided meditation is a big deal. I know a number of people who use Headspace. Also, obviously, some people are better at meditating. I think most meditation practitioners tend to sort of remove ego, not add to it. So I don't see anyone being competitive about it. But I do see people desperate for the benefits and looking to those good at it to show them the way. There are worse things people could be trying really hard to get good at :)

A lot of meditation and mindfulness encourages an active focus on other people and how they are feeling. I think it is generally wholesome with a side industry trying to take money from people who heard it was good.

Re: Much of the research around meditation and mindfulness has serious flaws

#80

Post by microtonal »

icebraining wrote: post #19
microtonal wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been to “mindfulness events” for executives and corporate, where people claim to let go of their ego only to look down on anyone who is not as “open minded “ as they are. "In the beginner’s mind there are many possibilities, but in the expert’s there are few." --- Shunryu Suzuki

I don't get how that quote relates to the parent post, can you clarify?

Sorry, I should have added an explanation for my quotation.

The parent post (rightfully) pointed out that some teachers feel superior to their students. The core of buddhism (from which insight meditation comes) is that suffering is a result of attachment, since everything is non-permanent.

These teachers may be attached to their perceived accomplishments in their practice, leading to a feeling of superiority. This is a well-known trap in meditation practice.

Hence Suzuki's quote: mediation practice should be treated with a beginner's mind, with openness and no preconceptions. Feeling better than your students is a contradiction to that, it starts with the preconception that you are better/more enlightened.

I have to admit that I find it difficult to write this comment, since it is paradoxical or perhaps even self-contradictary.

I like mikekchar's answer as well ;).

Post reply on HN