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

Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

thereader.mitpress.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#31

Post by tuyiown »

saiya-jin wrote: post #28
tuyiown wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't build scenarios out of aligned facts : > but if I so choose, I can completely zen out within 30 seconds and enter a state of total relaxation. Sometime peoples just want to have own time and relaxing in their own preferred way > In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after. It happened to his wife to come and start talking to him in this state, but hi…

Well, OP could have framed his description a lot better since its easy even for native speakers to come up with conclusion he acts like an a-hole towards his wife and avoids conflicts. This is internet, folks don't re-read some anonymous comments 5 times to grok what was actually meant. Good for him if he managed to get serious crippling condition under control, that's a hard feat deserving respect. Not a fan of self…

You're blaming the poster for judgmental people snapping at him ? It's one thing to wish people being more articulate, it's another to use it as an excuse for 0 thought patronizing.

If someone has to refrain from express themselves or taking better care of what and how they say it, it's moralists reframing words of other people, without even thinking of asking questions beforehand.

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#32

Post by bowsamic »

gnz11 wrote: post #25
bowsamic wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is textbook spiritual bypassing. You are misusing Buddhist teachings in order to run away from your life. Buddhism especially (but also related religions) is about facing the difficulty in your life as it is, not "blissing out for 30 minutes while you wife is talking to you"

Do Buddhist teachings not talk about passing judgments? OP provided an anecdote which makes no claims about "running away from life".

No, they do not talk of that

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#33

Post by monero-xmr »

tuyiown wrote: post #26
smogcutter wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after. He tunes out his wife > if I so choose Willfully > It drives my wife crazy And often enough that it’s an issue. He hasn’t shown up again in this bizarre thread, heck he’s probably doing it right now!

Don't build scenarios out of aligned facts : > but if I so choose, I can completely zen out within 30 seconds and enter a state of total relaxation. Sometime peoples just want to have own time and relaxing in their own preferred way > In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after. It happened to his wife to come and start talking to him in this state, but hi…

I went to sleep - but all of these responses and conjecture amuse me greatly, so I shall let it continue without comment.

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#34

Post by dav_Oz »

driggs wrote: post #29

This is an especially interesting read given that Huxley described his own apparent aphantasia - lack of mental visual imagery - in "The Doors of Perception": I am and, for as long as I can remember, I have always been a poor visualizer. Words, even the pregnant words of poets, do not evoke pictures in my mind. No hypnagogic visions greet me on the verge of sleep. When I recall something, the memory does not present…

Because of the lack of inner images (I thought everyone had this) in retrospect I was particularly drawn to exploring altered states of consciousness watching my mind in awe creating the utmost realistic scenes (lucid dreaming in REM sleep) or completely lose myself in ever complex imagery even on mild doses of psychedelics. So, I slowly learned to bypass my aphantasia by entering a trance state in a similar fashion as described here but through long meditations (>30mins).

Because I'm not distracted by mental images popping up, its only a function of slowly watching your thoughts pass by in complete blackness (normal for me). When talking to fellow meditators without aphantasia I feel it makes it easier for me (once I learned not to control those images) to enter those stages quicker and more reliably by taking a shortcut through the realm of visual blackness ;)

Since I don't know how it is to be able to conjure up mental images at will in the ordinary state of mind I tend to be more verbose and exact in describing my experiences to others who in turn can be more easily triggered by that - I suspect through the help of their mental images now popping up. I find it fascinating that I can literally evoke elaborate pictures in most people minds by just talking to them with attention to more detail (which I can only abstractly conceptualize).

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#35

Post by gardenhedge »

bowsamic wrote: post #18
meindnoch wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Religions have a history of making up bullshit reasons why suffering and being unhappy is the righteous path. Christianity promises you a happy afterlife for suffering in real life, Hinduism tells you that you're getting karmic credit points for your next life, etc. "facing your suffering" is just another iteration of this. A more rational take on these teachings is that historically they were a tool of pacifying the…

I didn't mention any of that stuff though. Facing your suffering is the only way to understand truly how to solve it. You can keep running from it if you want but it will just catch up to you.

Says who?

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#36

Post by bowsamic »

gardenhedge wrote: post #35
bowsamic wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't mention any of that stuff though. Facing your suffering is the only way to understand truly how to solve it. You can keep running from it if you want but it will just catch up to you.

Says who?

Me.

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#37

Post by dredmorbius »

hutzlibu wrote: post #30
dredmorbius wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why I wrote the more suggestive "seems to be" rather than the declarative "is". "Might be" could also have been used. Much of that depends on what is read into "drives my wife crazy", which could range from mild or even humorous response to scales far more irrational and concerning. My own experience over multiple relationships and time is that small irritations have a profound tendency to grow, and that as…

I noted your "seems to". I just wanted to point out, that it could be seen as overstepping a line, to suggest that the whole marriage is possibly incompatible, because of that little shared info. I mean, of course it does not sound ideal. But I would not dare to judge the whole relationship because of it.

That is an absolutely fair point.

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#38

Post by mistermann »

B1FF_PSUVM wrote: post #19

Huxley was a very persuasive writer, witty and engaging, with good insights. But I doubt that making an already unreliable pattern recognition apparatus go haywire can produce anything useful. Entertaining, maybe, useful, no.

Do you speak from experience? Lots of people who do disagree with you substantially.

Re: Aldous Huxley's Deep Reflection

#40

Post by mistermann »

saiya-jin wrote: post #28
tuyiown wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't build scenarios out of aligned facts : > but if I so choose, I can completely zen out within 30 seconds and enter a state of total relaxation. Sometime peoples just want to have own time and relaxing in their own preferred way > In this state I may acknowledge her talking to me but have little or no memory of any conversations after. It happened to his wife to come and start talking to him in this state, but hi…

Well, OP could have framed his description a lot better since its easy even for native speakers to come up with conclusion he acts like an a-hole towards his wife and avoids conflicts. This is internet, folks don't re-read some anonymous comments 5 times to grok what was actually meant. Good for him if he managed to get serious crippling condition under control, that's a hard feat deserving respect. Not a fan of self…

> Not a fan of self-illusion claims about talking to god

> no judaism/christian/muslim god ever talks back

Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.

Houston, we have a problem: faith is a fundamental aspect of consciousness and culture, not just religion.

Post reply on HN