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

The new science of meditation

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 396 posts

Re: The new science of meditation

#91

Post by pegasus »

choxi wrote: post #57

I’ve been meditating casually for almost 10 years, I couldn’t sit still for a minute when I started and can sit regularly for an hour now. I still have a lot of skepticism about the sensations that other meditators describe feeling, like jhanas and profound states of tranquility and whatnot. I have experienced deeper calmness and have made some insights about my brain (eg thoughts are like a sensor organ not unlike a…

There are scientists who are weighing these questions. For example, see Thomas Metzinger's latest research on these kind of states presented here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f4ykI9har8 (and in the followup video)

Another good resource is the book "Zen and the Brain".

And this interview with Daniel Ingram mentions some fascinating research on his own capacities developed in meditation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APOKB59pVpE

Re: The new science of meditation

#92

Post by ryanwaggoner »

akasakahakada wrote: post #3

Little google search I found this guy. https://www.exploringtheproblemspace.com/new-blog/2018/2/18/... To conclude that, Jon Kabat-Zinn, the "scientist" quoted in the article is just pure pseudoscience.

What? A random blog post that is nothing more than a word salad of the blogger's filenames for their notes on Kabat-Zinn's book was enough to make you conclude that he's not a real scientist and just peddling pseudoscience?

Sounds like your own standard of evidence isn't much higher than pseudoscience.

Re: The new science of meditation

#93

Post by oldstrangers »

johndhi wrote: post #73
oldstrangers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always sort of intuitively done this since I was a kid ( https://zchry.org/words/questioning-my-quantum-leap-an-ongoi... ). I have zero experience with meditation in the traditional sense but I'm really interested in going down that path next as I try to broaden my scope.

I used to play a game as a kid where I'd close my eyes and try not to see or imagine anything. To keep a black empty universe as the only thing I see, for as long as possible. It isn't easy!

I have a similar thought experiment where I try to imagine the true essence of 'nothingness', down to even the removal of the 'idea' of nothingness and even the thought that I'm trying to imagine something. It's a weird feeling.

Re: The new science of meditation

#94

Post by DrThunder »

jossclimb wrote: post #71
clsec wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation please!

Not OP, but it happened to me. Started meditation to deal with anxiety and the introspection that came with it, ended up with me on the verge of a complete breakdown. I started off doing Sam Harris and then progressed to doing an hour or more each day. I had some moments of insight and then hit some dark night of the soul which wrecked me, I was close to admitting myself to hospital for psychological help. What fixed…

I feel like you did the wrong sort of meditation for anxiety. Mindfulness and breathing where you see the thought come and let it go is preferred for anxiety sufferers. You should not be following your anxious thoughts.

I could see how it would affect you negatively if you tried to follow all your anxious thoughts and delve into their "meaning". The goal for some with high anxiety ought to be lessening its meaning. You should just see it as another emotion with a neutral (or even helpful at times) stance. You don't lessen anxiety by giving it MORE attention. That seems like it would train your brain to think it's way too important and you'd get stuck in an anxiety loop.

Re: The new science of meditation

#95

Post by oldstrangers »

dlivingston wrote: post #40
oldstrangers wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always sort of intuitively done this since I was a kid ( https://zchry.org/words/questioning-my-quantum-leap-an-ongoi... ). I have zero experience with meditation in the traditional sense but I'm really interested in going down that path next as I try to broaden my scope.

A bit tangential, but I absolutely love your blog design. Minimalistic, yet very aesthetic and unique.

Thank you!

Re: The new science of meditation

#96

Post by akasakahakada »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #92
akasakahakada wrote: post #3

Little google search I found this guy. https://www.exploringtheproblemspace.com/new-blog/2018/2/18/... To conclude that, Jon Kabat-Zinn, the "scientist" quoted in the article is just pure pseudoscience.

What? A random blog post that is nothing more than a word salad of the blogger's filenames for their notes on Kabat-Zinn's book was enough to make you conclude that he's not a real scientist and just peddling pseudoscience? Sounds like your own standard of evidence isn't much higher than pseudoscience.

You should click into the category and see there is literally ~100 blog posts about the issue.

Re: The new science of meditation

#97

Post by epiccoleman »

lcuff wrote: post #16
epiccoleman wrote: post #2

> Given that wealthy countries like the US aren’t exactly riding trend lines toward new peaks of mental health (depression rates in American adults are at an all-time high, while young people appear in the grips of a mental health crisis), scalable ways of not just mindfully soothing, but completely re-creating psychological experiences for the better should set off sirens of general, scientific, and funding intrigue…

> I can't help but feel the recent societal interest in meditation and psychedelics is wrongheaded in that it's treating a symptom rather than a cause. I agree, but the question emerges "what is treatable?" Many of the thousands of causes of stress in modern life can't be changed by an individual: I can't unelect politicians I disagree with, clean up the air where I live, or make the roads I travel significantly less…

> Stress reduction is a good way to go

I totally agree, I think the thing I find discomforting is the apparent conflict between the systems that exacerbate the "problem" and the fact that a meditation app, medicalized psychedelic trip, or scientific research into either seems somehow part of that system. It feels like instead of becoming tools for liberation from daily suffering or for deepening the understanding of one's consciousness, these tools are being subsumed and defanged by the same system that makes us need them.

It's some of the same feeling as seeing businesses embrace social justice culture - without even getting into the whole "woke" debate, I'll just say it often feels weird to see these big machines of capitalism embrace these causes. It feels cynical - rather than "this is a good cause, we will support it" it feels like "people are into social justice, this is good marketing".

But again, maybe that's OK. If Disney embraces LGBT causes for cynical reasons to sell movies, but instrumentally advances rights or attitudes in doing so - or if Headspace makes a ton of money, but genuinely improves someone's internal experience - or if Joe Rogan convinces someone to try psychedelic therapy, and that person is able to work through some issues and be better for their family - it's hard to find an argument that these are bad things.

But they still make me feel weird.

Re: The new science of meditation

#98

Post by johndhi »

haswell wrote: post #89
johndhi wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect you just have a different definition of 'religious' than I do. Why are you so anti-religion?

That’s possible! But that’s also why I’m calling attention to it here. Religiosity is a negative signal for many folks, and I think it’s important to debunk the need for religious thinking to gain the benefits of meditation. My stance comes from growing up in an extreme fundamentalist religious bubble. It set me up for a lifetime of unwinding unhealthy beliefs and patterns of thought, not the least of which was deep…

Makes sense. Thanks for sharing!

I personally think human beings need some kind of central spiritual belief or identity to feel satisfied/happy/whole. I'm not sure, but in your case, it almost sounds like you might be getting that identity from REJECTING the shitty religious bubble you grew up in. Sounds like you feel like you're on a good track and moving somewhere with your life -- even if it's away from religion. So I guess in my book, you're religious.

>>I’ve seen first hand what these systems of belief do to families and communities, and while I’m not one to claim that all religion is awful, I do think it’s a bigger problem than help in the current social climate.

For me, this is really case-by-case, but my suspicion is that most religion is generally better for people than no religion -- so I suspect I disagree with you, but on limited data.

>>The ideas of most religions also set up a fundamental misconception about our relationship with the world/environment (that we’re separate from it) that is an existential threat to reaching some kind of environmental balance.

Hadn't heard this one before - huh. I think there are a lot of reasons we burn coal but IMO the fact that we're religious isn't one of the main ones. To me, religion is a great path toward loving others and the world such that we'd want to conserve them and it.

Re: The new science of meditation

#99

Post by johndhi »

iamatworknow wrote: post #88
johndhi wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to play a game as a kid where I'd close my eyes and try not to see or imagine anything. To keep a black empty universe as the only thing I see, for as long as possible. It isn't easy!

I did the same as a kid. Like if I was in a classroom with noisy classmates ("study hall") I'd shut my eyes and actively try to not hear them and embrace the nothingness "around" the voices. Kinda interesting that I have distinct memories of doing this _years_ before I was ever exposed to "meditation".

IMO a lot of stuff humans have 'invented' (like meditation) are really just sort of tied to our nature as animals. I think meditation is something we're all (most?) inclined to try in some way, but then some specific geeks studied it really hard for thousands of years and turned it into what it is.

Re: The new science of meditation

#100

Post by johndhi »

oldstrangers wrote: post #93
johndhi wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to play a game as a kid where I'd close my eyes and try not to see or imagine anything. To keep a black empty universe as the only thing I see, for as long as possible. It isn't easy!

I have a similar thought experiment where I try to imagine the true essence of 'nothingness', down to even the removal of the 'idea' of nothingness and even the thought that I'm trying to imagine something. It's a weird feeling.

I do that too!
Post reply on HN