Tag: philosophy

Ambiguity in speech is the source of way too much psychology

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Genes aside, I believe ambiguity in speech and its consequent cascades of error are at the root of virtually all human psychology, both good and bad.

And this goes back in time as far as we can imagine because the problem of ambiguity in speech was there for your parents, your grandparents, and everyone else who came before you. And the same is true for everyone else in the world.

All cultures everywhere are both burdened and determined by this problem.

(The only exceptions are specialist “cultures” that make a point of removing error from their communication systems, such as mathematics, hard sciences, engineering, some branches of linguistics, etc. The people in these cultures only avoid the problem while working or speaking within their specialist culture. When at home or off the job, their psychologies are the same as the rest of us. In fact, smart as many of those people are, I bet few of them have ever considered how inaccurate their common speech is or how error-ridden their listening is, to say nothing of how profoundly that messes up their psychologies.)

Ambiguity in speech comes from inaccurate words and phrases, our strong tendencies to want to keep the wrong parts of speaking too short, our fear of open, truthful speech, our hyper-focus on wording and typical refusal to allow people to take back or alter their words or our inability to see the need for that, our strong tendency to believe we know what others mean, our constant need to grab meaning on the fly, or extract it from gestures or tone of voice, the brevity of most speech acts, our fear of being wrong or saying the wrong thing (legitimate fears given the foregoing), our practical incapacity to describe our own subjectivity or even know it, our inability to get other people’s subjectivity from them because they also suck at this.

When ambiguity flourishes, meanings are imagined. Guesswork replaces knowing. In response, everyone’s psychology become confused, confusing or rigid. We act roles rather than life.

How can we claim to know anything about human psychology without acknowledging that almost anything with psychological import that anyone ever says to anyone is sure to be riddled with error and ambiguity?

And even when it’s not: 1) it’s very hard to know when that is and 2) the event is so rare it’s like a bird that stops flapping its wings and falls to the ground.

The Five Skandhas

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

The Buddha’s explanation of the five skandhas is intended to help us understand the emptiness of the self. It is a short explanation aimed at his most intelligent students.

The Sanskrit word skandha means “heap” or “aggregate” in English. Sometimes the Buddha compared the skandhas to heaps of rice. They are the “heaps” of psycho-perceptual data that comprise the “contents” of our minds. The five skandhas are conditioned dharmas (literally, “conditioned things”), which is to say that they are impermanent and empty, and when improperly understood lead to delusive attachments characterized by greed, anger, and ignorance. The purpose of the Buddha’s five skandha explanation is to help us see through the skandhas, or disentangle ourselves from them. In some Buddhist texts the five skandhas are called the “five covers” because they cover our minds and prevent us from seeing deep levels of reality. In others they are called the “five yin (versus yang)” because they cloud the mind and hide the truth from us. I will discuss each of the five skandhas in the sections below.

1) The first skandha is form. Form, in this case, means anything that leads to, or is capable of leading to, the next skandha. Forms can be visual, auditory, or sensory. They can be dreams, memories, feelings, or moods. Forms are often described as being “obstructions” because, though they may lead to complex thought and activity, they are also hindrances to mental clarity since the activity they lead to is essentially delusive. It is important to remember that the five skandha explanation is an explanation of the deluded mind and its thought processes.

The Abhidharma-mahavibhasa Shastra categorizes the skandha of form into three types:

a) Visible forms with a referent in the outer world such as color, size, length, position, shape, and so on.

b) Invisible forms with a referent in the outer world that are associated with the other sensory organs such as sounds, smells, tastes, and the sensations arising from physical contact.

c) Invisible forms with no referent in the outer world such as dreams, memories, thoughts, feelings, and so on. Though a dream may be “visible” to the dreamer, it is called “invisible” here because no one else can see it. This last category of forms is associated with what the Buddha called “mental dharmas.”

2) The second skandha is sensation. Following the appearance of a form, the mind reacts to it with a sensation that is either positive, negative, or neutral. We either like it, don’t like it, or are neutral about it. Though it is possible to become conscious of this skandha, most of us most of the time are not.

Sensations are generally categorized into two types:

a) Sensations of the body coming from the outside world through any of the sensory organs, such as sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and so on.

b) Sensations of the mind which may or may not come from the outside world. These include moods, feelings, memories, dreams, thoughts, ideas, and so on.

Both kinds of sensation are, of course, based on the prior appearance of a form. Greed and anger have their roots in the skandha of sensation, for if we enjoy a positive sensation we are liable to become greedy about it, while if we do not enjoy it, we are liable to become “angry” or irritable concerning it. The deep meaning of greed is “excessive attraction” to a sensation that we deem to be agreeable or positive, while the deep meaning of anger (or hatred) is “excessive aversion” to a sensation that we deem disagreeable or negative. Neutral sensations often are the result of our ignorance or lack of understanding, though as we progress in Buddhist practice they may be the result of wisdom.

Positive and negative sensations associated with the body are generally considered to be weaker than those associated with the mind, though both types of sensations often are interrelated. An example of this mixture and distinction might be a light slap in the face. While the physical sensation is only mildly unpleasant, the mental sensation will be quite strong in most cases. And yet both are interrelated.

3) The third skandha is perception. This skandha refers to the deepening of a sensation. It is the point where the mind begins to latch onto its sensations. At this point conscious recognition of form and sensation normally begins. It is possible to become conscious of the first and second skandhas as they are occurring, but most of us generally are not. During the skandha of perception we begin making conscious distinctions among things.

4) The fourth skandha is mental activity. This skandha refers to the complex mental activity that often follows upon the skandha of perception. Once we have identified (perceived) something, long trains of mental associations become active. Our bodies may also begin to move and behave during this skandha. For example, the simple perception of a travel poster may set in motion a great deal of mental activity. We may begin recalling an old trip or begin fantasizing about a new one. If we are photographers, we may admire the composition of the photo, step closer to it, make an effort to remember it, and so on. All of these behaviors belong to the skandha of mental activity.

5) The fifth skandha is individual consciousness. It is a product of the first four skandhas and is completely conditioned by them. This is what we normally, more or less, think of as being our “self.” The Buddha taught the five skandhas primarily to help us understand that this “self” or consciousness is empty since it is entirely based on the conditions found in the first four skandhas.

The Ekkotarika-agama explains this point very well. It says, “The Buddha said that the skandha of form is like foam, the skandha of sensation is like a bubble, the skandha of perception is like a wild horse, the skandha of mental activity is like a banana tree, and thus the skandha of individual consciousness is nothing more than an illusion.” The trunk of a banana tree is made of leaves curled together. From the outside, it may look substantial, but if we examine it closely we will find that one leaf pulls away from the next, leaving ultimately nothing behind. The trunk looks substantial, but in truth it is “empty.” In just this way, our individual consciousness may look substantial to us, but if we peel it apart, we find that there is no self within—it is empty.

How to Understand the Five Skandhas

Though most of us are not normally aware of the first two skandhas it is possible to become aware of them through meditation and mindfulness practices. Though it is easier to begin understanding the five skandhas by thinking of them as being separate and distinct, it is important to realize that any of the last four skandhas can give rise to the skandha of form. Mental activity itself, for example, can generate whole new trains of forms, sensations, and perceptions.

Another important thing to understand about the five skandhas is that our minds move very quickly from one to the next. The five skandhas produce a snow storm of impressions and mentation, upon which rests our unstable conscious world. When we become overly attached to this snow storm or to the consciousness built upon it, we generate the karma that ultimately fuels the five skandhas in the first place.

The Explanation of Mahayana Terms (en 1212) says that the skandhas can be understood as being either good, bad, or neutral. The goodness mentioned in this explanation should be understood as being a relative goodness that arises within the phenomenal world—though it is “good,” it is not the same as an enlightened vision that completely sees through the five skandhas. For this reason, we will use the word “positive” in place of “goodness” in this discussion. The Explanation says that positive activation of the five skandhas can be of three types: activation by a positive form, such as a Buddhist image; activation by skillful means, such as a desire to help someone; and activation within a pure-minded person. The Explanation says that the three bad or negative types of activation of the five skandhas result from: simple badness within them, as may have derived from low motives or moodiness; contaminations within them, such as selfishness during an act of kindness; and negativity that is simply the result of bad karma. The Explanation says that the three neutral types of activation are: formal activations that result from the performance of rituals; activations resulting from the practice of a skill; and neutral changes among the skandhas themselves.

How to Contemplate the Five Skandhas

The second noble truth of Buddhism is the cause of suffering. Generally, this cause is explained as clinging to a false self. By contemplating the five skandhas, we learn to understand both that the self is empty and why it is empty. This contemplation appeals to the rational mind for it allows us to use reason to convince ourselves that the “self” we call our own is, in truth, an illusion.

In contemplating the five skandhas we should be mindful that we begin to generate karma during the skandha of perception. At the same time, it is important to realize that the very forms we see and the sensations that result from them are heavily conditioned by our past actions, by the accumulation of karmic “seeds” or influences that are already stored in our minds. Two people may see exactly the same form, but have very different responses to it because their karma is not the same. Since their karma is different, their sensations and perceptions, and especially their mental activity and consciousness will be very different.

The Numerical Teachings of Great Ming Dynasty Tripitaka says (en 1213) that the most important way to understand the five skandhas is to realize that each of them is empty. As we become familiar with the five skandhas, we will find it easier to identify each one and contemplate its emptiness. We can think about them from first to last or from last to first.

If we choose to think of them from last to first, our contemplation will consist of a series of questions, whose answers should be considered deeply. We begin by asking ourselves what the skandha of individual consciousness is based upon. The answer is the roiling mentation of the skandha of mental activity. The skandha of mental activity becomes apparent as soon as we sit down to meditate. Having identified this skandha and appreciated its fundamental emptiness, we can ask ourselves what it is based upon. The answer is the skandha of perception. First the mind seizes one of its impressions (the skandha of perception), then a long train of thought and emotion follows (the skandha of mental activity). Having appreciated this process, we then ask ourselves what the skandha of perception is based upon. The answer is sensation—of the many forms and feelings passing through our minds, one of them gave rise to either a positive or negative sensation (neutral sensations are usually ignored by the mind). It is this sensation that led to the skandha of perception. If we can appreciate this, then we can ask what the skandha of sensation is based upon. The answer is form—either an outer or inner form. Were it not for this form, none of the other skandhas would have arisen.

If we choose to contemplate from the first skandha to the last, we may choose a form and then carefully watch how our minds process it. We will see that form leads to sensation, then to perception, then to mental activity, and lastly to individual consciousness—a state of mind deeply colored by the skandhas below it. Bear in mind that when the five skandhas are simply happening of themselves and no one is watching them, we are normally unconscious of the activity of the first two skandhas. Before most of us are even aware of what we are perceiving, we have begun to react to it. It requires some skill to see that forms give rise to positive, negative, or neutral sensations before they give rise to the skandha of perception, but this is the case in a normally active mind.

The quotation cited previously from the Ekkotarika-agama can also be used as a very fine contemplation. The agama said, “The Buddha said that the skandha of form is like foam, the skandha of sensation is like a bubble, the skandha of perception is like a wild horse, the skandha of mental activity is like a banana tree, and thus the skandha of individual consciousness is nothing more than an illusion.” The skandha of form is like foam in a stream—at any moment scores of forms contend for our attention. The skandha of sensation is like a bubble—suddenly we react to a single bubble within the foam. The skandha of perception is like a wild horse—we can never be sure which way our mind will turn at this point. The skandha of mental activity is like a banana tree—it consists of many things wrapped together. And thus, the skandha individual consciousness is empty, an illusion.

ABN

UPDATE: FIML practice can be understood in terms of the five skandhas in this way: A FIML query begins at or interrupts the skandha of mental activity. Through training and prior agreement, partners learn to identify a fraught psychological response at the third skandha–perception–and thereby shift away from habitual mental activity to FIML mental activity. The FIML query at this points implicitly asks is my habitual perception based on fact? The FIML query should be made in as neutral a tone as possible to avoid influencing your partner. Your partner’s reply will either confirm or refute your habitual perception. FIML is a dynamic and very powerful form of mindfulness that allows partners to be much more objective about the granular workings of their minds. After hundreds of FIML queries, partners will establish a database of objective insight into their own (and each other’s) psychology that is much more accurate than what can be done alone or through general discussion with anyone. ABN

Trump signs Executive Order to maximize parental choice over vaccinations for their children

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

DELIVERING GOLD STANDARD CHILDHOOD VACCINE RECOMMENDATIONS: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to recognize Gold Standard Childhood Vaccine Recommendations that maximize parental choices over vaccinations for their children and align three categories of childhood immunizations with scientific evidence and best practices from peer, developed countries.

  • The Order provides recommendations that give parents more information and options when making immunization decisions for their children.
    • The Order recommends all children get immunizations to provide protection for 11 diseases – a decrease from the 18 diseases recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2024. Immunizations no longer recommended for all children are now recommended for shared clinical decision-making, ensuring that parents have all options available to them. 
    • The Order recommends separating out the combined MMR vaccine into three single-disease shots and recommends administering all vaccines during separate medical visits to give parents more options regarding the timing and frequency of this vaccine administration.
    • States that enact school vaccine requirements are advised to consider the Gold Standard Childhood Vaccine Recommendations and consider updating their laws to reflect the recommendations.
    • All Federal agencies are advised to advance the Gold Standard Childhood Vaccine Recommendations based on their relevant authorities to ensure Americans have the best scientific information. 
  • The Order maximizes parental choice over childhood vaccines by promoting State compliance with constitutional and Federal law related to parental authority, religious freedom, disability accommodations, and equal protection under the law, including States’ obligations to provide religious and medical exemptions from childhood and adolescent immunization requirement.
  • The Order directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), through the HHS Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines, to present plans to the President to improve vaccine research and options for American parents, including continuous evaluation of the risk and benefit profiles of all childhood vaccines based on U.S. and international data. 

link

Looks like a good start.

When you consider the vaccine topic from a vague ‘national’ and ‘science’ POV, it can appear complex, leading to individual resignation or stubborn belief based on unthinking habituation. When you consider it from a state’s POV or a schoolboard’s, the absurdity of government coercing medical treatments for children is easier to see for what it is. The smaller the state or the dumber the schoolboard, the more obvious it becomes. USA local and state governments are filled with people entirely unqualified to rule on matters like this. When ‘national standards’ are blindly followed, anyone who can read and think understands relevant agencies have all been captured by Big Pharma and Big Money. ABN

Mises Institute’s 5 Purges: Omitting Jewish Bankers

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Five Private Steps in the Statist Censorship Continuum

Censored image: This Substack distills every article into clear syllogistic infographics—saving readers time and preventing shaky premises and reasoning from being hidden behind a torrent of words. However, AIs often refuse to generate politically incorrect infographics. Initially Grok refused to generate this infographic and gave instead a long lecture on the great trustworthiness of the Mises Institute. Here is an example:

After being pushed, Grok finally agreed to generate an infographic but refused to include the terms “Jewish monopolies” (historical tax farmer, slave trade, war contractor, trade and banking monopolies) and “Jewish Problem” (Diaspora group refusing to assimilate). Yet other American AI models are even more censorious. ChatGPT, for instance, flatly refuses to discuss historically documented Jewish monopolies, while China’s DeepSeek allows these conversations.

Introduction

The Ludwig von Mises Institute serves as the headquarters for the Austrian School of economics and the rationalist-conservative strain of libertarianism known as Austro-Libertarianism. Although Ludwig von Mises passed away in 1973 and his leading disciple, Murray Rothbard, in 1995, their memory and intellectual message are carried on by the Institute. Led by President Llewellyn Rockwell Jr., the Institute’s foremost resident intellectual is David Gordon—a close friend and disciple of Rothbard. Like Mises and Rothbard, Gordon is Jewish. So too was Burton Blumert, whose Center for Libertarian Studies helped establish the Mises Institute before later integrating into it.

Following Blumert’s passing in 2009, only Rockwell and Gordon remain from the original guard. Gordon serves as the scholarly editor of the Mises Review and stands as the ultimate authority on all things Rothbardian. He is deeply revered by the Institute’s student body; some of his student fans even affectionately refer to him as the mastermind or “God” due to his encyclopedic knowledge on virtually every subject.

Image: Burton Blumert, Lew Rockwell, David Gordon and Murray Rothbard

Together, Rockwell and Gordon have led the Institute for decades, dramatically expanding its footprint into a multi-building campus where thousands of university students and scholars have been educated on the principles of liberty.

Video Link

Link to video Why I Support the Mises Institute.

Masterminds

Austro-Libertarianism is renowned not only for its free-market ideology and cultural conservatism, but particularly for its anti-war, isolationist foreign policy. This stance is rooted in an Austro-Libertarian Theory and historical narrative that views the United States as the world’s foremost imperialist power. At first glance, the Austro-Libertarian theory of history appears paradoxical. Much like Marxist theory, it posits that world history is largely driven by genetic and economic forces. However, unlike Marxism, it assigns a key role to specific individuals who operate at the crossroads of history when economic crises and wars create turning points. These key actors can be great generals, politicians, or entrepreneurs—but they can also be intellectuals. Occasionally, these intellectuals act as true masterminds, steering the course of history toward either liberty or tyranny through the sheer force of their ideas and personality.

Austro-Libertarians believe that during the last century, two great masterminds successfully turned the wheel of history toward liberty: Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard. Mises championed the fight against socialism. His disciple, Rothbard, not only expanded Mises’ work into a comprehensive, rationalist anti-statist paradigm, but also laid the foundations for the modern paleolibertarian movement alongside allies like Howard Buffett, Ron Paul and Patrick Buchanan.

The most famous of these allies is former Congressman Ron Paul, who remains closely associated with the institute. His historic campaigns in 2008 and 2012 brought him remarkably close to securing the Republican presidential nomination. Today, the Ron Paul Liberty Movement continues to exert significant influence within the Republican Party, MAGA and the larger libertarian movement.

link

Japanese population falls below 120m for first time in 42 years

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

TOKYO (Kyodo) — The number of Japanese nationals fell below 120 million for the first time in 42 years to 119,736,483 at the start of this year, the government said Wednesday, underscoring the challenges faced by a nation battling declining birth rates.

The figure as of Jan. 1 showed a drop of 917,000 people from a year earlier, the largest fall since comparable data became available in 1968, according to data from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.

The number of foreign residents, meanwhile, rose 354,000 to a record 4,031,159. The ministry began compiling relevant data in 2013.

Despite government efforts to reverse the declining birth trend, the country recorded around 670,000 births, a record low, compared with around 1.59 million deaths.

link

Let the population fall and deal with it. There are many advantages to a shrinking population. A nation should not be a population Ponzi scheme, wherein only a few benefit from the imported labor. Always wanting population growth, even excluding the price of destroying your country, is an argument ad absurdum; a logical, philosophical and sociological failure. ABN

Afghan arrested over death of British woman found in a suitcase ‘says he was angry with her because she wanted him to join Christian group’

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

An Afghan man arrested for allegedly killing a British woman and then stuffing her body inside a suitcase said he had become angry with her because she was trying to get him to join a ‘strict’ Christian group.

The body of Elisabeth Jane Ross, 38, who was also known as Lisa, was discovered inside the suitcase by a homeless man in an abandoned carpark in the Kypseli district of Athens on July 18.

Greek police arrested a 26-year-old man on Sunday night with graphic details emerging about the crime and the testimony his wife provided that led to his capture.

And police sources revealed that the man – who had converted to Christianity – told his wife that he had argued with Ms Ross because she wanted him to join her ‘stricter’ Christian group.

Ms Ross, 38, who was from Edinburgh, had been a regular visitor to Greece over the past seven years volunteering with NGOs helping refugees, homeless people and other vulnerable groups.

It has emerged that Ms Ross had previously volunteered with the One Heart organisation when in Greece which specialises in providing medical support to refugees, particularly those from Afghanistan or Iran.

Ms Ross's phone was seeminly still being used after she died

Elisabeth Jane Ross was found dead with her body stuffed inside a suitcase in Athens, Greece

link

A very large downside of all of the Abrahamic religious sects is their adamancy about ‘belief’ and their adamancy about their interpretations of scripture. Belief is always dubious in general and in its particulars. Few if any humans can be sure of any of it. Religions which do not recognize this obvious philosophical condition tend to become rigid, even fanatical. The psychologies engendered by Abrahamic beliefs are neither intellectually open and honest nor wholesome. They are not ethically or rationally sound. Buddhists can always get along with Christians or any Abrahamic sect, but the reverse is not always possible. I have a Christian friend, a good friend, who honestly believes Jesus loves me so much I will go to hell for all eternity if I don’t love Him back. This friend is a good person and has backed away from his rigid framing of Christianity, but still, it’s still in there. Overall, Abrahamic rigidity blinds adherents by preventing psychological and spiritual development. This lack of development within all of the Abrahamics is right now contributing to the rapid downfall of the West because: 1) the Christians cannot embrace the possibility and thus defend themselves against the invasion and infiltration of other Abrahamics who hate them; and 2) the other Abrahamics rigidly believe it is God’s Will that they must infiltrate, conquer and destroy the West. Virtually all of them are delighted to be part of the downfall of the West; it is their rigid belief that that is God’s Will. Guys, all of that that is bronze age nonsense. Virtually all Western atheists who have left Christianity, even hate Christianity, typically retain a crazy species of adamancy because that is the basic mindset inculcated in them from their experiences of the world around them. In place of Christianity they substitute, identity politics, woke, climate change, communism, welcome the invaders, anti-religious fanaticism, or,, worst of all, a dull sense of meaninglessness because they cannot find a way to fill the vacuum of non-belief. Guys, you do not need to have a rigid belief to experience spiritual joy and indescribable contentment. ABN

Response to a reader:

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

FIML provides the best possible data upon which you can see your functioning mind (your karma) in real-time. once you accumulate hundreds of FIML data points you will see that the abstractions which you have always relied on to define you and the world around you are distractions from the actual reality of consciousness

abstractions are at a different level of thought from the real-time, real-world karmic functioning of your mind

your FIML partner is the only place to get this precious data from. no other part of reality can answer you. only another authentic human

ABN

Long-term and short-term memory are obviously connected

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

And also, they are separably analyzable, and fundamentally one in the same thing working on different percepta1, at different speeds and at different and combined times. They have different capacities, become conscious at different times or at the same times in different measure. They hold or embrace all we know of our bodies and minds. Are they existential YOLO solipsisms? Or are they connected to something else, as time and space are connected, God and man, the Buddha mind and the ordinary mind? Are they beyond time or do they manufacture it or simply dwell in it?

  1. Percepta is the plural form of the Latin noun perceptum, meaning “something perceived” or the objects/aspects apprehended during the act of perception.  ↩︎

Micro, meso, and macro FIML

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Micro FIML practice is basic to all FIML practice.

(A description of micro FIML can be found here: How to do FIML.)

Basic or micro FIML provides a sturdy foundation for many other kinds of interpersonal discussions. This is so because basic FIML makes partners confident that they can say what they think without fearing that their partner will significantly misunderstand them.

Why is that? The reason is if your partner interprets what you have said in a palpable—and especially a negative—way, they will ask you about it. Once they have asked you, you can clarify what you meant, change it, expand on it, explain it, or do anything else you want with it as long as you are being honest.

Basic FIML explicates all new clouds that appear on the horizon. If your partner speaks or communicates in a way that causes a small cloud to appear on your horizon and you have time, bring it up immediately using the basic FIML technique linked above. If you don’t have time to bring it up immediately, do it later when you do have time if the cloud is still there. Even if the cloud is gone, it can still be interesting to bring it up later because you can discuss the incident and learn more about yourselves from that. Very small incidents are often the most interesting because data points are clear and strong emotions are not likely to be aroused.

No FIML partner should ever carry around a shadow of misgiving or negativity about their partner without saying something about it. This is where meso and macro levels of FIML come into play.

Meso and macro FIML come into play when you discover that even though you have been doing basic FIML perfectly and dealt with every cloud that appeared on your horizon, still there is a shadow or haze developing in your mind.

You can’t remember when it started or how it started, but you know it is there.

If you have been doing basic FIML and are reasonably skilled in it, you should be able to bring up the matter of a gathering haze in your mind and clear it with your partner. Maybe you partner is spending too much time away from you or too close to you. Maybe you are starting to feel weird about something they keep saying. No single incident of their saying whatever it is has bothered you enough to mention it, but they keep saying it and that is getting to you. Once you notice anything like that, just bring it up and discuss it at a meso level while relying on basic micro FIML practice to steer you toward a good resolution that works for both of you.

Another example of a meso discussion might be something like: you are a bit tired, your partner says something and you respond in what seems a pleasant way to you and they respond to that in a way that seems sharp or restrictive to you. Since you are tired, you don’t do basic FIML at the right moment but instead respond sharply to what you had perceived as their sharpness.

If your partner questions you on that and/or if you notice it yourself, just do a meso FIML discussion that brings in all of the factors you are aware of. Your habit of doing basic FIML will make it much easier to have conversations on meso or macro levels than if you had never done basic FIML at all.

A macro level FIML discussion might entail a growing shift in your understanding of any macro subject—science, religion, philosophy, politics, etc.

As with meso discussions, macro discussions will be much easier and more enjoyable if partners know how to do basic FIML.

Basic FIML solves most communication problems by helping partners be honest with each other in ways that are helpful and productive without being phony. Basic FIML also helps partners sail past the many minor snags that can occur in conversations, such as quibbling over word choices, minor details, tone of voice, gestures, and so on.

This happens because basic FIML will already have provided many examples of small snags and how to overcome them. It does take some practice to get to this point, but it is not much harder than learning to sew or make pizza. Requires some work and there are better and worse results, but once you get going the benefits should be clear enough to keep you going.

In my view, FIML will not work for partners only if a misinterpretation is not addressed, not honestly addressed, or not substantially addressed from the micro level on up. If you always jump in at meso and macro levels, you will almost certainly cause more problems than you will solve.

See also: Micro, meso, and macro levels of human understanding

Modern psychology is almost entirely the theory and treatment of the ‘self of the gaps’

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

The “self of the gaps” is the self that fills in the many gaps of understanding that occur during interpersonal communication.

These gaps can be small or large, but they are always there and there are many of them. Almost all people everywhere build their personalities on their need to fill these gaps.

They have been with you since you became conscious, You were raised on them. You can will yourself through them. Or theorize yourself over them. You can be confused by them or you can use them to confuse and control others. Malignant egos and narcissists thrive on gaps of understanding. Kinder people can be and often are devastated by them.

No one is free of them. Gaps arise frequently and can perdure for decades, whole lifetimes.

Communication gaps are filled with assumptions, illusions, wishful thinking, paranoia, emotionality, habit. When people visit a psychologist, a root cause is always going to be many painful gaps that have been internalized, reified, filled with wrong assumptions, make-believe.

The only way to correct a “self of the gaps” is FIML practice. Only FIML focuses precisely on real-time, real-world communication gaps and fixes them several orders of magnitude better than what they were.

FIML or something similar has never been discovered before because it comes very close to violating a fundamental language instinct; the instinct to recoil at being questioned personally and quickly. Almost all people feel threatened, insulted, attacked when questioned quickly, especially if the question involves something we just said. More precisely: especially if the question involves “personal” contents of the working memory, out of which we just spoke. Doesn’t have to be anything bad in the working memory; it’s just that that information is close to home and almost never shared for itself.

FIML “comes close to violating” this instinct but it most assuredly does not actually do that. Instead, it assuages our tendency to fear being questioned. FIML is never a gotcha question. It is always a question that arises out of an explicit previously made agreement. Any FIML question can be truthfully answered, “I would rather not say.”

By doing FIML, malignant old gaps are gradually filled with truthful data while new gaps are much less likely to form or grow. FIML can be difficult to understand because it entails an entirely new way of looking at human psychology. By focusing on small segments of conversation (psychological morphemes) FIML enables partners to see and understand how their minds are actually working in real time.

This replaces the need to rely on external theories of psychology by just examining what is actually there.

PS: My SO and FIML partner came up with the term “self of the gaps” this morning.

FIML provides an artist’s point of view

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

Through real-time inquiries during real moments of real life, FIML reveals the palette and tools of the artist, as they are being used.

As the receiver of a FIML inquiry, you are asked to reflect on the moments just passing.

Your answer provides a lot of information to both you and your partner.

Your partner also has information and insights into what their mind was doing.

These shared insights are the details of your psychologies as they are actually functioning in a real situation.

It is transformative to see these details often.

To do this, I think you have to use a “game” like FIML because FIML has no presuppositions. FIML does not ask you to believe anything; just do the method.

Chicken is not as healthy as most people believe

~ ABN ~ Leave a comment

link

I, for one, believe this is true. Not sure what people say today, but in the not-so-distant past many Chinese believed chicken causes cancer. Modern factory-bred and raised chickens live gruesome lives. For this and many other foods and products, farm-fresh and close to home quality produce is well-worth the extra money it costs. If it’s a good product from a good outfit, that’s the right thing to buy. Think of it as charity-spending if you like. Either that or try raising your own high-quality chickens (or anything else) and selling them; then you will see how much work it is. Farming and ranching are hard work and small producers who provide quality products should be supported by their communities. I hope in the future, assuming we have one, many more people will be able to make a good living providing high-quality foods and artisan products. Good food, reasonable exercise and sunlight are the keys to good health and a healthy mind. Being generous with local quality producers is key to getting more of them everywhere. Full disclosure: I do not own a farm but have worked extensively on one. ABN