the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

I think jimmy recently paraphrased this theory on a different thread.

I wonder what their theory of meditation would be.

That's why you have to set the intention and let it manifest. Get ahead of the cycle instead of getting stuck reacting

...or you could just let go and enjoy the ride

Let it go and let it flow.

"Go with the flow" sure. But that's not what this is discussing, is it?

This is talking about our actions and behaviors occurring and then us making up stories for why we did them. This has long been my understanding. We're rationalization engines. We do what we do and explain it to ourselves in a way that makes us feel good.

This stimulus-response can be completely unconscious, amoeba-level existence. We're jerked around by our whims and desires and impulses and reactions based upon the specific neural pathways we've cultivated.

This is great if we've achieved some zhong ding and unitiy with the Tao or whatever, and we're responding skillfully to what the universe throws at us, great, go with the flow.

Some of us are still not perfect, we struggle with addiction, trauma, anxiety, fear, all manner of self-limiting patterns. I know it's hard to conceive of from atop your ivory tower, but my boots are in the mud and it's dirty down here.

Those are the people I want to help with my art. I could care less about beating people up.

To that end, this model ties right back into basic CBT/DBT concepts. We set up the machine, and then when that function is needed, it springs into action.

So tune the machine. Calibrate it to behave in the way you want instead of being lead around by sense input and response.

I'm not much of a fan of Kevin Kostner, but there was a line in "The Bodyguard" that has always stuck with me. Something like "I spend a lot of time training to not respond like other people"

And that to me sums it up. Sure, go with the flow, be one with the Tao and be unstoppable.... but fix your keel first. Get your sails properly trimmed and maintained. Fly. Otherwise you're just a disorganized wreck buffeted about by the storms of every passing phenomenon.

I see a different "core message" here; I see yet another confirmation that we can't help do what we do and be who we are. How we rationalize it matters even less, because that can't be helped either...

We can't help it in the moment, but we can tune ourselves to particular patterns.

Look at it like, a perfect human will naturally respond perfectly, naturally in harmony with Tao.

But we're flawed, we have these patterns that prevent us from easily accessing that flow.

You say "let go" but even that is a conditioned response, at least that's what 20 years of Taijiquan has taught me. With most of us, our natural inclination is to hold on.... tightly.

It's easy to just say "I am who I am" and behave reflexively. It's transcendent to start being aware of the negative response patterns. We call it growth and maturity, change, whatever. In some cases, sure, our reactions mellow based simply on changes to our hormones over our lifetime. I believe most of that positive change, at least for me, is a result of conscious effort to reprogram my immediate reponses.

A minor example is in the reflexive greetings.

When someone would ask me "How are you today?" I would say "Good, thanks."

But I don't like that, it's not grammatically pleasing or reflective of the person I actually am. So I've trained myself to say "I am well, thank you. How are you today?"

Small, minor example, but the key to everything. Language guides thought, thought sets patterns, behavior follows patterns.

You can take the same approach to ablist, sexist, racist microaggressions and slurs, negative self-talk, self-limiting beliefs and behaviors.

You most definitely CAN help who you are and what you do, but maybe it's less adding on than it is stripping away the bullshit.

Dmitri, are you really a fatalist in terms of philosophy? or a super determinist in terms of physics/chemistry?

But, afa consciousness, I wonder about artificial intelligence, as in the Turing test. Don't we measure whether something is conscious by whether it can communicate with us? Granted that the human questions aren't are absolutely predetermined, why would the machine's answer be? The human question is biochemical; the machine answer is electro-mechanical.

If machine consciousness becomes a reality based on some human algorithm, we better hope the human programmer wasn't a psychopath. Skynet comes to mind.

a machine (let's say it's a chess program)
- can make some (chess) decisions
- have a memory of the decisions
- assess future possible decisions and moves and the opponent decisions to make the next decision
- "learn" over time to improve at this decision making for future games.

It seems like the theory says human consciousness comes from the above doing/memory/deciding. But it doesn't seem to apply to this machine.

You can take the same approach to ablist, sexist, racist microaggressions and slurs, negative self-talk, self-limiting beliefs and behaviors.

Well, it's true that some people will say things have to be the way they are just to excuse the things they do. People will say it's God's will that they murder, or that science has determined they are supposed to be in the positions they are. The Puritans did; Napoleon did; shucks, those opinions are common.

I don't think Dmitri is trying to justify behavior. He's arguing, iinm, that thoughts are the products of brain chemistry over which individuals have no control.

You most definitely CAN help who you are and what you do, but maybe it's less adding on than it is stripping away the bullshit.

Imo, that's a bit too absolute. We use chemicals to treat people who can't control their negative behaviors. But, I agree that controlling behavior is possible. I think our behaviors are motivated by more than thoughts. The article refers to the unconscious. Well, I think of seeing an attractive woman at a party while my girlfriend was away. I could always say I had no choice. But, my girlfriend would disagree, and something would tell me. There's an old saying about gonads and conscience.

It seems like the theory says human consciousness comes from the above doing/memory/deciding. But it doesn't seem to apply to this machine.

Iinm, Alpha-zero worked on that principle. There wasn't an algorithm for chess. It wasn't taught how the pieces should move, just how they move, and the objective of the game. Then it just kept playing millions of games, finding its own moves through experience.

Imo, the difference is in the human emotions that affect our behaviors sub and unconsciously. A chess computer is like a Terminator: it can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity, remorse, or fear, and it will absolutely will not stop until you are checkmated.

Speaking as a diagnosed manic depressive on psych meds... the chemicals/hormones are just another stimulus you learn to interpret and respond to.

A computer program/ai can make decisions based on input and algorithms and can learn to a limited extent, but it can't have an opinion about it, or itself. That ability to be aware of oneself AND have an opinion or feeling about it is what separates us from machines and even to a lesser extent animals. They also have feelings, aka chemical/emotional responses, but they aren't terribly self aware.

That curse of self-awareness is where we get free will, the knowledge of good and evil in the bible that made them want to cover their nakedness.

The first thought I had about this was shen-yi-qi-jin flow and the qi stagnating when it's double-weighted/in the same place as the yi. Music is how I relate the concept. When you're performing you don't have time to listen to yourself and THEN continue. You have to be listening to the notes you've just played and possibly adjusting timing and pressure and intensity, etc to match the band, while simultaneously playing the current note and preparing to play the next.

Formally written and choreographed songs with a set sequence are like our form play, we have a little room for personal expression but not much in the way of spontaneity.

Fighting/partner work is more like a jam session, everything else still applies but now you have the added dimension of the next note not always being decided. You join with the mind and ebb and flow and give and take the lead as the energy directs.

Here in particular is where simply surrendering to the flow doesn't work. We've got to program the right patterns and responses to deal with the chaos of the situation and take control of it, so we don't get beaten.

Um, afa the article, my understanding is that we make decisions a split second before we are consciously aware of making them. So, the authors say the decisions are done unconsciously. For ex., my decision to pick up the beer bottle is made before I pick it up (and I'm only conscious of it while I'm doing it). I agree with the conclusion, but I don't think that supports the idea that I had no choice or that it was inevitable.

Music is a great analogy, specifically when it comes to improvisation. I think of Coltrane's "Giant Steps." The changes are just too fast to "consciously" keep up an improvisation.