Bliss - do you want it?

[Blowtus]

Yeah... tapping a button seems a little easier than learning this NLP jiggery - if I want bliss and both are options to get it, why would I take the harder option?

I don't think the idea that we must work hard for a happy life is a farce imposed upon us for anyones specific benefit. To me it seems a reality occasionally suggested to us for the benefit of most / all. Accepting that 'bliss' can be had without effort sounds like a rejection of understanding (for understanding requires some effort) and a throwback to a more primitive, instinctual mode of behaviour... which would soon see you clashing with those around you, likely ending up in jail. Can you still find your primitive bliss in jail??

 

[Silver Incubus]

it's false advertising to say NLP can do any of this "in an instant".

What brought you to this board today? were you not happy enough with your life to add nothing more to it?---surely you didn't come here to become unhappy or ruin how good you were feeling, so presumably you thought of it as a tool to obtaining something that you would enjoy having...

why didn't you just anchor the memory of another time you visited this board rather than waste your time manufacturing a new experience?

the fact is, whatever the brain is capable of, people are for the most point far too lazy for... yes you can orgasm with the power of the mind, yes you can feel good without alcohol or chocolate, or resolve boredom and loneliness without reading or chatting on a forum, but people prefer to take these shortcuts, presumably because they're 'easier' or 'faster' than the instant cognitive tactics of NLP.

Well I came to this board because I have just recently lost my job and I have nothing to do during the day, so I thought, 'what the hell, the "know it alls" might appreciate something that would make their lives easier and more enjoyable' , but as usual, I get the same old flak about the same old shit that seems to hang around this board like a bad stink.

To me, it doesn't matter if any of you are miserable, seeking that fleeting happiness, or hell, want, like a drug addict, to have a machine hooked to your brain stimulating your different zones.

Blowtus, Honestly, what I put up there was all you have to do. Anchoring is creating a stimulus response point through either sound, visual cues, or more common, kinesthetic anchors. So when you think about it, you say, touch a spot on your knee, or a freckle or whatever. If you do it before the experience reaches the climax then it will have full effect.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3E-pJdF_TY0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22wkXrbd6tk

 

[Seditious]

Well I came to this board because I have just recently lost my job and I have nothing to do during the day, so I thought, 'what the hell, the "know it alls" might appreciate something that would make their lives easier and more enjoyable' , but as usual, I get the same old flak about the same old shit that seems to hang around this board like a bad stink.

well, it was nice of you to show up the false know-it-alls with your omniscient insight, but you missed the point---your presence itself was a contradiction to your wisdom... you can merely choose 'oh hey, I'll anchor orgasm to a freckle and stare at my hands all day mind-cumming' rather than all this bother, but instead you choose the far less instant satisfaction... why?---you have free time, and you're bored, either you want to be less bored or more bored... I would imagine you're looking to be more satisfied than less, so why jump through hoops, why all this ritual, this excess bells and whistles when you can just instantly get whatever mental state you want?

Like I said, I know the basics of NLP, but I'm well aware you can't even practice it for the extent of one boring afternoon, let alone consider it anything of a substitute for artificially enduced sincere happiness. So, while it's delightful to point out the capacity of our mind, was it ever in question, it's rather irrelevant to the thread, as you yourself are a living example of it's limitations.

 

[OldScratch]

Of course I would.

Some people would rather feel pain than nothing at all. I would rather feel nothing at all than feel even a tiny bit of pain. That is my answer.

The idea that pain and suffering are necessary to a happy life... that is a farce imposed upon us so that we will keep working and doing shit we hate. To sustain society.

What a horrible life that would seem to be. If one is not willing to risk even the slightest bit of pain, they may indeed guarantee that they will likely feel nothing! What of the natural pain of loss, rejection, death, etc? How can one ever hope to accomplish anything remotely noble or wonderful, without the risk of pain - of failure, of physical pain, of more loss and defeat?
To feel nothing is to not live at all, is it? While I appreciate the cynicism of your last statement, I don't think that is quite the reality of the situation - pain and the risk of pain go well beyond such mundane issues.

 

[Seditious]

How can one ever hope to accomplish anything remotely noble or wonderful, without the risk of pain - of failure, of physical pain, of more loss and defeat?

Interjection by way of Schopenhauer: Why would someone ever want to accomplish something noble or wonderful if they're not unhappy.

To feel nothing is to not live at all, is it?

surely 'nothing' and 'nothing bad' are as different 'sound asleep' and 'cozy Sunday morning in bed' respectively.

 

[Silver Incubus]

well, it was nice of you to show up the false know-it-alls with your omniscient insight, but you missed the point---your presence itself was a contradiction to your wisdom... you can merely choose 'oh hey, I'll anchor orgasm to a freckle and stare at my hands all day mind-cumming' rather than all this bother, but instead you choose the far less instant satisfaction... why?---you have free time, and you're bored, either you want to be less bored or more bored... I would imagine you're looking to be more satisfied than less, so why jump through hoops, why all this ritual, this excess bells and whistles when you can just instantly get whatever mental state you want?

1. I don't claim to be omniscient.
2. My wisdom is only what I have experienced, nothing more.
3. This board is entertaining and stimulating at times.
4. I didn't realize you were a psychic who read minds. Its as if you know what I am not thinking of. Why do you make yourself out to be such a goof?
5. I find both interaction with people fun (as it might have been a better assumption instead of the crazy mental stories you created), and helping people release those binding limitations put onto us.
6. I was and am feeling great as I type, so how the fuck would YOU know anyways.

Like I said, I know the basics of NLP, but I'm well aware you can't even practice it for the extent of one boring afternoon, let alone consider it anything of a substitute for artificially enduced sincere happiness. So, while it's delightful to point out the capacity of our mind, was it ever in question, it's rather irrelevant to the thread, as you yourself are a living example of it's limitations.

You claim to know "something about NLP" but I think you are full of shit. And everything you claim to know about it is also false. I have done NLP and hypnosis for over a year now and been successful every time. And just because you compliment me at the beginning of a sentence doesn't grant you the insult at the end. I only found it sad and pathetic really. Aren't you suppose to be an adult or something approximately like that? On this topic you clearly have nothing to say and use to many words to say that nothing because what I have said is relevant to the thread for the simple reasoning that if you can already alter you brain chemistry at will, then their is no point for the machine. It simply would be doing all those things the person already does, and therefore be a waste of time and energy. If your brain has that capacity for bliss, then you can attain it without machines, it is just that YOU don't know how to, not everyone doesn't know how to.
Unless you have some kind of revelation, you will never know how to. As your mind believes its limitations, then you tell others that they are like yourself which is obviously false as well.

 

[Blowtus]

Silver Incubus - to re-phrase Seditious' point, if you can alter your brain chemistry at will, why wouldn't you simply do that instead of logging on here and typing stuff?

 

[Blowtus]

Interjection by way of Schopenhauer: Why would someone ever want to accomplish something noble or wonderful if they're not unhappy.

Can't see that they would.
It would bring me unhappiness to accept that there is no worth in anything, so I do not, and thus could not press that button

 

[Silver Incubus]

Silver Incubus - to re-phrase Seditious' point, if you can alter your brain chemistry at will, why wouldn't you simply do that instead of logging on here and typing stuff?

"3. This board is entertaining and stimulating at times."
sitting around doing nothing doesn't accomplish much. I need to eat like everyone else.

Besides there are more then one type of bliss.

 

[Seditious]

It would bring me unhappiness to accept that there is no worth in anything, so I do not, and thus could not press that button

I only find unhappiness in trying not to accept it, rather like not believing in God... a godless life may be upsetting to a Theist struggling to deny that reality, but any Atheist will tell you it's nothing to be upset about if you actually accept it.

 

[Seditious]

1. I don't claim to be omniscient.

oh, not omniscient, just knowing better than the 'know-it-alls'... my mistake.

You claim to know "something about NLP" but I think you are full of shit. And everything you claim to know about it is also false.

lmao, cos saying it makes it true.

BTW, You claim to have done NLP and hypnosis for over a year now and been successful every time, but everything you claim to know about it is also false.

There we go... an equally strong case.

And just because you compliment me at the beginning of a sentence doesn't grant you the insult at the end. I only found it sad and pathetic really.

Did I compliment you?---I didn't mean to.

I find your inability to defend your nonsense, or even act on it, pathetic, but I didn't know we were here to judge rather than discuss.

if you can already alter you brain chemistry at will, then their is no point for the machine.

and yet you have need for the machine sitting in front of you.

again, you're your own refutation.

If your brain has that capacity for bliss, then you can attain it without machines, it is just that YOU don't know how to, not everyone doesn't know how to.

I -know how- to attain it just as you do (not as much as you in your practice of NLP, but in the theoretical understanding of NLP theory and patterns and my own experience with it.), I just don't do it any better than you do.

 

[OldScratch]

Interjection by way of Schopenhauer: Why would someone ever want to accomplish something noble or wonderful if they're not unhappy.


surely 'nothing' and 'nothing bad' are as different 'sound asleep' and 'cozy Sunday morning in bed' respectively.

I'm not sure I understand where you are going with the Schopenhauer-ish idea. One cannot look to do something grand unless they are...unhappy? No wonder I never got some of Schopenhauer's pessism for the sake of it.

The second reference I don't understand at all, as I didn't see "nothing bad" as an option noted anywhere. If the choice were purely to feel nothing or feel nothing bad, that would be different. But the assertion was that if pain were a risk of feeling - period, it would then be better to feel nothing at all than to risk ever feeling bad(pain), no? Have I read too much...or too little into the discussion?

 

[Seditious]

I'm not sure I understand where you are going with the Schopenhauer-ish idea. One cannot look to do something grand unless they are...unhappy? No wonder I never got some of Schopenhauer's pessism for the sake of it.

He said the same things you find in Buddhism, I just prefer his language.

by 'unhappy' I mean a very benign idea, perhaps you think of it more strongly and a synonym would be better used here. 'suffering' is another one, some people consider it synonymous with 'excruciating pain' but I use it to note any disquiet or disagreeableness... any, using the Buddhist language, state of suffering, a condition where you're grasping for things, desiring things to be different than they are.
I can't want to scratch my head unless I'm unhappy with it being how it is (perhaps stimulating an itch in my experience) (hilariously enough, I was playing NLP mindtricks regarding exactly that this morning before ever checking the latest posts here )

What I suggested, to me is just "Aristotle + Schopenhauer": You do some act of volition supposedly because it in itself is [perceived as] good or it is seen to attain an end which is [perceived as] good. From that you merely ask yourself why you're doing it, or, to put it in the single-variable form---"if I perceived this outcome I desire to have no causal relation to these actions would I still be doing them?"

If it was noble to hand in to the police a suitcase of money you found, which no one/camera saw you discover, well, did you instantly respond automatically 'I do what is noble because it is noble', or do you tend to see noble things as useful things, like manners are?
In any case, if it was 'I do it because it is noble, regardless consequences' the question is simply rephrased to elucidate the inclusion of psychological consequences---if not doing what was noble/proper/decent/humane/whatever didn't make you feel worse about yourself (is that 'negative reinforcement'? I forget) then would you do it?' (if so, I'm curious to know why---how you (anyone) act by choice without motive, or just what that motive is which is hidden from you, or hid by you from me.)

it's just demanding 'why does an animal take any course of action?' put in the situation unique to humans---conceptual values. I don't see how our nature would ever differ so remarkably with merely such an addition, so of course I'm skeptical of any of the nonsense people claim about not doing things because they're hoping it will assist in 'mood management' as Daniel Goleman would call it.

The second reference I don't understand at all, as I didn't see "nothing bad" as an option noted anywhere. If the choice were purely to feel nothing or feel nothing bad, that would be different. But the assertion was that if pain were a risk of feeling - period, it would then be better to feel nothing at all than to risk ever feeling bad(pain), no? Have I read too much...or too little into the discussion?

Dunno, maybe I have, I wasn't didn't re-read the post you were referring to when replying, but I assumed, given the nature of this thread, he wouldn't have meant 'to be nothing, and be unable to feel', but 'to be alive/conscious, but not enjoying anything great, nor suffering anything shit', more a neutrality (which is what I consider bliss to be, I don't consider bliss to be approached by heroin and orgasms, that's probably another terminology issue causing havoc in this thread).

 

[OldScratch]

He said the same things you find in Buddhism, I just prefer his language.

by 'unhappy' I mean a very benign idea, perhaps you think of it more strongly and a synonym would be better used here. 'suffering' is another one, some people consider it synonymous with 'excruciating pain' but I use it to note any disquiet or disagreeableness... any, using the Buddhist language, state of suffering, a condition where you're grasping for things, desiring things to be different than they are.
I can't want to scratch my head unless I'm unhappy with it being how it is (perhaps stimulating an itch in my experience) (hilariously enough, I was playing NLP mindtricks regarding exactly that this morning before ever checking the latest posts here )

What I suggested, to me is just "Aristotle + Schopenhauer": You do some act of volition supposedly because it in itself is [perceived as] good or it is seen to attain an end which is [perceived as] good. From that you merely ask yourself why you're doing it, or, to put it in the single-variable form---"if I perceived this outcome I desire to have no causal relation to these actions would I still be doing them?"

If it was noble to hand in to the police a suitcase of money you found, which no one/camera saw you discover, well, did you instantly respond automatically 'I do what is noble because it is noble', or do you tend to see noble things as useful things, like manners are?
In any case, if it was 'I do it because it is noble, regardless consequences' the question is simply rephrased to elucidate the inclusion of psychological consequences---if not doing what was noble/proper/decent/humane/whatever didn't make you feel worse about yourself (is that 'negative reinforcement'? I forget) then would you do it?' (if so, I'm curious to know why---how you (anyone) act by choice without motive, or just what that motive is which is hidden from you, or hid by you from me.)

it's just demanding 'why does an animal take any course of action?' put in the situation unique to humans---conceptual values. I don't see how our nature would ever differ so remarkably with merely such an addition, so of course I'm skeptical of any of the nonsense people claim about not doing things because they're hoping it will assist in 'mood management' as Daniel Goleman would call it.




Dunno, maybe I have, I wasn't didn't re-read the post you were referring to when replying, but I assumed, given the nature of this thread, he wouldn't have meant 'to be nothing, and be unable to feel', but 'to be alive/conscious, but not enjoying anything great, nor suffering anything shit', more a neutrality (which is what I consider bliss to be, I don't consider bliss to be approached by heroin and orgasms, that's probably another terminology issue causing havoc in this thread).

I see where you were going now, though there may indeed be some terminological issues effecting us here! I'm pressed for time right now, so I have to go back and re-read your post for better comprehension an all...still not sure if I agree or not!

 

[Seditious]

sweet as, mate. never any rush, I'm off to bed now anyways.

have a good one. : )

 

[Silver Incubus]

oh, not omniscient, just knowing better than the 'know-it-alls'... my mistake.


lmao, cos saying it makes it true.

BTW, You claim to have done NLP and hypnosis for over a year now and been successful every time, but everything you claim to know about it is also false.

There we go... an equally strong case.



Did I compliment you?---I didn't mean to.

I find your inability to defend your nonsense, or even act on it, pathetic, but I didn't know we were here to judge rather than discuss.


and yet you have need for the machine sitting in front of you.

again, you're your own refutation.


I -know how- to attain it just as you do (not as much as you in your practice of NLP, but in the theoretical understanding of NLP theory and patterns and my own experience with it.), I just don't do it any better than you do.

Honestly, I don't understand why you have a problem with me, but so far I haven't really got anything out of your posts.
See you are one of the "know it alls" simply because you think you know everything about anything and you are always right about everything. I on the other hand know that I don't know everything and am actually humbling myself. You took it as if it was the opposite and assumed what I meant.

lmao, cos saying it makes it true.

BTW, You claim to have done NLP and hypnosis for over a year now and been successful every time, but everything you claim to know about it is also false.

There we go... an equally strong case.

This actually proves my point of what you said, and it is exactly what I thought you would post. You claim the same things and mean it to be true, and all I did was copy it and change it to myself.

I find your ability to define nonsense lacking. You lack the knowledge to judge it, let alone the experience. You are the one judging me here not the other way around.

Oh you must have forgot we were talking about a device or Machine as I referred to it that could create bliss. Not a computer, so why are you talking about a computer and not the imaginary bliss machine. That is bad argumentation right there that you have been throwing out at me, really it makes me confused as to what you are talking about. Please try to follow the topic. OF COURSE I use a computer, I was never talking about computers, you did.

Well even if you know some NLP it doesn't credit you as anything. Seriously you can know the theory of surgery, it doesn't automatically make you a surgeon. I have helped over 50 people in the past year(including my bandmates, friends of friends, and others) which is hard experience with this stuff, not just theoretical understanding of it. I know what I have achieved in myself and in others, is that proof enough for you, cause I don't see you offering me any kind of proof, and yet you claim so much. So where did you learn NLP from anyways? I learned mine from Richard Bandler, JohnGrinder,John LaValle and Kenrick Cleveland mostly. I was inspired however by Derren Brown's usage of it.

And my point again is if the bliss machine can make your brain experience bliss then that means that your brain is already capable of doing such. This then means that this certain technology not only could be abused like a drug which can also induce pleasurable states, which again is only a reaction in your body which is creating the response.
For example, I have made some drunk without them drinking alcohol. I have made people stoned without taking drugs. I've made people laugh at the sound of a fan. There is still much I need to learn but the more I do it the better I get. I still want to have someone feel no pain, as I do know how to do this, just never really had the chance to utilize it.

 

[Seditious]

Honestly, I don't understand why you have a problem with me.

I'm not sure why you think you're special. I have no more problem with you than anyone else. Maybe we just got off on the wrong foot or something.

so far I haven't really got anything out of your posts.

Neither, except recognising just what I need to better address to get through to some people.

See you are one of the "know it alls" simply because you think you know everything about anything and you are always right about everything.

Prove I'm wrong or I'll assume you are, because I know I've reasoned my way to my beliefs but I don't know that you have, so I cannot take your beliefs for granted. It's as simple as that. That is a standard I hold everyone to, simply as a matter of skepticism. I am open to the fact most people are wrong and I'm no different to most people in probably any thing, nonetheless I must adhere to reason, and have no need to explicate humility when skepticism should be taken for granted among philosophers---there's no need to begin every sentence with 'I might be wrong, but...', as much should be assumed, and any arrogance put in check in the process of reasoning.

Oh you must have forgot we were talking about a device or Machine as I referred to it that could create bliss. Not a computer, so why are you talking about a computer and not the imaginary bliss machine. That is bad argumentation right there that you have been throwing out at me, really it makes me confused as to what you are talking about. Please try to follow the topic. OF COURSE I use a computer, I was never talking about computers, you did.

I'm not sure why you're still confused while the other participants seem to understand.

Well even if you know some NLP it doesn't credit you as anything. Seriously you can know the theory of surgery, it doesn't automatically make you a surgeon. I have helped over 50 people in the past year(including my bandmates, friends of friends, and others) which is hard experience with this stuff, not just theoretical understanding of it. I know what I have achieved in myself and in others, is that proof enough for you, cause I don't see you offering me any kind of proof, and yet you claim so much.

I never disputed your ability to use NLP effectively, or NLP's effectiveness, only your two exaggerations, 1. calling it 'instant', and 2. considering it a replacement for any other method of mood management (such as watching TV, or eating chocolate, or helping others for a warm fuzzy feeling (while behaving as if that were not true).

So where did you learn NLP from anyways? I learned mine from Richard Bandler, JohnGrinder,John LaValle and Kenrick Cleveland mostly. I was inspired however by Derren Brown's usage of it.

"I learned mine from Richard Bandler, JohnGrinder"---that's like me saying I learned general relativity from Einstein. They created it, and yea, I don't dispute their work, or know of anyone teaching NLP who contradicts their original work, so you might well say I learned it from them too.

I still want to have someone feel no pain, as I do know how to do this, just never really had the chance to utilize it.

I've only had the opportunity to self-experiment with things like grazes and burns, and basic concepts of NLP work momentarily, but they're not sufficient for the average person to use at will instead of the clumsy employment of behavior-in-the-world as a means for extended periods (Buddhist monks however, I would consider great examples of exactly this ability, and indeed, about as close to achieving the bliss-machine existence without such a device, but that takes a remarkable amount of devotion, something neither of us have... I always end up scratching my head or masturbating -eventually-).

 

[Silver Incubus]

I never disputed your ability to use NLP effectively, or NLP's effectiveness, only your two exaggerations, 1. calling it 'instant', and 2. considering it a replacement for any other method of mood management (such as watching TV, or eating chocolate, or helping others for a warm fuzzy feeling (while behaving as if that were not true).

Well I mean by instant, is that is not like therapy where you go back continuously to get basically nothing. Usually people were ending up with more problems and no solutions. Its instant as in you have a phobia when you come and are without by the time you leave, which could be 2-5 minutes. Plus the anchors when done right can change your mood instantaneously. Well in effect I think it is much more then just a replacement. I mean external things (like the examples you give) creating your moods is a much less effective at getting the caliber of response and control over you emotional states then if you were to do it yourself or with the help of someone trained in NLP.
But you can have you own opinion on it but thats just what I've experienced.

 

[Seditious]

Well I mean by instant, is that is not like therapy where you go back continuously to get basically nothing.

ah ok, put in that context, I see why you'd have said it.

Well in effect I think it is much more then just a replacement. I mean external things (like the examples you give) creating your moods is a much less effective at getting the caliber of response and control over you emotional states then if you were to do it yourself or with the help of someone trained in NLP.

certainly. I feel the same about Zen and CBT and all that other good stuff, it certainly has the potential to have a greater impact than any emotional control as clumsy as sex/eating/tv/etc.

 

[Blowtus]

I only find unhappiness in trying not to accept it, rather like not believing in God... a godless life may be upsetting to a Theist struggling to deny that reality, but any Atheist will tell you it's nothing to be upset about if you actually accept it.

As always your very simplistic and powerful argument is a spur for my thoughts - I always feel like I'm in denial in any discussion along these lines with you, which perhaps I am, but so be it

It seems to me, that the only reason I am able to attach value to my happiness is because it is in contrast to other states, remembered from the past and perceived to be of potential in the future. A cherishing of the moment perhaps? 'Happiness' may still 'feel' the same without such a value attached to it... but without value, well, it's worthless.