transcendental meditation
Robert Forman has done TM for many, many years, and he writes about his experience in this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Enlightenment-Aint-What-Its-Cracked/dp/1846946743/
His perspective is balanced and thoughtful.
You might also be interested in my meditation blog which is often (particularly in earlier posts) but not always from a rationalist perspective:
http://meditationstuff.wordpress.com/2013/12/22/experiences-of-long-term-meditators/
Perfectly beautiful nude people, on demand, with infinite rapid novelty is a superstimulus.
Here is a self-link to my meditation blog; this post has links to other posts:
The blog is a mixture of personal experience, unscientific references, and cherry-picked peer-reviewed research. I specifically talk about the dangers of meditation, with included citations, but unfortunately it’s all mixed in with other stuff. Here is one place to start:
On the Cruelty of Really Teaching Computer Science by prof. dr. Edsger W. Dijkstra:
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD10xx/EWD1036.html
I think the issue is that driving is a process of tiny course corrections, where if you’re slightly off course you don’t die. But, programs are fragile. One bit wrong and you die.
I’m coming at this from ten years of brain fog, unrefreshing sleep, “feeling sick all the time,” etc. Mostly better now; I did a lot of stuff highly specific to my situation. The below mostly helped with enduring it. Remember, I’m just some random idiot on the internet, hope this is helpful, and in no particular order:
http://www.amazon.com/Awareness-Through-Movement-Easy—Do/dp/0062503227/
http://www.amazon.com/The-Lover-Within-Opening-Practice/dp/1581770170
http://www.amazon.com/Male-Multiple-Orgasm-Step—Step/dp/1882899067/
http://store.breathingcenter.com/books—in-english/buteyko-breathing-manual-download
http://www.amazon.com/Acceptance-Commitment-Therapy-Second-Edition/dp/1609189620/
http://www.amazon.com/Get-Your-Mind-Into-Life/dp/1572244259
http://www.amazon.com/Exposure-Therapy-Anxiety-Principles-Practice/dp/146250969X/
http://meditationstuff.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/additive-meditation/
http://www.amazon.com/Compassion-Focused-Therapy-Distinctive-Features/dp/0415448077/
http://www.butyoudontlooksick.com/wpress/articles/written-by-christine/the-spoon-theory/
http://www.amazon.com/HIIT-Intensity-Interval-Training-Explained/dp/1477421599/
Some of John Sarno’s stuff
My meditation blog from a (somewhat) rationalist perspective is now past 40 posts:
This is all stuff that I use:
My “foreground background meditation” http://meditationstuff.wordpress.com/2013/08/25/how-to-do-foregroundbackground-meditation/
Eugene Gendlin’s Focusing http://www.amazon.com/Focusing-Eugene-T-Gendlin/dp/0553278339/
Eugene Gendlin’s Thinking at the Edge http://www.focusing.org/tae.html
Eugene Gendlin’s concept of “direct reference” http://www.amazon.com/Experiencing-Creation-Meaning-Philosophical-Psychological/dp/0810114275/
Jay Earley’s explication of Internal Family Systems Therapy http://www.amazon.com/Self-Therapy-Step-By-Step-Wholeness-Cutting-Edge-Psychotherapy/
The discovery techniques of Coherence Therapy http://www.amazon.com/Unlocking-Emotional-Brain-Eliminating-Reconsolidation/dp/0415897173/
structured analytic techniques http://www.amazon.com/Structured-Analytic-Techniques-Intelligence-Analysis/dp/1608710181/
Hurlburt’s “experience sampling method” http://www.amazon.com/Investigating-Pristine-Inner-Experience-Moments/dp/0521279127/
See also: Warnock’s Dilemma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma
The problem with no response is that there are five possible interpretations:
The post is correct, well-written information that needs no follow-up commentary. There’s nothing more to say except “Yeah, what he said.”
The post is complete and utter nonsense, and no one wants to waste the energy or bandwidth to even point this out.
No one read the post, for whatever reason.
No one understood the post, but won’t ask for clarification, for whatever reason.
No one cares about the post, for whatever reason.
—Bryan C. Warnock
Read the table of contents, read the index, read through the citations, read the preface/forward/intro, possibly read the concluding chapter. Then and only then do I dip into the book in a few targeted places, and then and only then do I (sometimes) read the entire book.
For math courses, I always took the “honors” version. This was not because I was an over-achiever but because the honors versions were taught by professors whereas the normal versions were taught be TAs. The instruction was soooooooooooo much better, which made up for the extra work and/or extra difficulty. My annoyance level was kept low, which was worth it.
The idea is to start a thread for people to discuss 50 Shades, or something else perceived as trashy, and try to find what’s likable in it.
The links in this MetaFilter post will make it harder:
Or maybe it won’t.
But, seriously, I genuinely enjoy trashy, extremely problematic stuff like 50 Shades. I am curious to see a poll, too, to get a sampling of things that provoke, “I DO NOT GET WHY SO MANY PEOPLE LIKE THIS THE CONTEMPTIBLE FOOLS.”
I cannot participate, but things that give me hives off the top of my head are Sex In The City and professional sports.
But, it’s usually not the what but the why that makes me insane and contemptuous. Like, I don’t mind if you watch hours of reality TV, but you better have a damn good reason, even if it’s not easy to articulate. I have to trust you see something I don’t, the metabolizing of which is gratifying to you in a me-approved way. /channeling-my-most-pathologically-judgmental-aspects-of-self
This made me hate Sex In The City less, though I’m still suspicious:
This book looks very interesting, as does the author’s other work. Sort of tangentially related: empathic accuracy. Right now, humans can infer the emotions and actual thought contents of complete strangers, way above chance. This guy has done many, many years of research:
Ickes, William. Everyday mind reading: Understanding what other people think and feel. Prometheus Books, 2003.
It’s my pleasure. Feedback greatly appreciated—I have over a decade of thinking and doing on this; Help me expand on the parts that people most care about.
I started a meditation blog from a rationalist perspective. 10 posts so far.
Venkatesh Rao has tips on this exact topic:
http://www.tempobook.com/2013/04/29/sensitive-dependence-on-paperwork-conditions/
Somewhere I think there’s a quote about Eliezer writing faster with a writing partner. Could someone point me to this quote?
I’m sure some people find some of these ideas distressing or depressing, whether or not they actually accept them as true in whole or in part. I would say I do, in a qualified way. But I have decent perspective on the whole singularity/LessWrong/FAI/etc/etc memeplex.
Try reading Hoffer’s “The True Believer” to gain insight into how elements of singularity thinking can be really poisonous to your mental wellbeing. There’s more and less healthy ways to think about and approach the future.
Thoughts:
I don’t have any references that I can reach for, and I’m not sure how good the studies actually are, or what they actually say, but my mild belief is that meditation does generally accelerate cognitive development at all stages.
Also, the “unitive” stage isn’t just found in advanced meditators: “enlightenment is an accident, meditation makes you accident prone,” as the saying goes. Not that I want to get into a discussion about classical Buddhist enlightenment. Also, Wilber does say that that meditative attainment and cognitive development can be orthogonal (see “Wilber-Combs lattice” concept).
Finally, “Meditation is just a way of practicing with your mind to experience reality in a specific way,” is a really broad statement. There’s lots of different kinds of meditation. The types of meditation that are probably most relevant here are not “state achievement and stabilization” types, but meditation techniques that make what your mind is already doing more transparent over time.
I think “mind functioning transparency” and associated metacognitive skill increases are a key part of how all this hangs together (cf. the so-called “construct aware” stage, for example). So, the above class of meditation protocols could accelerate the “ego level” line, and use of which would be correlated with but not necessary for hitting the so-called “unitive” stage.
But I do agree that descriptions of the “unitive” stage (by both the experiencers and the researchers) can be colored by all sorts of “spiritual” language and assumptions, and these assumptions have certainly influenced the path and interpretation of this research (and that influence is a mixed bag). But there is methodologically sound signal in there, and I think it’s likely that there’s an underlying structure to the unfolding of the higher (and lower) stages that can be independent of culture, meditation, and Buddhism. In any case, the nature/nurture/culture influence at each stage and the “ontological status” of these stages is still an open question, as are their utility and malleability.
Motivating, appreciated.