The IanEye Theory of Personality

[Burnt Hill]

I may be reading wrong, but I am feeling a little bit of romanticising MPD here (no,not by all). Consistanly m's come with a background of Trauma, both physical and emotional. And its amazing how quickly personalities can switch. Just for what its worth as we move forward with our theories.

[brekin]

PW wrote:

I cannot believe this is happening on RI. Oh the company you keep....

Oh god just laughable. Yes, anyone who disagrees with you is now a eugenicist, as well as a misogynist.
I'm just curious when you'll start calling those who don't bow to your every interpretation as gospel, antisemitic?
Are we three weeks out maybe?

By the way, I don't like the word eugenicist. How would you like it if someone called you that?

[Bruce Dazzling]

Let's keep things civil.

When you want to type "fuck you," please count to ten, and then type something more conducive to RI debate, and less conducive to Godlike Productions.

And please, I really don't think that the fate of the world, or even this thread, relies on the use of the word "defect." Have some respect for Willow's stated discomfort with the word and proceed accordingly.

Thanks.

[brekin]

Let's keep things civil.

When you want to type "fuck you," please count to ten, and then type something more conducive to RI debate, and less conducive to Godlike Productions.

And please, I really don't think that the fate of the world, or even this thread, relies on the use of the word "defect." Have some respect for Willow's stated discomfort with the word and proceed accordingly.

Thanks.

I get the civil part Bruce Dazzling. I'm just curious how we are suppose to proceed with the word defect moving forward?

[FourthBase]

Let's keep things civil.

When you want to type "fuck you," please count to ten, and then type something more conducive to RI debate, and less conducive to Godlike Productions.

And please, I really don't think that the fate of the world, or even this thread, relies on the use of the word "defect." Have some respect for Willow's stated discomfort with the word and proceed accordingly.

Thanks.

I get the civil part Bruce Dazzling. I'm just curious how we are suppose to proceed with the word defect moving forward?

Would now be a good time to point out that it wasn't the word "defect", but ""defect""?

[Gnomad]

Come on fellow humans, its just a word. I know you all can do without something like just a word.

Sometimes I am amazed at how we can get stuck picking nits.

My housemate never even talks, and he is doing just fine.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Let's keep things civil.

When you want to type "fuck you," please count to ten, and then type something more conducive to RI debate, and less conducive to Godlike Productions.

And please, I really don't think that the fate of the world, or even this thread, relies on the use of the word "defect." Have some respect for Willow's stated discomfort with the word and proceed accordingly.

Thanks.

I get the civil part Bruce Dazzling. I'm just curious how we are suppose to proceed with the word defect moving forward?

You're feelings on the word "defective" are already on record in this thread, as are Willow's.

Agree to disagree and move on.

[Perelandra]

Somebody already used the word adaptation, which seems accurate and relatively neutral.

[FourthBase]

Somebody already used the word adaptation, which seems accurate and relatively neutral.

True. Or, "condition", but that's loaded with its own connotations of pathology.
"Condition" would seem to suggest, uh, an impermanent and curable defect.
But maybe not. Maybe it's neutral enough. So, let's go with "condition", yes?

[Project Willow]

Brekin, and most of the other people commenting here don't have to live with the stigma. I and a few other people on this board do. That's the difference. When the lot of you set this up as a simple disagreement, that's unjust. Period.

I'm done with this.

[FourthBase]

Brekin, and most of the other people commenting here don't have to live with the stigma. I and a few other people on this board do. That's the difference. When the lot of you set this up as a simple disagreement, that's unjust. Period.

I'm done with this.

More than a few of the rest of us have what might be termed psychological conditions, too.
You and the few other people are not the only people in the world who live with a stigma.
If there were eugenicists weeding out the "mentally defective", they'd come for me, too.

[BrandonD]

A theory: since the term "personality" refers to something that can't really be seen or quantified in any meaningful manner, one interesting idea might be the existence of multiple centers or organs of cognition in one individual.

The overwhelming assumption is that there is one center of cognition - the brain - it is overarching and homogenous. IMO there is much evidence to support the idea of multiple independent centers of cognition in each human organism. One being of course the brain in the skull. Another perhaps being the spinal cord, as an entirely independent center or organ. Yet another being the large mass of neurons that have been found to exist in the region of the gut - which some have theorized gave rise to terms such as "gut feeling". And then another being the heart, which has its own neurons that function differently than the neurons in the brain. Perhaps even the brain itself is compartmentalized into yet more independent centers of cognition as well.

If there are in fact separate centers of cognition, each with their own impressions, opinions, and perhaps even memories of the world around them, then this could very easily account for the idea of multiple personalities existing within each individual.

A normal healthy individual operates with all these centers in harmony, so that their interaction is not even noticed. Like a bicycle with its pedals, chain, spokes, tires, frame - all working smoothly so it appears to just be one unified object. It is only when the individual centers operate out of sync or become damaged that a person begins to notice discrepancies, which might account for "hearing voices" and such.

This is only one theory, as I'm not totally opposed to the concept of disembodied entities and such things.

Anyway, just wanted to throw those ideas/theories out into the mix.

[FourthBase]

A theory: since the term "personality" refers to something that can't really be seen or quantified in any meaningful manner, one interesting idea might be the existence of multiple centers or organs of cognition in one individual.

The overwhelming assumption is that there is one center of cognition - the brain - it is overarching and homogenous. IMO there is much evidence to support the idea of multiple independent centers of cognition in each human organism. One being of course the brain in the skull. Another perhaps being the spinal cord, as an entirely independent center or organ. Yet another being the large mass of neurons that have been found to exist in the region of the gut - which some have theorized gave rise to terms such as "gut feeling". And then another being the heart, which has its own neurons that function differently than the neurons in the brain. Perhaps even the brain itself is compartmentalized into yet more independent centers of cognition as well.

If there are in fact separate centers of cognition, each with their own impressions, opinions, and perhaps even memories of the world around them, then this could very easily account for the idea of multiple personalities existing within each individual.

A normal healthy individual operates with all these centers in harmony, so that their interaction is not even noticed. Like a bicycle with its pedals, chain, spokes, tires, frame - all working smoothly so it appears to just be one unified object. It is only when the individual centers operate out of sync or become damaged that a person begins to notice discrepancies, which might account for "hearing voices" and such.

This is only one theory, as I'm not totally opposed to the concept of disembodied entities and such things.

Anyway, just wanted to throw those ideas/theories out into the mix.

What an interesting hypothesis/theory!!!

Perhaps we have one set of IanEye-ian personae in our brains, another set in our guts, another in our spines, hearts. Actually (re-reading) your post contains multiple captivating hypotheses. Have you derived the essence from other sources, or are you, too, a pioneer of intuition?

[FourthBase]

This, too, good stuff:

viewtopic.php?p=159493#p159493

[crikkett]

IMO there is much evidence to support the idea of multiple independent centers of cognition in each human organism. One being of course the brain in the skull. Another perhaps being the spinal cord, as an entirely independent center or organ. Yet another being the large mass of neurons that have been found to exist in the region of the gut - which some have theorized gave rise to terms such as "gut feeling". And then another being the heart, which has its own neurons that function differently than the neurons in the brain. Perhaps even the brain itself is compartmentalized into yet more independent centers of cognition as well.

I remember being taught that the neurons around the gut and heart are for autonomic processes, like digestion and respiration.

If there are in fact separate centers of cognition, each with their own impressions, opinions, and perhaps even memories of the world around them, then this could very easily account for the idea of multiple personalities existing within each individual.

That is a nice thought.
I learned last week about the theory behind applied kinesiology- that our bodies know what's good for us, better than our minds. I wonder if this field of research identifies different centers of cognition.