Research  Even healthy people can be tricked into hearing voices that aren't there

(Nov 4, 2023 01:37 PM)stryder Wrote: You've the same tools at your disposal as I have, the internet.  Sure there's potentially a bunch of rubbish online, but there is also information hidden away if you look for it.

Most evidence is in relationship to BCI (Brain Computer Interfacing), there was a story some years ago of a magical "Waffle iron" looking contraption that could project sound/voices into a persons head.  Even DARPA was toying around with the usage of it for non-lethal method of breaking rioters up etc (Sonic Projectors).  You only have to look (if of course it's not buried too deep)

The main problem is that you go on about wanting to understand the evidence, however when it comes to evidence collection the doctors aren't scientists as their minds are already made up.  It's not like they double blind and stick someone in an anechoic chamber to record their brain activity without third-party sources available and then do the same recording outside of all the shielding. If it's all in the persons head, then the patterns should be the same both inside and outside of the anechoic/faraday environment.

The internet is not evidence.

BCI is a direct brain communication, not remote. "Stories" about "magical" items is less then pseudoscience. Sonic projectors do not transmit voices into the brain. These are all lame attempts to shore up a paranoid fantasy used to justify a mental illness.

You don't get to shift the onus for evidence onto others (like you project the the source of voices). If you make the claim, the onus is solely on you to produce the evidence. If you can't, no one has any reason to believe it exists. It's no ones' job to go looking for pink unicorns you may claim exists.

Have you isolated yourself in an anechoic/RF shielded chamber? If not, why not? Are you afraid the phenomena will eventually manifest there too?
Why should anyone else test what you won't test yourself?

Do you think that the terms that we use matter, e.g., mental illness vs brain disorder?

(Nov 4, 2023 09:00 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: Do you think that the terms that we use matter, e.g., mental illness vs brain disorder?

That's why I have used mental illness, dysfunction, and disorder interchangeably. It could be mental illness or disorder due to brain dysfunction or any number of other factors.
Is there a catch-all term to cover all that?

(Nov 4, 2023 09:24 PM)Syne Wrote:

(Nov 4, 2023 09:00 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: Do you think that the terms that we use matter, e.g., mental illness vs brain disorder?

That's why I have used mental illness, dysfunction, and disorder interchangeably. It could be mental illness or disorder due to brain dysfunction or any number of other factors.
Is there a catch-all term to cover all that?

I don’t know, but there’s a tendency for society to show more empathy and understanding toward physiological or "visible" health conditions compared to mental health conditions. The term "mental illness" seems to imply that you have some control over your thoughts and therefore some blame or responsibility, unlike a brain disorder.

(Nov 4, 2023 09:39 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Nov 4, 2023 09:24 PM)Syne Wrote: That's why I have used mental illness, dysfunction, and disorder interchangeably. It could be mental illness or disorder due to brain dysfunction or any number of other factors.
Is there a catch-all term to cover all that?

I don’t know, but there’s a tendency for society to show more empathy and understanding toward physiological or "visible" health conditions compared to mental health conditions. The term "mental illness" seems to imply that you have some control over your thoughts and therefore some blame or responsibility, unlike a brain disorder.

Most people seem to believe that "mental illness" is beyond all self-control. So for most, it doesn't presume any such stigma.

Considering even brain disorders can be the result of neural plasticity, a physiological source doesn't rule out some capacity for personal responsibility. Now if the disorder is due to actual damage to the brain, that could be another matter. But I would assume any such obvious damage could be ruled out by lack of other symptoms, diagnostics, etc..

It should also be pointed out that blame and responsibility are not synonymous. Someone else could be to blame, but since they often cannot or will not take responsibility, only the individual can reliably take responsibility for themselves. This is especially the case where childhood trauma from a long-dead relative can only be addressed by the individual, but it applies throughout life, for more than just mental illness. Everyone can take action and form better habits to improve their own lives, rather than waiting for some external source to be corrected.

(Nov 4, 2023 10:24 PM)Syne Wrote: Most people seem to believe that "mental illness" is beyond all self-control. So for most, it doesn't presume any such stigma.

Considering even brain disorders can be the result of neural plasticity, a physiological source doesn't rule out some capacity for personal responsibility. Now if the disorder is due to actual damage to the brain, that could be another matter. But I would assume any such obvious damage could be ruled out by lack of other symptoms, diagnostics, etc..

It should also be pointed out that blame and responsibility are not synonymous. Someone else could be to blame, but since they often cannot or will not take responsibility, only the individual can reliably take responsibility for themselves. This is especially the case where childhood trauma from a long-dead relative can only be addressed by the individual, but it applies throughout life, for more than just mental illness. Everyone can take action and form better habits to improve their own lives, rather than waiting for some external source to be corrected.

I disagree. I think that people perceive physiological disorders as being outside of the individual’s control, while mental illnesses are seen as more internal and subject to one’s own thoughts and behaviors. I could be mistaken but you seem like one who attributes mental illness to personal shortcomings. I agree that some conditions can improve with effort but there are a lot of neurological disorders that cause significant disfunction that don't show up on an MRI.

(Nov 4, 2023 11:19 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote:

(Nov 4, 2023 10:24 PM)Syne Wrote: Most people seem to believe that "mental illness" is beyond all self-control. So for most, it doesn't presume any such stigma.

Considering even brain disorders can be the result of neural plasticity, a physiological source doesn't rule out some capacity for personal responsibility. Now if the disorder is due to actual damage to the brain, that could be another matter. But I would assume any such obvious damage could be ruled out by lack of other symptoms, diagnostics, etc..

It should also be pointed out that blame and responsibility are not synonymous. Someone else could be to blame, but since they often cannot or will not take responsibility, only the individual can reliably take responsibility for themselves. This is especially the case where childhood trauma from a long-dead relative can only be addressed by the individual, but it applies throughout life, for more than just mental illness. Everyone can take action and form better habits to improve their own lives, rather than waiting for some external source to be corrected.

I disagree. I think that people perceive physiological disorders as being outside of the individual’s control, while mental illnesses are seen as more internal and subject to one’s own thoughts and behaviors. I could be mistaken but you seem like one who attributes mental illness to personal shortcomings. I agree that some conditions can improve with effort but there are a lot of neurological disorders that cause significant disfunction that don't show up on an MRI.

Well, I think most people don't bother to make the distinction between physiological and psychological mental/behavioral problems. After all, modern medicine says a pill is usually THE solution to either. But that could just be accounting for half the population having below average intelligence plus some percentage of everyone else not giving a shit. The thing is that psychiatry, and pharma in general, has spent decades trying to blur the line. Telling us everything is outside of our control and medication is all that will help. I think that has eroded people's belief in their own agency over these things.

Mental illnesses are not typically caused by personal shortcomings. Most serious mental trauma people experience, especially as children, is not of their own doing. And different people have different native capacities to handle trauma and stress. It seems some people are just born more resilient. I believe that everyone has the potential to overcome their shortcomings, of any kind, but that this may be limited by native attributes like intelligence, introspection, and/or need for external validation.

If there is no physiological evidence, even besides MRIs, for a disorder, we have no real reason to believe it is purely physiological. And considering neural plasticity alone can show differences in MRI results, MRIs are not even the final word in purely physiological causes. Aside from actual damage to the brain, the brain is an amazing machine, and can be corrected by forming better habits. It's mostly just a matter of will (strength of belief in one's own agency) and intelligence that mediates how successfully people can intentionally form new habits.

So the half of the population with below average intelligence may be out of luck, but then mental illness often correlates more with higher intelligence.

(Nov 4, 2023 06:47 PM)Syne Wrote: Have you isolated yourself in an anechoic/RF shielded chamber? If not, why not? Are you afraid the phenomena will eventually manifest there too?
Why should anyone else test what you won't test yourself?

If I was given the opportunity I would gladly test the hypothesis however it would have to be a proper experiment, sitting in a tent in a room just for my own benefit wouldn't be enough.

There are problems such as it can cost time and money, require travel. Such places will likely only grant access when the tests themselves are well planned, executed and documented well (Such chambers tend to exist in either R&D companies or Astrophysics that would likely require money for time, or at least a graduate paper being written at the campus it resides.

There is then the equipment for recording brain patterns in all (double-blinded) environments. Originally EKG's might of been used, although now adays people would probably turn to using multiband methods of mapping with AI assistance.

So my fear isn't about whether my opinion is wrong, that I could handle. My fear is that if I don't do it correctly it will either be dismissed or made invalidated and if invalidated it would lead the action to being pointless. (I guess it's a form of perfectionism only willing to commit if the outcome of actually fulfilling experiment correctly is assurd, Along with the obvious financial concerns.)

Ideally some researchers should only deal with the result data and not be clued into whether a room was shielded or not (much like myself), as if it was to be studied correctly it's not just about the guinea pig not creating bias within the experiment, but as much the experimenters (or researchers in this case)

(Nov 5, 2023 09:19 AM)stryder Wrote:

(Nov 4, 2023 06:47 PM)Syne Wrote: Have you isolated yourself in an anechoic/RF shielded chamber? If not, why not? Are you afraid the phenomena will eventually manifest there too?
Why should anyone else test what you won't test yourself?

If I was given the opportunity I would gladly test the hypothesis however it would have to be a proper experiment, sitting in a tent in a room just for my own benefit wouldn't be enough.

There are problems such as it can cost time and money, require travel. Such places will likely only grant access when the tests themselves are well planned, executed and documented well (Such chambers tend to exist in either R&D companies or Astrophysics that would likely require money for time, or at least a graduate paper being written at the campus it resides.

There is then the equipment for recording brain patterns in all (double-blinded) environments. Originally EKG's might of been used, although now adays people would probably turn to using multiband methods of mapping with AI assistance.

So my fear isn't about whether my opinion is wrong, that I could handle. My fear is that if I don't do it correctly it will either be dismissed or made invalidated and if invalidated it would lead the action to being pointless. (I guess it's a form of perfectionism only willing to commit if the outcome of actually fulfilling experiment correctly is assurd, Along with the obvious financial concerns.)

Ideally some researchers should only deal with the result data and not be clued into whether a room was shielded or not (much like myself), as if it was to be studied correctly it's not just about the guinea pig not creating bias within the experiment, but as much the experimenters (or researchers in this case)

All excuses. For your own benefit alone would certainly remove the need for you to demand others to prove your claim. There's even relatively cheap options on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Shielded-Protecti...B005I4D5GO
https://www.amazon.com/Brain-Coat-Shield...B00K0PX1KG
Including shielding kits: https://www.amazon.com/Shielding-Bluetoo...94MGK?th=1

This is your first step, unless you are just making excuses.

(Nov 5, 2023 10:32 AM)Syne Wrote:

(Nov 5, 2023 09:19 AM)stryder Wrote:

(Nov 4, 2023 06:47 PM)Syne Wrote: Have you isolated yourself in an anechoic/RF shielded chamber? If not, why not? Are you afraid the phenomena will eventually manifest there too?
Why should anyone else test what you won't test yourself?

If I was given the opportunity I would gladly test the hypothesis however it would have to be a proper experiment, sitting in a tent in a room just for my own benefit wouldn't be enough.

There are problems such as it can cost time and money, require travel. Such places will likely only grant access when the tests themselves are well planned, executed and documented well (Such chambers tend to exist in either R&D companies or Astrophysics that would likely require money for time, or at least a graduate paper being written at the campus it resides.

There is then the equipment for recording brain patterns in all (double-blinded) environments. Originally EKG's might of been used, although now adays people would probably turn to using multiband methods of mapping with AI assistance.

So my fear isn't about whether my opinion is wrong, that I could handle. My fear is that if I don't do it correctly it will either be dismissed or made invalidated and if invalidated it would lead the action to being pointless. (I guess it's a form of perfectionism only willing to commit if the outcome of actually fulfilling experiment correctly is assurd, Along with the obvious financial concerns.)

Ideally some researchers should only deal with the result data and not be clued into whether a room was shielded or not (much like myself), as if it was to be studied correctly it's not just about the guinea pig not creating bias within the experiment, but as much the experimenters (or researchers in this case)

All excuses. For your own benefit alone would certainly remove the need for you to demand others to prove your claim. There's even relatively cheap options on Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Shielded-Protecti...B005I4D5GO
https://www.amazon.com/Brain-Coat-Shield...B00K0PX1KG
Including shielding kits: https://www.amazon.com/Shielding-Bluetoo...94MGK?th=1

This is your first step, unless you are just making excuses.

You moan first about the quality of the "evidence" online, and then shill random products? If it's going to be done, it's got to be done properly at a professional level, not a hackathon.