Originally Posted by Occipitalred
Hey Snoop,
You misinterpreted my statement... very much.
Sorry, seeing people claim the subconscious is trying to directly communicate with you or solve problems for you and that dreams inherently have meaning is something I commonly see around here. I didn't necessarily think you thought that, but I was clarifying my stance on the matter in case you were, or so that anybody that thought that might see my reasoning and think it makes sense. Deriving meaning from things without any is a very human quality that often gets taken to extremes. Attributing meaning to something through interpretation while recognizing the meaning you come up with is entirely fabricated (but does have meaning if it means something to you), on the other hand, has practical applications. Regarding the latter, I'm referring to dream interpretation almost specifically, but the statement applies everywhere else too.
I think about action in relation to dream content the same as I do thought, emotion, or any other mental phenomena that affect perception (well, thinking is an action, and you can cause yourself to feel different emotions by thinking, meaning emotion at least potential links to actions via some sort of interaction). Individually it doesn't appear to do much without mistakenly misattributing the cause directly to that thing when the process is more nuanced than that. To say emotions or thoughts (like was discussed in the last topic) don't affect perception, in my mind, is patently false. My reasoning here being that the cortical circuit crucial to forming perceptual reality disseminates information at different rates to several areas of the brain in a relatively set path between brain structures. These brain structures interpret sensory information, modify it, and perform cross talk between local structures surrounding them, and through specialized pathways with neurons that can send the information to more distant structures. This cortical loop is subject to feedback that can lead to some signals becoming more excited or outright inhibited. On top of always receiving new information that's been processed and modified at different rates allows for the potential interruption and changing of one's perception from most major structures. Emotions, thoughts, actions, sensory experience, etc. are all part of a greater integrated whole of consciousness that allows enough forms of influence over itself that specific components of perception can drastically affect the integrated whole.
With a constant barrage of sensory and perceptual input, it's impossible to narrow the cause of the system's overall behavior to a single source (as Dolphin was doing in the previous thread with the rather vague usage of the term "perception" that excluded phenomena like emotion or thought as being entirely reactive or dependent by an initial perception that precedes their existence). There's never a single instance of time you actually experience, the brain delays the perception of reality by ~0.6-0.8ms on average to compensate for the limitations of nerve conduction and provide a final, linear sensory experience generated from the non-linear collection and processing of the sensory input initially signaled. It's possible the delay isn't so much as intentional as has been described (that I've read, anyway), but is merely a manifestation of the limits inherent to the eternal gathering of sensory data from several sources with different pathways that make their way past some brain structures before others (for instance, tactile sensation all travels through the spinal cord, brain steam, and the cortical circuit, but the optic nerves travel through and reverse in the mid brain and actually provide raw sensory input to areas like the amygdala that allows for a quick emotional response to possible danger) and the integration of it all into a more or less "single" final perception. For all we know the delay could just so happen to be the time it takes for information from the different pathways the information has to travel through before making its way to the part of the brain that integrates the experience (actually, that sounds far more likely, and saying the brain itself delays perception is more like the layman's version of what happens).
Given all that, I believe actions have potential to affect change just like emotions do, but it's not easy to gauge to what degree it might affect said change, as it's largely dependent on the person and the situation. The actions we're talking about are a result of habitual behavior, which is inextricably linked to emotional state, thought patterns, the way you choose to interpret reality, your past experiences, etc. Actions themselves are more like a catalyst for a greater change that occurs through the natural interaction of neurons/cortical circuits/feedback loops/etc. I'm not too keen on reducing things specifically to one thing though, just the approximation that thing represents. The rabbit hole of reductionism takes you into physics and whatnot on top of neurobiology, and I think making definitive statements about exactly what causes and what merely reacts to information only serves to make the discussion all the more confusing. Unless you keep in mind that any ideas that try and reduce the perception as a phenomenon to something we can neatly dissect, parse, categorize, and discuss aren't actually possible, you're operating under a faulty premise.
Suffice it to say, I readily believe that the actions you take, whether on a regular basis or not, have significant enough potential to affect dream content that it's likely able to. The effects learning a new skill, working in a stressful environment (and how you handle it), and performing repetitive tasks for several hours have well documented effects in hypnagogia. Given hypnagogia is an altered state leading directly up to sleep, it wouldn't strain belief that the underlying phenomena can affect dream content as well, given what you experience during these states is related to how suggestible you are during them. I think anything you can feel, do, or experience can impact dream content, probably, at times, in ways you wouldn't naturally expect. Again, how much you can specifically attribute the dream content to something specific like an action is certainly difficult given actions necessarily mean experiencing everything else you can and do as a result of that action. That, and the actions, thoughts, and feelings preceding the decision to act also play a role. But, saying action therefore has no role is like admitting nothing beyond coming into existence in the first place has a role. It's too deterministic for my taste, as spells a dead end for discussion on the topic (even if that dead end was predeterimined, lol). Just like we don't talk about a car having no part in an accident when it was the driver who controlled it (and what compelled or controlled the person to drive, along with the person and the other car they hit), you can't say emotions, thoughts, sensory experience, or actions have no part in affecting dream content. With some degree of certainty we can assign responsibility to action's potential in relation to dream content, because as a part of you it's intrinsically linked to the process. How much responsibility to assign it, or rather a method for doing so would require a lot of thought, but there are ways to narrow the inaccuracies of our eventual approximations. That's why I love science.
|
|
Bookmarks