Do we have a say in the subconscious defining of our world?

Another question: are psychiatrists worth the money they charge?

NO!

Cyracuz,

Given that drugs can alleviate "depression" it seems unlikely that specific mental "constructs" are involved. Perhaps a better analogy might be the esoteric concept of the "misuse of mental energy". The depressive becomes enmeshed in "circling thoughts" which drain energy from attention to "the now" thereby causing dysfunction. Perhaps drugs break into such obsessive circles.

But it's not just drugs that alter our mental states. Everything does. Food, sugar, coffee, cigarettes...

A friend of mine had some phsycological problems a while ago. She had traces of schitzophrenia and quite strong angst, diagnosed by her shrink. We talk a lot, and it turned out that her notion of self, the construct she lived with, was one of a solid, unaltering self, and that many of the conflicts she struggled with were direct results of this.
Then I tried to get her thinking along the lines of how we have defined self here on A2K, and she tells me this has helped her condition.
Drugs could probably have helped as well, but according to several people I know who take drugs against mental ailments say that the drugs don't really cure the ailments. They just numb the mind to such an extent that you don't have the mental capacity to experience the problems.

Cyracuz,

If psychiatrists are not worth the money they charge, does this mean they are ineffective or just overpriced in your opinion?

Nope, but salvation is worth the price...they're just capitalizing on the desperation

pswfps

I think that psychiatrists are at large ineffective. Their drugs and treatment methods cannot do what they claim they can. They may be helpful for a time, but if a patient were to quit the drugs the problems return in a large percentage of the cases.

Psychologists, on the other hand, may be of some effect, as long as they understand that they cannot solve any problems, only help those who has the problem shed some light on it, and perhaps guide them towards a solution.

There is the claim that some of the psycho-active drugs such as LSD and peyote can provide the mind with new "subconscious constructs" on which a new set of preconceived notions may be supported.

Yes. Unfortunately, these are not the drugs psychiatrists distribute.

It does perhaps give credence to the shaman / peyote equation and perhaps argues against the recent crop of stabilizing drugs proffered by the set-and-forget pop-culture shrinks.

I think it does. I think that the medical drug industry has a part to play in it.

For people with MS, for instance, it is documented that cannabis helps against the symptoms, and can allow a person to live with considerably less pain and inconvenience. But they do not get cannabis. Instead they get some sythetic THC, because the industry can make money off it. It doesn't work nearly as well, and there is a bunch of side effects that are not found in the organic stuff.

Peyote and psilocybin mushrooms can be grown by anyone with the will to do so, and therefore it is not possible for the industry to make as much money off it. I think that is a major reason why such substances are illegal and kept out of the market.

A close friend, having had some trouble with angst and other mental ailments, told me that she saw everything in a new perspective after we had tried some mushrooms. During our "session", when we were tripping as loons, she says, everything welled up in her, and she felt herself dissolve. She said it was scary, but that afterwards it left her with a sense of calm that she hadn't experienced in some time. This calm gave her the energy to tackle her issues.

Cryacuz, off the top of my head, I suspect that "subconcious constructs" (which shape and direct much of our thinking, including the tacit grammar that organizes much of it) may be involved in "pathological" behavior. This may be especially so regarding obsessive thought and compulsive action patterns. But there is no denying the role of brain chemistry. I just don't feel confident to identity "subconscious constructs" either as causes or effects (or perhaps as reciprocal patterns of both).
I do think that while the management of some constructural patterns, like the dualism resulting in "hardening of the categories" and rigid ego-centered perception, may not eliminate INsane behavior, such management might help us to go beyond "normal" UNsane behavior and have a more fulfilled life experience. The conversation here has been about below-normal behavior; I'm talking about above-normal behavior--with, I suppose, Abraham Mazlow in mind.

The thought behind my initial post in this thread was that many mental ailments may be a result of mis-managing experience.

Psychiatrists claim that drugs can help against this, since they believe that brain chemistry is at the root of it. I guess the reasoning is that "if the engine doesn't run smothly it's because the cogwheels are not properly aligned". Following such an analogy it does sound strange to say the oposite.

But the cogwheels may be out of alignment because the engine isn't running smoothly since the "engine" in question is still quite the mystery to us.

I believe, with all of my being, that focus does determine the individual's reality. And focus isn't an entirely conscious thing. If it was, advertising wouldn't be so successful.

I guess what I am proposing is that if one was able to master his focus, many of these ailments would be non existent. This may be a bold claim though...

But when it comes to "normal" behavious, I cannot really say that I know what that is. Therefore I find it difficult to relate to "below and above normal behaviour".
As I see it, what is considered "normal" is to be a puppet to one's wants and needs. It's what drives our consumer societies, to a large extent; that we are all so focused on what we want and need. Just turn on the telly for fifteen minutes, and you'll know where I got that impression..

But I do not consider this "normal behaviour" very beneficial to out general happiness. That is why the philosophy of buddhism holds such strong appeal to me. But when I express such ideas among my friends who are not intimate with them, they do not consider me "normal functioning".

Tall order assuming the physcological can even overcome the physical.

Cryacuz, it appears from here that you are functioning higher than "normal."

By the way, I suspect that drugs are the therapy of choice for people with problems of brain chemistry (the so-called insane), but for neurotics, those who have mismanaged experience, as you say, I think that talk therapy will always be relevant. But the therapist should follow an educational rather than medcal model, with themselves as intellectual/spiritual facilitators rather than as mental medics. They should help people to take a more realistic and nutritious approach to experience.

I think you are right in what you say JL. There are theories that state that children born from parents with heavy drug or alcohol abuse can suffer from this. Also, neglect of care at a critical phase of childhood is believed to have an impact on brain functions.

But studies have also been conducted that reveal that the mental activites of the mind help shape and "customize" the brain. One example if the pianist who practices arpeggios. After a lot of practice the parts of the brain governing the movements of the indexfinger and the middle finger fuse, making it easier for the pianist to perform the rapid movement, but in turn making it very hard for him to move those fingers individually.

So the the only difference between those with problematic brain chemistry and those with mismanaged experience may be that the experience was mismanaged for them in the first case, and that it has been going on for so long that the dysfunctions have become hardwired...

Chumly,
What I am proposing may indeed be a tall order. I confess that in this area I have many questions, but precious few answers.

Cryacuz, are you suggesting that behavior can influence our "hardwiring" in the same sense as Lamarck's notion of "acquired characteristics," a process by which learned skills become genetic traits that can be biologically transmitted to offspring?

Yes, even though this Lamarck is taking it one step further.

The key point, however is that there are studies that have shown that mental activity guides the development of the brain, not only in children, but in people all thorough life. I thought I had bookmarked a really great site explaining this, but all I had was this:

http://home.att.net/~meditation/monks.brains.html

But a little quick googling yielded this:

http://biology.about.com/library/weekly/aa102199.htm

It explains how brain cells regenerate, something thought to not be the case for a very long time.

When I have more time I will try to find a reference to the studies that suggest that mind activity dictates brain development. To some extent, at least.

Re: Do we have a say in the subconscious defining of our wor


I would guess it could be either, depending on the particular case.

And they might occur in combination as well.

The neural connections in our brains are honed by experience, so experience to a certain degree, forms the physiology of the brain. But initial physiology also lays the foundation upon which experiences flow.

hypochondriacs can create their own physical ailments, so I don't see why they couldn't create their own psychological ones as well.