Does the BIP actually change who we *are*?

[LMNO]

if if the Bars were really YOU, then we couldn't change them could we?

Are you saying we can't change ourselves?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

if if the Bars were really YOU, then we couldn't change them could we?

Are you saying we can't change ourselves?

I'm saying that it appears to me that:
1. We can change how we perceive ourselves and our environment.
2. Such a change in perception, coupled with experiences  can affect our behavior.

Changing some perceptions (changing some bars in the prison) doesn't necessarily modify who we are.... only the data we're currently considering at the time.

Like I said, I think this is an area where the metaphor feels kinda constraining.

For example, I used to identify myself as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I eventually broke down those bars... but I was still me, even though I was considering new ideas, I'm still me, even though the me that is typing this, perceives things differently than I did before.

Maybe the problem here is that the OP and most of our discussions are still using the 'is' of identity.

[LMNO]

This is not a criticism, this is an observation:

You seem to have an idea that who you "are" is a fixed thing, and our behavior and thoughts and beliefs are somehow separate from this core thing.

Further, if one's perceptions changes one's thoughts, and one's thoughts change one's behavior, that is only an external process, and the core thing remains as it was.




I tend to think in more integrated terms, that the "is" tends to be more malleable, and while perceptions are filtered, if the thoughts and behaviors change because of that, the "is" changes as well.

[AFK]

if if the Bars were really YOU, then we couldn't change them could we?

Are you saying we can't change ourselves?

I'm saying that it appears to me that:
1. We can change how we perceive ourselves and our environment.
2. Such a change in perception, coupled with experiences  can affect our behavior.

Changing some perceptions (changing some bars in the prison) doesn't necessarily modify who we are.... only the data we're currently considering at the time.

Like I said, I think this is an area where the metaphor feels kinda constraining.

For example, I used to identify myself as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I eventually broke down those bars... but I was still me, even though I was considering new ideas, I'm still me, even though the me that is typing this, perceives things differently than I did before.

Maybe the problem here is that the OP and most of our discussions are still using the 'is' of identity.

So you think that you as the JW is exactly the same you as you, not the JW?  No difference at all?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

if if the Bars were really YOU, then we couldn't change them could we?

Are you saying we can't change ourselves?

I'm saying that it appears to me that:
1. We can change how we perceive ourselves and our environment.
2. Such a change in perception, coupled with experiences  can affect our behavior.

Changing some perceptions (changing some bars in the prison) doesn't necessarily modify who we are.... only the data we're currently considering at the time.

Like I said, I think this is an area where the metaphor feels kinda constraining.

For example, I used to identify myself as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I eventually broke down those bars... but I was still me, even though I was considering new ideas, I'm still me, even though the me that is typing this, perceives things differently than I did before.

Maybe the problem here is that the OP and most of our discussions are still using the 'is' of identity.

So you think that you as the JW is exactly the same you as you, not the JW?  No difference at all?

Yes, there's a very big difference in the data I perceive. Experiences that I have had, have further modified the aspects of reality I focus on, and even what I consider reality to be... but the little homunculus that looks out of my eyes is still the same little homunculus. He has a much nicer view though.

Do we change who the horse is, if we take off his blinders? Do we change who the person is, if we make them wear sunglasses? Or are we just changing the input stream between their homunculus and reality?

[AFK]

But isn't a change in perceptions still a change? 

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

if if the Bars were really YOU, then we couldn't change them could we?

Are you saying we can't change ourselves?

I'm saying that it appears to me that:
1. We can change how we perceive ourselves and our environment.
2. Such a change in perception, coupled with experiences  can affect our behavior.

Changing some perceptions (changing some bars in the prison) doesn't necessarily modify who we are.... only the data we're currently considering at the time.

Like I said, I think this is an area where the metaphor feels kinda constraining.

For example, I used to identify myself as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I eventually broke down those bars... but I was still me, even though I was considering new ideas, I'm still me, even though the me that is typing this, perceives things differently than I did before.

Maybe the problem here is that the OP and most of our discussions are still using the 'is' of identity.

So you think that you as the JW is exactly the same you as you, not the JW?  No difference at all?

Yes, there's a very big difference in the data I perceive. Experiences that I have had, have further modified the aspects of reality I focus on, and even what I consider reality to be... but the little homunculus that looks out of my eyes is still the same little homunculus. He has a much nicer view though.

Do we change who the horse is, if we take off his blinders? Do we change who the person is, if we make them wear sunglasses? Or are we just changing the input stream between their homunculus and reality?

By changing the input, you change that person. Our experiences, as we perceive them, define at least some of our personality. Wouldn't changing a person's environment change their personality, at least a little? That's as much of a change in perception as altering their perception of their current environment, or at least can be.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

This is not a criticism, this is an observation:

You seem to have an idea that who you "are" is a fixed thing, and our behavior and thoughts and beliefs are somehow separate from this core thing.

I think that who you think you are changes all the time, with every experience and every new bar you break in the BiP.

Further, if one's perceptions changes one's thoughts, and one's thoughts change one's behavior, that is only an external process, and the core thing remains as it was.

Yes. I think that's true in some sense. If we were to use Leary's 8-circuit model... I would argue that the basic preprogrammed YOU (Circuits I-IV) remains YOU unless specifically modified through some sort of 8th circuit metaprogramming. It's possible to change YOU, but not just through perceiving new data, or modifying behavior.

I tend to think in more integrated terms, that the "is" tends to be more malleable, and while perceptions are filtered, if the thoughts and behaviors change because of that, the "is" changes as well.

I think that sort of change CAN happen... but usually only if the change in perception is coupled with action and experience....

That's why I think the BiP metaphor gets stretched a little far. When I was a JW I had no idea that a prison existed... I had no clue that my beliefs really altered my perceptions. I think the BiP is a wonderful metaphor for this point in my life.

When I started questioning my beliefs, when I finally looked at data outside the JW's official literature, I broke some bars... I saw new data. But I was still me, I was just me with access to some data I didn't have access to before. When I decided to read about magic, I broke some more bars, but I was still me. When I experienced an invocation to Therion for the first time, it changed how I perceive myself in a huge way. But, I was still me inside... just me with a much more interesting view of the universe around me.

When I got into chaos magic, I used Carroll's technique of rolling dice to determine a belief system (6 systems, roll a die, be X for a month etc). Every time I stuck my head into a new system, I saw new data. This, I think was most obvious for me when I played across political systems for awhile and realized that both sides had some insanely good ideas and other absolutely horrific ones. However, breaking bars, bashing doors, stealing locks from the jailer while he sleeps, still hasn't changed the ME inside me... It's allowed that me to access all sorts of new and interesting pieces of data, which has further encouraged me to examine yet more ideas. But, the me inside bears a striking resemblance to the me that has always been inside.

I don't think that I'm in a prison any longer... for me the prison was being trapped in that single world view. Now, I can change my views and opinions on a die roll. I've made liberals turn red in the face and call be a horrible and evil conservative... I've had conservatives call me a peacenik hippie liberal. But the me inside me isn't really either... never has been.

I can argue Christian beliefs just as well as I always have (and I still do on occasion). The only difference is that the me inside me doesn't actually believe that bullshit.

I think we can change our beliefs and preferences, just like we can change our web browser, or internet service provider... it doesn't change who we are, or how innane our posts are  , it just changes how we access and perceive some of the data available. 

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

But isn't a change in perceptions still a change? 

By changing the input, you change that person. Our experiences, as we perceive them, define at least some of our personality. Wouldn't changing a person's environment change their personality, at least a little? That's as much of a change in perception as altering their perception of their current environment, or at least can be.

Changing perceptions seems to me like... changing perceptions, not changing who we are.

I'll go back to Leary here. Let's say that we imprinted Low on the first circuit (fight/flee) as a child. No matter what perceptions we change... what new ideas we think about. We don't change that basic program. We might learn to compensate for it in some manner, but the basic YOU would still have the initial response to run when faced with danger.

Now, if you take up a martial art, or live through a horrific event, there may be a metaprogramming change to that circuit and fundamentally modify the homunculus inside you. However, thats not gonna happen by breaking a few bars... it takes a lot more than that, I think.

To wrap this back around to the OP, st verbatim is talking about a preference shift in what pron turns him on, that's not a change to who he is necessarily... now, if we say that st. verbatim used to only enjoy rape and bondage pics, and thought that lap dances were always better when the stripper was crying... then, after experiencing life with this particular female, only liked porn where the two appears as partners. I would say that we have an argument for actual change to the person, particularly to the fourth circuit metaphor. I would also guess that the experience was something extreme in one way or another to evoke such a change (and that it was the physical experiences, not just expanding perceptions that caused the change).

If however, his criteria for good porn was "nice ass and nice tits" and now they take second place to "woman is enjoying herself"... he's still him, but he's got a bit of a broader (no pun intended) perspective.

Does that seem sensible?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

I'll provide another example that I just thought of.

I have always been infophilic. I have always craved to know more. However, as one of JW's, the information pool was very limited. My BiP simply made lots of potential information invisible. Instead, I was infophilic within the pool of information that I was exposed to. I studied all sorts of "the deeper things", detailed discussions of prophecy and fulfillment in Type and Anti-type. I studied other religions from the perspective of how to beat them... but really, in some sense, because I was fascinated with the other belief structures.

Once I broke out of prison, my small pool of information to swim in, turned into a raging ocean... but I'm still infophilic.

[The Littlest Ubermensch]

But isn't a change in perceptions still a change? 

By changing the input, you change that person. Our experiences, as we perceive them, define at least some of our personality. Wouldn't changing a person's environment change their personality, at least a little? That's as much of a change in perception as altering their perception of their current environment, or at least can be.

Changing perceptions seems to me like... changing perceptions, not changing who we are.

I'll go back to Leary here. Let's say that we imprinted Low on the first circuit (fight/flee) as a child. No matter what perceptions we change... what new ideas we think about. We don't change that basic program. We might learn to compensate for it in some manner, but the basic YOU would still have the initial response to run when faced with danger.

Now, if you take up a martial art, or live through a horrific event, there may be a metaprogramming change to that circuit and fundamentally modify the homunculus inside you. However, thats not gonna happen by breaking a few bars... it takes a lot more than that, I think.

To wrap this back around to the OP, st verbatim is talking about a preference shift in what pron turns him on, that's not a change to who he is necessarily... now, if we say that st. verbatim used to only enjoy rape and bondage pics, and thought that lap dances were always better when the stripper was crying... then, after experiencing life with this particular female, only liked porn where the two appears as partners. I would say that we have an argument for actual change to the person, particularly to the fourth circuit metaphor. I would also guess that the experience was something extreme in one way or another to evoke such a change (and that it was the physical experiences, not just expanding perceptions that caused the change).

If however, his criteria for good porn was "nice ass and nice tits" and now they take second place to "woman is enjoying herself"... he's still him, but he's got a bit of a broader (no pun intended) perspective.

Does that seem sensible?

It's totally sensible, but this goes back to the question of what defines "you". IMO, there isn't really a "core" of being that is "you", so as I perceive it, to change something even as miniscule as taste in porn is to change at least part of that person's personality. It seems like your concept of "you" is based around the basic traits which inform nearly all of a person's actions, and from that sort of definition, breaking a bar is less likely to alter a person.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

But isn't a change in perceptions still a change? 

By changing the input, you change that person. Our experiences, as we perceive them, define at least some of our personality. Wouldn't changing a person's environment change their personality, at least a little? That's as much of a change in perception as altering their perception of their current environment, or at least can be.

Changing perceptions seems to me like... changing perceptions, not changing who we are.

I'll go back to Leary here. Let's say that we imprinted Low on the first circuit (fight/flee) as a child. No matter what perceptions we change... what new ideas we think about. We don't change that basic program. We might learn to compensate for it in some manner, but the basic YOU would still have the initial response to run when faced with danger.

Now, if you take up a martial art, or live through a horrific event, there may be a metaprogramming change to that circuit and fundamentally modify the homunculus inside you. However, thats not gonna happen by breaking a few bars... it takes a lot more than that, I think.

To wrap this back around to the OP, st verbatim is talking about a preference shift in what pron turns him on, that's not a change to who he is necessarily... now, if we say that st. verbatim used to only enjoy rape and bondage pics, and thought that lap dances were always better when the stripper was crying... then, after experiencing life with this particular female, only liked porn where the two appears as partners. I would say that we have an argument for actual change to the person, particularly to the fourth circuit metaphor. I would also guess that the experience was something extreme in one way or another to evoke such a change (and that it was the physical experiences, not just expanding perceptions that caused the change).

If however, his criteria for good porn was "nice ass and nice tits" and now they take second place to "woman is enjoying herself"... he's still him, but he's got a bit of a broader (no pun intended) perspective.

Does that seem sensible?

It's totally sensible, but this goes back to the question of what defines "you". IMO, there isn't really a "core" of being that is "you", so as I perceive it, to change something even as miniscule as taste in porn is to change at least part of that person's personality. It seems like your concept of "you" is based around the basic traits which inform nearly all of a person's actions, and from that sort of definition, breaking a bar is less likely to alter a person.

Yeah, I think that pretty much nails it (and why I don't like the metaphor of the BiP as being a prison you're in for life). Through all the experiments that I've done, there is still a Me in the core that is... well... Me. Now maybe its because I have failed in my experiments. But based on what I've experienced (which is really all I can base this conversation on)... there seems to be something that is You, some base set of operating parameters that were programmed by DNA or by imprints or something. That you can be temporarily constrained or uplifted by variations in perception... but I don't think perception is me... any more so that my perception of you, IS you.

I think breaking bars in the BiP may expose us to more of who we are. We may find ourselves taking positions, holding opinions or doing things that we didn't realize we would or could do... but that seems more like discovery than modification of the individual, to me anyway. I think we humans often try to define who we ARE, by our beliefs... but that seems prone to the same kinda Cosmic Schmuck position we fall into when we try to define who someone else is by their beliefs.

Maybe I could say that I don't think we know ourselves as well as we think we do. More broken bars, exposure to more information and (most important IMO) exposure to more experiences, may help us to discover more of who we are. IE we change our perception of ourself.

I don't identify myself at all with porn preferences, so a modification in what porn I happen to get off on would probably not feel like a change. St. verbatim, may personally perceive porn preference part of who he is (5 P's w00t!)... but again, I think that may be our perception of who we think we are.

[Epimetheus]

Personally, I think changing one's filters IS changing one's behavior, even though that seems inherently incorrect to me.

Changing the filters = changing the way data is recieved in the brain = changing the way you think about that data = changing the way you think = changing the way you behave because of those thoughts.

Maybe there's a flaw in my logic. Please point it out.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Personally, I think changing one's filters IS changing one's behavior, even though that seems inherently incorrect to me.

Changing the filters = changing the way data is recieved in the brain

I disagree. Changing filters seems (to me) to modify the data we choose to focus on. It's still received the same way, through the neurological system. It still gets modified by our first four circuit imprints (if you're familiar with leary's metaphor)... we just choose to focus on that particular data rather than other data (see Wilson's quarter experiment).

Putting different data into a program doesn't change the program.. it just changes the data.

= changing the way you think about that data = changing the way you think = changing the way you behave because of those thoughts.

I think that if we have different data that we're focused on, we may learn more about how we think about that data, but its not changing the fundamental You (The Hardware, Operating System etc... just new web pages, new databases, new photo galleries).

More knowledge seems able to lead to real changes, but not through knowledge processing alone. Through processing new ideas, we might decide that we need to change ourselves. Metaprogramming, physical experiences that evoke a paradigm shift... those can fundamentally change stuff. But, I don't think data alone does this.

I also think that line of thought may be dangerous, not only because we make make cosmic schmucks out of ourselves (confusing who we are, with who we think we are), but it may also lead to people thinking that they are making a lot more progress on themselves that may actually be the case.

I like the reality tunnel metaphor a lot for this reason, we can grow or shrink our tunnel, it can take in more or less data, we can point it in different directions... but the person looking down the tunnel is still the person looking down the tunnel.

[Epimetheus]

I like the reality tunnel metaphor a lot for this reason, we can grow or shrink our tunnel, it can take in more or less data, we can point it in different directions... but the person looking down the tunnel is still the person looking down the tunnel.

But if you're looking down the tunnel and a gnat buzzes out at you, versus if you're looking down the tunnel and the train comes, there's a difference there, and there's a difference in the effect it has on you. I think every experience has the potential to change who you are on a fundamental level.