We have perception. We have imagination. We have memory. We have habit. Through deep investigation, I have come to the possibility that this is all the mind is composed of. Perception is stored in memory. Imagination creates action through memory, habit is that action burned into the brain, possibly physically burned. Habit and memory are both outside of our consciousness, yet imagination and perception make up our consciousness. Imagination creates habit, therefore habit is avoidable if all action starts with imagination. Memory is separate from action, but knowledge is probably our habitual thoughts based on our memory. So we start with perception, and through this we store up memory, which we draw up from our imagination, we create habit somewhere along the line through the of repetition of action. Did I miss something?
"Who am I? I am aware of my feelings, so I am not my feelings-who am I? I am aware of my thoughts, so I am not my thoughts-who am I? Clouds float by in the sky, thoughts float by in the mind, feelings float by in the body-and I am none of those because I can Witness them all. Moreover, I can doubt that clouds exist, I can doubt that feelings exist, I can doubt that objects of thought exist-but I cannot doubt that the Witness exists in this moment, because the Witness would still be there to witness the doubt. I am not objects in nature, not feelings in the body, not thoughts in the mind, for I can Witness them all. I am that Witness-a vast, spacious, empty, clear, pure, transparent Openness that impartially notices all that arises, as a mirror spontaneously reflects all its objects...." - Ken Wilbur
I want to find out why habit forms. We have perception, our input, we have imagination, our output, we have memory of our perceptions, our hard drive. But then we have this habit. Habit causes us to be mechanized. We have no control. We are unconscious of the immediate action produced through habit, we are not able to control its creation. Why does habit form though? Do we allow it to form? Do we strive to create a perfect system in our minds that will keep us happy forever? I want to discuss this.
Are we, then, our awareness? Isn't that something we have (like feelings, a body)? Wouldn't that mean we are not our awareness, but the awareness of our awareness? And so on forever into infinity? Personally I don't so much disagree with the above quote that you posted. Just think we should be clear on what we mean.
Trippen, I see what you're saying, but awareness is not something we have. Awareness is. Awareness is the center. Let's look at something we are aware of. (And I have to use the words I, we, me, etc.) A bird chirps. We hear it. Are we the hearing? Yes we have the mechanical structures that allow the hearing to take place, but we are not those structures anymore then we are the bird or the sound waves. Further the ear, brain, etc. do not in themselves constitue the hearing by themselves. We still need the bird and the sound waves for the hearing to take place. And so on, the more we look the more we see. We need the entire world for the hearing to take place. We need the air, the earth to hold the air, the birds parents to produce the bird, the sun, the solar system, etc, etc, etc. So getting back to what we are.... We find that we cannot divide the world into seperate parts and so there is no we or I to have this awareness. Saying "I am that Witness-a vast, spacious, empty, clear, pure, transparent Openness that impartially notices all that arises, as a mirror spontaneously reflects all its objects...." is just saying that you are everything-undivided-and "you" know it. Isness, What kind of habits are you talking about? Like, B.F. Skinner stuff or Pavlov?
I see. Good point, and I agree about not being able to seperate things out. "My body" means nothing without the environment (air, water, sun) that sustains it. The environment is just as much part of my body as my liver.
I'd say pavlovian formation (meagain). Thought of that before I saw your message (meagain) in the thread. I don't remember what skinner said about habit formation (if it conflicted with pavlov, or if it added to pavlov), vaguely remember skinner box.
If you can get it from your library, this book gives a good mind trip into the subject: Figments of Reality: Evolution of the Curious Mind Ian Stewart, Jack Cohen Also: The Essence of Happiness: A Guidebook for Living ~Dalai Lama XIV Bstan-'dzin-rgya-mtsho, et al
I thought skinner just followed pavlov. They both studied classical conditioning and were both behaviorists, right? Shit, how many psych classes have I taken in college so far? 5? I should know this...
Okay, Skinner: "Changes in behavior are the result of an individual's response to events (stimuli) that occur in the environment. A response produces a consequence such as defining a word, hitting a ball, or solving a math problem. When a particular Stimulus-Response (S-R) pattern is reinforced (rewarded), the individual is conditioned to respond." Pavlov: "First, we start with an existing relationship, Unconditioned Stimulus ---> Unconditioned Response. Second, we pair a new thing (Conditioning Stimulus) with the existing relationship, until the new thing has the power to elicit the old response." So Skinner offers rewards and punishment to get a response, Pavlov pairs a pre-existing pattern with a new pattern. Then presents the new pattern by itself which invokes the older pre-existing pattern. So, why do these things work? is the question, I think. Now, as for unconscious action. There are massive amounts of unconscious actions that we partake of everyday. Everything from beating our heart to most aspects of driving a car to "reading" peoples' fascial expressions. And we can form concepts, learn (pavlov), think, and reason unconsciously.
