Like Ra in latex catsuit, latex mask and high heels
Like Ra's Naughty Playground

jialuowei
Women High Heel slippers Metal Thin Heels Pleated Peep-toe Female Sexy Fetish Pumps Shoes
$889.35-30%

transparent panties
Women's Transparent Panties Sweet Underwear Open Crotch Thongs Embroidery Sexy Briefs Lingerie Erotic Beaded G-Strings T-Back
$19.93

camatech
camaTech PU Leather Zipper Single Glove Armbinder with Over Shoulder Straps Sexy Full Sleeve One Arm Binder Bondage Restraints
$272.25-35%

telescopic masturbator
Sucking Vibrators for Women Wireless Remote Control Telescopic Vibrating Clit Sucker Sex Toys for Women Female Masturbation
$45.96-59%

cock cage
Silicone Penis Cock Ring Delay Ejaculation Super Small Chastity Cage Couple Penisring Bdsm Sex Toy for Men Gay 18 Adult supplies
$2.87

gjhond
Male Chastity Device Chastity Lock Cage Stainless Steel Arc Penis Sex Products Silicone Catheter 40/45/50m Sex Toy for Men G253B
$63.98-44%

app electric shock
Wireless Clit Sucker Vibrator Sex Toys for Couples G Spot Wearable Electric Shock Massager APP Control Sex Game for Adults Women
$43.84-34%



To view Aliexpress you might need to switch your mobile browser to the Desktop version.

If you would like to use search functions, view hidden archives or play games, please consider registering.


General hypnosis and NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming) discussion
I've tweaked the post above a bit šŸ˜Š
Reply
(18 Dec 2019, 02:00 )princesitanatty Wrote: Panpsychism is not a mainstream position in science
True, but it's getting more supporters nowadays. Mostly from neuroscientists, who could not find either "thoughts" or "consciousness" in any brain, even with the most sophisticated equipment which allows to map each neuron.

And a typical question: at what time the fetus becomes conscious?
Reply
Like Ra Wrote:
princesitanatty Wrote:Panpsychism is not a mainstream position in science
True, but it's getting more supporters nowadays. Mostly from neuroscientists, who could not find either "thoughts" or "consciousness" in any brain, even with the most sophisticated equipment which allows to map each neuron.

And a typical question: at what time the fetus becomes conscious?
Only a few fringe scientists. Thoughts and consciousness are not things, and that's the reason why they cannot be found in any brain. They are processesĀ of organisms with a brain.Ā We know they develop gradually in the fetus. It's a mistake to treat every word as naming a thing that can be located somewhere, many words don't name things.
Reply
Yes, and no. The problem is, we are trying to understand a system from within the system, what is impossible. The neuroscientists say:"If the brain were so simple, so we could understand it, we would not understand it". Of course, "a thought" is not "a thing", but (at this science level) "an electrochemical process". The science is still trying to break, smash or dissect things, because this is the currently scientifically approved way. The science will continue doing it until the exceptions overweight the rules. OTOH, the astrophysics invented a perfect way to explain exceptions - they call the exceptions "dark". "Dark matter", "dark energy" šŸ˜

Something new needs to come. New measurements, new measuring devices. New (or 5000-6000 old?) paradigms. However, new ideas do not monetize. You won't get a new grant, unless it's "approved" by "the normal scientific society ". And we need "mad scientists". Madly! šŸ˜
Reply
I disagree with that. I don't think it's impossible to understand a system from within the system, and I don't think scientists need to change their current philosophical approach to understand mind. I think new devices and theories are aeady emerging, but without the need of changing our current philosophical approach, which is doing pretty well. Anyway, time will tell.
Reply
(18 Dec 2019, 04:14 )princesitanatty Wrote: I don't think scientists need to change their current philosophical approach to understand mind.
The neuroscientists admit that the current approach does not work. Remember what was Einstein for physics? Mad guy with mad ideas, which did not conform anything what was usual at that time. Quantum mechanics does not conform common sense. Why should the mind conform it? It's more complicated. Scientists MUST doubt "the usual", the dogmas, the common sense, the proved theories, the "approved ideas". Otherwise, they are not scientists. Fortunately, the society stopped burning "mad scientists" alive. But continue to laugh them out...

Another thing. The money streams, and the fear, that these streams will stop flowing prevent the scientists from stopping beating dead horses. This is something what's going on with the string theory, for example. The last symposium in Japan (dedicated to the 50th anniversary of the string theory) was quite ridiculous. Especially the Q&A section. They basically admitted, that this theory does not work. But they will continue, otherwise where will they get the money from?
Reply
Like Ra Wrote:
princesitanatty Wrote:I don't think scientists need to change their current philosophical approach to understand mind.
The current approach does not work. The neuroscientists admit that. Remember what was Einstein for physics? Mad guy with mad ideas, which did not conform anything what was usual at that time. Quantum mechanics does not conform common sense. Why should the mind conform it? It's more complicated. Scientists MUST doubt "the usual", the dogmas, the common sense, the proved theories, the "approved ideas". Otherwise, they are not scientists. Fortunately, the society stopped burning "mad scientists" alive, but continue to laugh them out...
I disagree. MainstreamĀ approachesĀ in neuroscienceĀ areĀ working very well, and most scientists agree with them. Our knowledge in that areaĀ advances fast, much faster thanĀ in any other time of our history. It's reasonable to put money where it's working well. A few scientists explore other options, and that's ok, they're free to do that, and to put their bets in other approaches. But that doesn't imply that mainstream approaches are not working well.
String theory is another issue, it's not working well, and it's more controversial.
Reply
(18 Dec 2019, 04:51 )princesitanatty Wrote: MainstreamĀ approachesĀ in neuroscienceĀ areĀ working very well, and most scientists agree with them. Our knowledge in that areaĀ advances fast, much faster thanĀ in any other time of our history.
In terms of physical characteristics - yes. But not in the fundamental questions, like: what is consciousness, when/if it appears or disappears, what/who is conscious, how thoughts are formed, etc. There is no progress there.

There was an interesting Mythbusters episode, when they were testing the hypothesis about plants reaction and emotions. Mythbusters were virtually scared of the results, but in the final version they made everything to make the experiment fail - you can't make it public, that the about to be destroyed plants were screaming...
Reply
(23 Dec 2019, 19:48 )princesitanatty Wrote: Do you know "mantra-hypnos"? I mean, most hypnosis have an intro and a set of commands and descriptions. But some hypnos are just a few words or sentences repeated over and over, sometimes with the addition of rhythm or moans or music. I don't know if you consider them included or excluded from the category of "hypnosis", I guess they are included.

I would call this method a "brainwashing". This is what politics, media or advertisers use - they mention something over and over again, until the general public begins to think of it as of a fact, which "everybody knows".

There is another effect, which I will discuss in "my coming blog series" (and not, before you ask, it's not a "clinically approved fact", and it's not approved by the the current scientific society either šŸ˜ ) Basically, it (at least) "intersects" with some reasons and effect behind the "usual" (e.g. Sanskrit) mantras.
Reply
(23 Dec 2019, 20:13 )LikeĀ Ra Wrote: Let 's move the mantras discussion into the general hypno thread: https://www.likera.com/forum/mybb/showth...p?tid=2136
Why do you propose to move my request of mantra-hypnos? I think its current location isĀ more accurate. I'm asking for examples, not for a "general discussion".
By the way, I disagree with your claim that it's "brainwashing", and it would be ok to discuss that issue in the other thread, but that was not my goal here.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
Short and effective hypno and NLP files Like Ra 1 3,603 19 May 2022, 23:15
Last Post: alavkin
Layered(?), NLP like files, what is how perceived? peterpumm 4 2,721 25 Nov 2019, 23:12
Last Post: Like Ra