Is introspection a reliable scientific method?

  • 43 Replies
  • 4056 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« on: 04/07/2016 11:31:41 »
Conscious access of the mind via introspection is essential in the empirical study of consciousness. The "conscious access hypothesis" is based on the global access of information in the cerebral cortex, an emerging property of consciousness. However, the scientific methodology of introspection remains poorly understood. Is it possible to develop a methodology to study how computational analysis of consciousness affect our subjective experience through cognitive information processing in the cerebral cortex? Could introspection become the study and research workbench of the computational theory of the mind?

The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #1 on: 04/07/2016 20:16:21 »
Synaptic hypercomputation of conscious experience via THC administration:

Could introspection be used to cognitively process informations in the cerebral cortex? Does metacognitive skills can be developed via conscious access of self-organized informations to acquire (compute) new learnings of consciousness? I propose "quantum introspection" as a novel scientific method to hypercompute conscious experience into synaptic activity using exogenous THC administration. Furthermore, the non-locality of quantum introspection using intracellular CB1 activation suggest conscious access as the hypercomputational capacity of synapses using synaptic quantum tunnelling.
« Last Edit: 04/07/2016 20:36:39 by tkadm30 »
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 573
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #2 on: 04/07/2016 21:16:18 »
Introspection will be needed to research the final frontier; the nature of consciousness. For example, dreams show how the brain can generate content apart from our choice and will. Dreams cannot be fully analyzed with only third person observations of brain hardware. Dreams need to be experienced in the first person, in real time, to gather subtle data you can't see with a hardware approach.

The scientific method, when it comes to consciousness, is more geared toward addressing the hardware side. Introspection will be the tool needed to address the software side of consciousness.

An analogy is say you have a computer. It is not easy to infer what software is running simply by looking how the hardware of the computer is behaving. One might be able to distinguish between extreme gaming and low CPU usage word processing, but not between two extreme games. This will require looking at the code. 

I have often said that humans have two centers of consciousness. This can be observed with introspection. It may not be obvious using a hardware approach. The inner self is the primary center and is connected to the unconscious mind. It controls personality firmware all of which can be observed with introspection. These can be partially inferred with a hardware approach, because it is firmware; hard/soft. But there are software aspects that are better addressed with first person observation.

Introspection is a skill that one needs to develop. One need to learn to become both the scientist and the experiment. Your brain and psyche will become the experiment. Another part of your; secondary center, will be the observer. Often one has to be both subjective and objective at the same time; allow subjectivity so you can observe and analyze it.

Computational approaches may be useful for the conscious mind and or the ego center. However, they will not be as useful for the inner self. The inner self uses a much faster 3-D language, whereas logic and language is slower and more 2-D. The mechanics of language; words, sentences and structure is processed in the left brain. The inner self tends to use the right brain, and a very fast/dense 3-D language often called symbols.

An emotional valence, which is processed in the right brain, can seem simple; love. Bu that tone is often a very complex data signal; compressed into 3-D. The love one may feel is the result of a lot of water under the bridge. The analogy is playing 1 minute of speech in 1 second. All the complexity of the language sounds will appear like a buzz, but it nevertheless contains all the data. Introspection skills allow one to intercept 3-D signals.

Introspection experiments can also be very dangerous since one is a stranger in a land where you don't know the customs. You can unknowingly mess with the operating system and cause a destabilization which can limited your ability to be objective. This is when introspection can break down and not be scientific. One may merge with firmware, or ride the white water rapids struggling not to drown; no value as a scientist. But if you survive, you get map a path so it is easier for the next generation of explorers to may get even further.

The reason introspection is not yet a part of science is, science is afraid of first person science; rightfully so.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #3 on: 05/07/2016 13:10:44 »
Pharmacological introspection of the mind via THC administration: Could THC potentiate introspection skills ?

Quote
Consider the possibility of a drug that enhances introspection. Might there be drugs that increase the mind's perception of what drugs are doing to it? The hypothesized drug would increase the self-referential qualities of the nervous system. "Pay attention to attention."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2702330/
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 593
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #4 on: 05/07/2016 13:57:26 »
No.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #5 on: 05/07/2016 14:10:22 »
Please explain your objections. I don't see how THC could not be a pharmacological agonist to CB1 receptor via introspection.   
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 6564
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #6 on: 05/07/2016 21:41:40 »
My original post was somehow deleted.

I am for "YES"

To be scientifically objective, a scientist must have a completely open mind, especially if his belief system is inimical to the question.

I then suggested a position held by Alexander Pope in "Essay on Man"

"Know then thyself
Presume not God to scan
The proper study of mankind is man."
The mind is like a parachute. It works best when open.  -- A. Einstein

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #7 on: 06/07/2016 12:06:46 »
Quote
The core hypothesis is the optimistic expectation that the nervous system and consciousness have the potential to be self-referential in an accurate and positive manner. Undoubtedly, delusion and addiction are possible and known to be potential problems with respect to drugs that alter the mind. Having said that, it is reasonable to entertain the hypothesis that the mind can inform as well as fool itself. Introspection is a name for processes whereby the mind of an individual reflects on and assesses itself. If the optimistic hypothesis is accepted, then a further hypothesis is that all introspection is not equal and some modes of introspection are better than others. A further hypothesis is that enhancement and education of introspection is possible.

Is it possible to enhance pharmacological introspection by using THC to increase conscious access to subjective experiences?
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #8 on: 06/07/2016 13:36:52 »
Is it possible to enhance pharmacological introspection by using THC to increase conscious access to subjective experiences?
We already have access to subjective experiences; by most assessments, consciousness is subjective experience (e.g. Thomas Nagel - an organism has conscious mental states, "if and only if there is something that it is like to be that organism—something it is like for the organism").

It is certainly possible to potentiate - and distort - subjective experience by pharmacological means (psychotropics). This can provide a limited degree of insight into the construction of perceptual reality (via perceptual distortions), and the construction of the self (through distortions of self-image, perspective, location, ownership, boundaries/extent, agency, feelings, etc).

But there is a potential catch with explicit introspection and that is the mapping of the conscious self. It appears that, just as our experiential reality is an internal model corrected by sensory feedback, the conscious self is a construct based on a simplified (and inaccurate) internal self-model (probably generated by the same processes that provide theory of mind); so conscious introspection is likely to elaborate or, worse, confabulate, on this partial model, the person we think we are, rather than the hidden bulk below conscious awareness that produces the 'real' person. I doubt much work has been done in this respect as it is so difficult to study, but it seems likely that in the absence of a deliberative route (Kahneman's 'System 2') to the subconscious, System 1's accessibility heuristic will play a part.

However, at a conference on consciousness I attended last weekend, a new study was described, that suggests that if you want to become closer to, or more conscious of, subconscious mental processes, meditation or mindfulness is the way to go; in a study of the chronometry of voluntary action (timing the build up of the readiness potential, and the subjective sense of decision, prior to volitional physical action, as per Benjamin Libet) subjects who practiced meditation or mindfulness showed a reduced gap between the onset of the readiness potential and conscious awareness of volition, compared to non-meditators. This suggests a reduced threshold of awareness for preconscious activity; a small step, but an interesting one.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #9 on: 06/07/2016 16:46:48 »
Absolutely yes!

self-contemplation, self-examination
musing, reflection, rumination, thoughtfulness, contemplation, reflexion - a calm, lengthy, intent consideration
self-analysis, soul-searching - a penetrating examination of your own beliefs and motives

Alan
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 6564
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #10 on: 09/07/2016 05:15:27 »
Is it possible to enhance pharmacological introspection by using THC to increase conscious access to subjective experiences?

Yes. The downside is that using a chemical "crutch" to experience the subjective experience makes the ability to experience naturally occuring subjective experiences much more difficult.
The mind can learn to enter enhanced states without chemicals.

That is what eastern religions and meditation is all about.
The mind is like a parachute. It works best when open.  -- A. Einstein

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 573
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #11 on: 09/07/2016 12:16:09 »
Quote
The core hypothesis is the optimistic expectation that the nervous system and consciousness have the potential to be self-referential in an accurate and positive manner. Undoubtedly, delusion and addiction are possible and known to be potential problems with respect to drugs that alter the mind. Having said that, it is reasonable to entertain the hypothesis that the mind can inform as well as fool itself. Introspection is a name for processes whereby the mind of an individual reflects on and assesses itself. If the optimistic hypothesis is accepted, then a further hypothesis is that all introspection is not equal and some modes of introspection are better than others. A further hypothesis is that enhancement and education of introspection is possible.

Is it possible to enhance pharmacological introspection by using THC to increase conscious access to subjective experiences?

There are two aspects of introspection; Scientist and the experiment. THC might be able to enhance the experimental side, but it may diminish the scientist side. For example, one may get the munchies. To analyze this as a scientist, one needs to make a conscious effort not to eat, so they can observe the induction. However, one may merge with the impulse; buy a pizza, losing the objectivity of the scientist.

« Last Edit: 09/07/2016 12:25:23 by puppypower »

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #12 on: 09/07/2016 13:59:45 »
There are two aspects of introspection; Scientist and the experiment. THC might be able to enhance the experimental side, but it may diminish the scientist side. For example, one may get the munchies. To analyze this as a scientist, one needs to make a conscious effort not to eat, so they can observe the induction. However, one may merge with the impulse; buy a pizza, losing the objectivity of the scientist.

I have no doubts pharmacological introspection via THC is theoretically subjective. But to experimentally increase self-awareness and metacognitive skills may require an altered state of consciousness to detach the inner self from its physical body. Thus the objectivity of introspection is probably depending on the medium used to acquire new knowledges from conscious observation of the experiment.
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 781
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #13 on: 09/07/2016 14:54:07 »


I have often said that humans have two centers of consciousness. This can be observed with introspection. It may not be obvious using a hardware approach. The inner self is the primary center and is connected to the unconscious mind. It controls personality firmware all of which can be observed with introspection. These can be partially inferred with a hardware approach, because it is firmware; hard/soft. But there are software aspects that are better addressed with first person observation.


   As a person with a bi-polar mind I try to analyze myself. I am hypermanic and go from normal to hypermanic and back to normal. I never suffer depressions. When In a very hyper state my outer mind communicates with my inner mind. Thus my brain has two different sections. My inner brain never seems to sleep. At night as I sleep it works. As an engineer I often had problems to solve which no one could solve. My inner brain would work out the problems and transfer the data to my outer brain as I awoke. At times during tests or solving the rubic cube, my outer brain could not get the answer. Then I would go into a robotic state and become only hands which were controlled by my inner brain.
  The problem I have always had with respect to my studies of the physics of the universe and religious quests was whether my inner mind had the right answer. At work it was easy. I used the answers and they were always right. On tests when I let my inner mind take over, I would always get 100%. So at different times I bring myself up to an excited level and get the data from my inner mind. But then my outer mind has to analyze the data and thus there is always a conflict as my outer mind always seek contrary answers as I try to disprove what my inner mind says. So there is always a battle for truth between both sections of my brain.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #14 on: 09/07/2016 16:49:14 »


I have often said that humans have two centers of consciousness. This can be observed with introspection. It may not be obvious using a hardware approach. The inner self is the primary center and is connected to the unconscious mind. It controls personality firmware all of which can be observed with introspection. These can be partially inferred with a hardware approach, because it is firmware; hard/soft. But there are software aspects that are better addressed with first person observation.


  As a person with a bi-polar mind I try to analyze myself. I am hypermanic and go from normal to hypermanic and back to normal. I never suffer depressions. When In a very hyper state my outer mind communicates with my inner mind. Thus my brain has two different sections. My inner brain never seems to sleep. At night as I sleep it works. As an engineer I often had problems to solve which no one could solve. My inner brain would work out the problems and transfer the data to my outer brain as I awoke. At times during tests or solving the rubic cube, my outer brain could not get the answer. Then I would go into a robotic state and become only hands which were controlled by my inner brain.

  The problem I have always had with respect to my studies of the physics of the universe and religious quests was whether my inner mind had the right answer. At work it was easy. I used the answers and they were always right. On tests when I let my inner mind take over, I would always get 100%. So at different times I bring myself up to an excited level and get the data from my inner mind. But then my outer mind has to analyze the data and thus there is always a conflict as my outer mind always seek contrary answers as I try to disprove what my inner mind says. So there is always a battle for truth between both sections of my brain.

We are both bi-polar in fact since the age of 35 until now at the age of 76 I have battled against this curse and blessing. It opens doors to other realities and spiritual realms of extreme spirituality and I find that it has brought me closer to God rather than what would be expected. It is humans that shy away from me at times as if I were some sort of an alien from elsewhere in the universe. I find that in the hyper-manic state my focus is almost infinitely precise and sustainable.
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #15 on: 09/07/2016 17:27:06 »
Could introspective skills be physiological evidences of increased grey matter volume and connectivity in the prefrontal cortex?

Quote
So, although each participant performed equally well at the task, their introspective abilities did vary considerably, the researchers confirmed. By comparing the MRI scans of each participant’s brain, they could then identify a correlation between introspective ability and the structure of a small area of the prefrontal cortex. An individual’s meta-cognitive, or “higher-thinking,” abilities were significantly correlated with the amount of gray matter in the right anterior prefrontal cortex and the structure of neighboring white matter, Rees and his team found.

These findings, however, could reflect the innate differences in our anatomy, or alternatively, the physical effects of experience and learning on the brain. The latter possibility raises the exciting prospect that there may be a way to “train” meta-cognitive abilities by exploiting the malleable nature of these regions of prefrontal cortex. But, more research is needed to explore the mental computations behind introspection—and then to link these computations to actual biological processes.

http://www.aaas.org/news/science-specific-brain-region-linked-introspective-thoughts
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #16 on: 09/07/2016 17:52:36 »
Semantic priming in remitted patients with bipolar disorder. (2013) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22922076

Hyper-priming in cannabis users: a naturalistic study of the effects of cannabis on semantic memory function. (2010) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20122742

Quote
The finding of decreased priming in patients with BD raises the possibility that semantic processing abnormalities in BD are of a different nature than those encountered in schizophrenia

The hypothesis that cannabis use may increase automatic semantic priming (hyper-priming) while the decreased priming in bipolar disorder patients suggests that introspection is biologically relevant to grey matter density. 
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #17 on: 09/07/2016 19:23:33 »
Semantic priming in remitted patients with bipolar disorder. (2013) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22922076

Hyper-priming in cannabis users: a naturalistic study of the effects of cannabis on semantic memory function. (2010) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20122742

Quote
The finding of decreased priming in patients with BD raises the possibility that semantic processing abnormalities in BD are of a different nature than those encountered in schizophrenia

The hypothesis that cannabis use may increase automatic semantic priming (hyper-priming) while the decreased priming in bipolar disorder patients suggests that introspection is biologically relevant to grey matter density.

You might have a point but it is a moot point because in South Africa where I live just the possession of Pot is a crime!

However, just the opposite of what you are suggesting is that the use of cannabis actually worsens mental illnesses.

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/there-link-between-marijuana-use-
psychiatric-disorders


Several studies have linked marijuana use to increased risk for psychiatric disorders, including psychosis (schizophrenia), depression, anxiety, and substance use disorders, but whether and to what extent it actually causes these conditions is not always easy to determine.31 The amount of drug used, the age at first use, and genetic vulnerability have all been shown to influence this relationship. The strongest evidence to date concerns links between marijuana use and substance use disorders and between marijuana use and psychiatric disorders in those with a preexisting genetic or other vulnerability.

Recent research (see AKT1 Gene Variations and Psychosis) has found that marijuana users who carry a specific variant of the AKT1 gene, which codes for an enzyme that affects dopamine signaling in the striatum, are at increased risk of developing psychosis. The striatum is an area of the brain that becomes activated and flooded with dopamine when certain stimuli are present. One study found that the risk for psychosis among those with this variant was seven times higher for daily marijuana users compared with infrequent- or non-users.62


« Last Edit: 09/07/2016 19:34:14 by Alan McDougall »
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline jerrygg38

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 781
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #18 on: 09/07/2016 23:21:57 »

We are both bi-polar in fact since the age of 35 until now at the age of 76 I have battled against this curse and blessing. It opens doors to other realities and spiritual realms of extreme spirituality and I find that it has brought me closer to God rather than what would be expected. It is humans that shy away from me at times as if I were some sort of an alien from elsewhere in the universe. I find that in the hyper-manic state my focus is almost infinitely precise and sustainable.

A fellow sufferer! I have been this way since birth. Yet in youth my bipolar nature was great and I considered it a blessing. At 42 I pushed myself to a higher limit which was stupid of me. I then started a study of God and the Universe. In the end I have spent 35 years in my studies. I refused to take any medicine. So I suffered the manic highs. It cost me financially but I managed to retire early and stay at middle class existence.
   So what did I accomplish? So I created many books with different perspectives and have very small sales on Kindle and Create space. Years ago I self published and it cost me a lot of money.
   I believe in God but I am not religious. I do produce religious and non-religous theories in my books.
   

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #19 on: 10/07/2016 00:24:58 »
However, just the opposite of what you are suggesting is that the use of cannabis actually worsens mental illnesses.

I disagree. I believe cannabis use may actually heal mental disorders by enhancing introspective and metacognitive abilities of the mind: Metacognition and introspection are essential conscious activities to overcome psychiatric disorders using subconscious processing.

Most mental disorders are belief-based and are not caused by a neurological condition. It is the purpose of introspection to examine theses beliefs originating from the unconscious mind.   

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3277324/
« Last Edit: 10/07/2016 00:35:15 by tkadm30 »
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #20 on: 10/07/2016 09:15:54 »
However, just the opposite of what you are suggesting is that the use of cannabis actually worsens mental illnesses.

I disagree. I believe cannabis use may actually heal mental disorders by enhancing introspective and metacognitive abilities of the mind: Metacognition and introspection are essential conscious activities to overcome psychiatric disorders using subconscious processing.

Most mental disorders are belief-based and are not caused by a neurological condition. It is the purpose of introspection to examine theses beliefs originating from the unconscious mind.   

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3277324/

Where you dug up your unscientific nonsense beats me I still insist it is a religious cultic idea spawned by Scientology.

Have you ever subjectively experienced a "Mental Disorder , even if you assumed it was caused just by incorrect thinking

Others studies disagree totally with your position

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html#

Many of these research studies indicate that the risk is higher when the drugs are used by people under the age of 21, a time when the human brain is developing rapidly and is particularly vulnerable.

People with any biological predisposition towards schizophrenia are at the highest risk -- unfortunately its impossible to accurately identify this predisposition beforehand ( a family history of mental illness is just one indicator of such a predisposition). [see causes and prevention of schizophrenia for more information on all risk factors linked to a person developing schizophrenia]

Researchers in New Zealand found that those who used cannabis by the age of 15 were more than three times (300%) more likely to develop illnesses such as schizophrenia. Other research has backed this up, showing that cannabis use increases the risk of psychosis by up to 700% for heavy users, and that the risk increases in proportion to the amount of cannabis used (smoked or consumed). Additionally, the younger a person smokes/uses cannabis, the higher the risk for schizophrenia, and the worse the schizophrenia is when the person does develop it. Research by psychiatrists in inner-city areas speak of cannabis being a factor in up to 80 percent of schizophrenia cases.

Professor Robin Murray (London Institute of Psychiatry) has recently (2005) completed a 15-year study of more than 750 adolescents in conjunction with colleagues at King's College London and the University of Otago in New Zealand.

Overall people were 4.5 times more likely to be schizophrenic at 26 if they were regular cannabis smokers at 15, compared to 1.65 times for those who did not report regular use until age 18.

Many researchers now believe that using the drug while the brain is still developing boosts levels of the chemical dopamine in the brain, which can directly lead to schizophrenia.

Professor John Henry, clinical toxicologist at Imperial College London said research has shown that people with a certain genetic makeup who use the drug face a ten times (1000%) higher risk of schizophrenia. (for example - if your risk of schizophrenia was 6% (due to a family history of mental illness) prior to taking cannabis, it could be 60% -- or more likely than not - after taking cannabis). Every person is different (i.e. has different genes and different environments) - so this "10 Times Higher Risk with cannabis use"- is just a generalization, and it may or may not apply to a given person.

The increased risk applies to people who inherit variants of a gene named COMT and who smoked cannabis as teenagers. About a quarter of the population have this genetic make-up and up to 15 per cent of the group are likely to develop psychotic conditions if exposed to the drug early in life. Neither the drug nor the gene raises the risk of psychosis by itself.

A recent Dutch study showed that teenagers who indulge in cannabis as few as five times in their life significantly increase their risk of psychotic symptoms.

The increase in evidence during the past decade could be tied to the increased potency of marijuana. A review by the British Lung Association says that the cannabis available on the streets today is 15 times more powerful than the joints being smoked three decades ago.

Schizophrenia can sometimes be triggered by heavy use of hallucinogenic drugs, especially LSD; but it appears that one has to have a genetic predisposition towards developing schizophrenia for this to occur. There is also some evidence suggesting that people suffering from schizophrenia but responding to treatment can have an episode as a result of use of LSD. Methamphetamine and PCP also mimic the symptoms of schizophrenia, and can trigger ongoing symptoms of schizophrenia in those who are vulnerable.

Melbourne University's Professor David Castle stated in a February, 2005 interview that heavy drug use during formative times of life, such as the years at school, could affect the way a teenager or young adult thought, impairing cognitive ability and having a long-term impact on job prospects. Victorian studies had revealed that regular use of cannabis by adolescent girls could trigger long-term depression. And for those vulnerable to a psychotic disorder, even a small amount of cannabis could pose a threat.

Professor Castle, author of the book Marijuana and Madness, has said that those people with this "psychotic proneness" were those who had a family history of mental illness or who had had a bad response on their first use of cannabis or to a tiny amount. Others at risk included those who had experienced a psychotic episode where they had paranoid thinking or heard a voice calling their name. Professor Castle said experiencing such a one-off episode was far more common than people thought.

"People with such a vulnerability should avoid cannabis like the plague," he said.

Without the effects of the drug, such a person might live their whole life without ever experiencing mental health problems. It has been estimated, for example, that between 8% and 13% of people that have schizophrenia today would never have developed the illness without exposure to cannabis.

Professor Castle compared the effect to feeding sweets to a diabetic. While high sugar content foods did not cause too many problems for most people in the short term, they could be catastrophic for diabetics.

He said there was an accumulative effect when it came to cannabis use and schizophrenia. Those who used the drug more than once a week were more prone to needing hospitalisation and often suffered other associated problems such as the breakdown of relations with their family, isolation, crime and violence.

   * Cannabis impacts on neurotransmitters that regulate how arousal and stress are managed in the brain. Cannabis takes a long time to metabolise, and can quickly build up to high levels in the body. Once you get to this point, there is a real risk of depression or schizophrenia being triggered.

   * A Swedish study of 50,000 military conscripts found heavy use of cannabis increased the risk of suicide by four times (400%). A Victorian study of 2332 adolescents found weekly use increased the risk of suicide attempts among females by five times. Weekly use as a teenager doubled the risk of depression and anxiety. Daily use at the age of 20 boosted the risk of depression and anxiety by five times (500%).


Helpful Actions: If you want to avoid getting schizophrenia - research suggests that the number one thing you should avoid are street drugs (especially marijuana/cannabis - but because you never know what someone has put into a street drug, all of them are dangerous). By avoiding use of all street drugs research suggests that you can greatly reduce the chance (by as much as 50% to 80% if you are biologically predisposed) that you'll develop schizophrenia. Avoiding marijuana after developing schizophrenia also helps reduce relapse rates. Some people with schizophrenia suggest that it makes them feel better, but if depression is an issue we recommend these people talk to their Psych-Doc about possible anti-depressant use rather than street drugs.

Do not use even small amounts of cannabis if you have any family history of mental illness, have had an episode of paranoid thinking or hearing voices or had a bad response when first using cannabis or when using a small amount.

Other street drugs are also very dangerous - partly because they are produced in home laboratories with virtually any possible combination of additional substances mixed in with the drugs. See: Crystal Meth & Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia and Cannabis Video Report:

A recent Internet video report on schizophrenia and cannabis has recently become available. To play the video go to the following link - and then click on "Play" button to view any of the 6 different sections of the video report: Messing with Heads: New Research into the longterm effects of Cannabis (Internet Video, 2005) from the Australian Broadcasting Company (ABC).

Supporting News (a sample):
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #21 on: 10/07/2016 11:09:54 »
Have you ever subjectively experienced a "Mental Disorder , even if you assumed it was caused just by incorrect thinking

I have received a diagnostic of "schizophrenia", apparently caused by chronic cannabis use. However i still enjoy smoking cannabis and even with the forced medication I never suffered from this mental illness. I assume the methodology to diagnose mental disorders is subjective and totally ignore the risks of medication. The incorrect thinking is the perception that psychiatry is a brilliant medical science: In fact, psychiatry is "quackery, a pseudo-science which lacks independent diagnostic tests, testable hypotheses, and cures for "schizophrenia" and all other types of alleged "mental illness" or "mental disorder"."

http://www.antipsychiatry.org/25reason.htm

So, I guess mental disorders are just convenient labels for psychiatric drugging. No one can ever "experience" a mental disorder even with introspection.     
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #22 on: 10/07/2016 12:58:56 »
Quote
Another element which further muddles the scene is the way in which the term 'schizo­phrenia' has come to be used, especially in the United States and Soviet Union.  Some professionals will label as 'schizophrenic' virtually anyone who looks cross-eyed or wears different color socks.  Labels like 'borderline schizophrenic,' 'latent schizo­phrenic, 'pseudo­neurotic schizophrenic' are used.  As such the term has become almost meaning­less and its demise, along with that of psychiatry itself, will be a welcome addition to the clarity of thought.  ...  The term 'schizophrenia' will wither away to the shelves of museums, looked back upon as an historical curiosity along with the crank telephone." — Psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey, M.D., in his book The Death of Psychiatry (Penguin Books 1974, p. 160)

http://www.wayneramsay.com/schizophrenia.htm
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #23 on: 10/07/2016 16:25:25 »
Quote
Another element which further muddles the scene is the way in which the term 'schizo­phrenia' has come to be used, especially in the United States and Soviet Union.  Some professionals will label as 'schizophrenic' virtually anyone who looks cross-eyed or wears different color socks.  Labels like 'borderline schizophrenic,' 'latent schizo­phrenic, 'pseudo­neurotic schizophrenic' are used.  As such the term has become almost meaning­less and its demise, along with that of psychiatry itself, will be a welcome addition to the clarity of thought.  ...  The term 'schizophrenia' will wither away to the shelves of museums, looked back upon as an historical curiosity along with the crank telephone." — Psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey, M.D., in his book The Death of Psychiatry (Penguin Books 1974, p. 160)

http://www.wayneramsay.com/schizophrenia.htm

You just will not give up your pseudo-Scientology nonsense will you no matter how much scientific evidence to the contrary to your belief.

You are a fundamentalist who believes you are right and everyone else on earth is wrong !

Maybe your mind is so fogged up with pot that you are unable to accept the truth and think like a logical person.

My advice give up the grass and get a life!
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #24 on: 10/07/2016 16:59:04 »
You just will not give up your pseudo-Scientology nonsense will you no matter how much scientific evidence to the contrary to your belief.

You are a fundamentalist who believes you are right and everyone else on earth is wrong !

Maybe your mind is so fogged up with pot that you are unable to accept the truth and think like a logical person.

My advice give up the grass and get a life!

Your hate of nonconformity is perhaps the truth you ignore in promoting the pharmaceutical mafia
pseudoscience...

Myths about cannabis have nothing to do with its ability to enhance introspection!

I'm convinced the truth is available by opening your mind to thoses who thinks differently than yourself...

I hope you enjoy your stay on scientific forums...
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #25 on: 10/07/2016 17:42:37 »
You just will not give up your pseudo-Scientology nonsense will you no matter how much scientific evidence to the contrary to your belief.

You are a fundamentalist who believes you are right and everyone else on earth is wrong !

Maybe your mind is so fogged up with pot that you are unable to accept the truth and think like a logical person.

My advice give up the grass and get a life!

Your hate of nonconformity is perhaps the truth you ignore in promoting the pharmaceutical mafia
pseudoscience...

Myths about cannabis have nothing to do with its ability to enhance introspection!

I'm convinced the truth is available by opening your mind to thoses who thinks differently than yourself...

I hope you enjoy your stay on scientific forums...

Keep on smoking!
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #26 on: 10/07/2016 17:47:41 »
Keep on smoking!

"A closed mind is a dying mind." -Edna Ferber

The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #27 on: 11/07/2016 00:34:11 »
Keep on smoking!

"A closed mind is a dying mind." -Edna Ferber

Your mind is so open it might fall out of your head, keep you delusion.

http://cannabisandpsychosis.ca/more-information/what-do-we-know/

What do we know about the link between cannabis and psychosis?

In the last few years there have been an increasing number of studies examining the relationship between cannabis and psychosis. This has captured not only the attention of the research community but also the popular media and public in general. Although it is well known that using cannabis can induce temporary psychotic/hallucinatory symptoms this accumulating body of evidence has suggested that there is an association between some youth who use cannabis regularly and enduring psychosis. Several recent studies suggest that frequent cannabis use during adolescence is associated with a clinically """significant increased risk of developing schizophrenia and other mental illnesses which feature psychosis.""

Some of the headlines about these studies in the media may be leading the everyday reader to believe that there is a ""direct casual relationship between marijuana and psychosis"", i.e. that the"" average person who smokes some pot may become psychotic"". Though this definitely makes for a gripping news story and there are some studies that suggest this causal link, according to the abundance of scientific literature and various other forms of information (e.g. web and print-based resources, anecdotal evidence, documentaries evidence) the nature of the link between the two seems to be more complicated than this. Before we take a closer look at this link, let's first review the basic facts about psychosis and cannabis.


The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #28 on: 11/07/2016 11:31:11 »
What do we know about the link between cannabis and psychosis?

Thats a great example of how the pharmaceutical industry is a proponent of anti-cannabis laws. Cannabis doesn't cause schizophrenia/psychosis. This is a myth... Having myself experimented with cannabis for long enough, I can tell you that schizophrenia is a fictious disorder and theres no causal link between cannabis and "schizophrenia".

"In summary, we conclude that cannabis does not cause psychosis by itself. In genetically vulnerable individuals, while cannabis may modify the illness onset, severity and outcome, there is no evidence from this study that it can cause the psychosis.”"   

http://www.leafscience.com/2013/12/08/marijuana-cause-schizophrenia-harvard-study-finds/

The whole point in all the pseudoscientific voodoo of psychiatry is this: Psychiatric drugs does impair cognitive processes and harm the brain. By consenting to psychiatric treatments, you lose the ownership of your body and mind. For me, cannabis smoking is a way to reclaim the ownership of my consciousness.

The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #29 on: 11/07/2016 16:21:50 »
What do we know about the link between cannabis and psychosis?

Thats a great example of how the pharmaceutical industry is a proponent of anti-cannabis laws. Cannabis doesn't cause schizophrenia/psychosis. This is a myth... Having myself experimented with cannabis for long enough, I can tell you that schizophrenia is a fictious disorder and theres no causal link between cannabis and "schizophrenia".

"In summary, we conclude that cannabis does not cause psychosis by itself. In genetically vulnerable individuals, while cannabis may modify the illness onset, severity and outcome, there is no evidence from this study that it can cause the psychosis.”"   

http://www.leafscience.com/2013/12/08/marijuana-cause-schizophrenia-harvard-study-finds/

The whole point in all the pseudoscientific voodoo of psychiatry is this: Psychiatric drugs does impair cognitive processes and harm the brain. By consenting to psychiatric treatments, you lose the ownership of your body and mind. For me, cannabis smoking is a way to reclaim the ownership of my consciousness.

You are proof that it is not a myth because you are obviously delusional due to your untreated schizophrenia, my advice is for you to make an appointment with a good physiatrist  to bring you back into reality.

And distance yourself from the madness of Scientology.

Or keep on smoking the poison! 
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #30 on: 11/07/2016 17:31:06 »
You are proof that it is not a myth because you are obviously delusional due to your untreated schizophrenia, my advice is for you to make an appointment with a good physiatrist  to bring you back into reality.

And distance yourself from the madness of Scientology.

Or keep on smoking the poison!

LOL. The difference between me and you is that you're consenting to your psychiatric treatment while I don't. Your "brilliant madness" is nothing but a figment of your imagination; In contrast, my forced treatment is involuntary and based on my chronic consumption of cannabis, that is all. Cannabis is not really socially acceptable because it's medical values are in direct opposition to psychiatric drugs. You should educate yourself on the medical benefits of cannabis before unleashing your hate on natural medicine used since 2500 b.c.

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/chap2B/China/China.htm

PS: I have actually a very good "physician"... He sells me his product whenever I feel down or naive about why we exists! In reality life is good and marijuana is a blessing we cultivate for its abilities to tamper our ignorance. I don't pretend I have the absolute truth on everything, but feeling that introspection is a skill which requires training. Pot is not for everyone; It is made for thoses who seeks careful examination of their inner consciousness in order to gain higher learning about the chaotic world we live in. 

"One love, one heart
Let's get together and feel all right" -Bob Marley (One Love)
« Last Edit: 11/07/2016 17:37:24 by tkadm30 »
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #31 on: 11/07/2016 18:48:06 »
You are proof that it is not a myth because you are obviously delusional due to your untreated schizophrenia, my advice is for you to make an appointment with a good physiatrist  to bring you back into reality.

And distance yourself from the madness of Scientology.

Or keep on smoking the poison!

LOL. The difference between me and you is that you're consenting to your psychiatric treatment while I don't. Your "brilliant madness" is nothing but a figment of your imagination; In contrast, my forced treatment is involuntary and based on my chronic consumption of cannabis, that is all. Cannabis is not really socially acceptable because it's medical values are in direct opposition to psychiatric drugs. You should educate yourself on the medical benefits of cannabis before unleashing your hate on natural medicine used since 2500 b.c.

http://antiquecannabisbook.com/chap2B/China/China.htm

PS: I have actually a very good "physician"... He sells me his product whenever I feel down or naive about why we exists! In reality life is good and marijuana is a blessing we cultivate for its abilities to tamper our ignorance. I don't pretend I have the absolute truth on everything, but feeling that introspection is a skill which requires training. Pot is not for everyone; It is made for thoses who seeks careful examination of their inner consciousness in order to gain higher learning about the chaotic world we live in. 

"One love, one heart
Let's get together and feel all right" -Bob Marley (One Love)

Leave it at that keep in smoking your weed and give up preaching Scientology garbage You are now on my ignore list, in fact, you are the only one on it because you have earned it by your illegal drug postering.

Haile Selassie is not my god?
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 573
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #32 on: 12/07/2016 12:28:16 »
One of the hazards of introspection type research, are the more advanced data inductions; way beyond dreams, which are the most interesting to study through introspection, have a social taboo. If you look at schizophrenia, unconscious inductions, separate from the conscious mind and ego, are overlapping and becoming more dominant. This is a stage of introspection research when personality firmware become active so they can be observed in action.

These firmware and/or subroutines are traditionally observed from the outside using standard science practices; from output affects. However, from the POV of introspection research, there are additional dimensions of data that can be observed from the inside, you just can't see from the outside. However, the idea of wanting to induce schizophrenia in the scientist, so he can collect this extra dimensions of data, is scary and unsettling.  Introspection research may not be for everyone. It is more for those with a certain temperament and daredevil spirit. Introspection will see other data allowing different theories. Tkadm30 may well have generated extra internal data which makes the status quo seem incomplete. But unless one goes inside to see for yourself, one may well to rely on the prestige of external science as the final say. 

As far as marijuana type inductions, this may help one trigger certain types of internal data; experiments. But chronic use can weaken the scientist's ability to separate himself, with the same level of internally objectivity, that external science uses, externally. Objectivity and data analysis is a key component that makes it science. One might be able to generate lots of data, but if you don't do anything with the data, you are only an experiment. Introspection research is both data generation and data analysis.

A good place to learn how to use the data is study collective human symbolism, such as in the collective works of Carl Jung. He calls the personality firmware the archetypes of the collective unconscious. His collective works contain a huge library of collective human symbolism, from which you can analyze data. It can get very complicated, which is why you need clear periods to help the scientist,  within, focus.

His most advanced book, which is called Mysterium Conjunctions or the mystical union, is about synthesis symbols or symbols of integration. These can be used to reintegrate the personality; experiment, without  the need of drugs. The introspection scientists does this from the inside and does not need props. This is an extremely intense aspect of introspection research. Symbols are the 3-D language which the unconscious mind uses and which the firmware understand.

When I went through this phase of introspection research, I had to invent a tool to help me. It is called thought dimensional theory, which organizes brain generated information from 0-D to 4-D thought, wth the limits of 0-D and 4-D included for completeness. What I found are the firmware are spread out into three zones within that range. If you know any of the three zones, some of which are easier to observe, you know the other two. It made it easier for me to keep my bearings. It was based on many years of previous observational data. This is getting long. Maybe I will develop the basics of thought dimensional theory in another post.

*

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1285
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #33 on: 12/07/2016 12:45:14 »
One of the hazards of introspection type research, are the more advanced data inductions; way beyond dreams, which are the most interesting to study through introspection, have a social taboo. If you look at schizophrenia, unconscious inductions, separate from the conscious mind and ego, are overlapping and becoming more dominant. This is a stage of introspection research when personality firmware become active so they can be observed in action.

These firmware and/or subroutines are traditionally observed from the outside using standard science practices; from output affects. However, from the POV of introspection research, there are additional dimensions of data that can be observed from the inside, you just can't see from the outside. However, the idea of wanting to induce schizophrenia in the scientist, so he can collect this extra dimensions of data, is scary and unsettling.  Introspection research may not be for everyone. It is more for those with a certain temperament and daredevil spirit. Introspection will see other data allowing different theories. Tkadm30 may well have generated extra internal data which makes the status quo seem incomplete. But unless one goes inside to see for yourself, one may well to rely on the prestige of external science as the final say. 

As far as marijuana type inductions, this may help one trigger certain types of internal data; experiments. But chronic use can weaken the scientist's ability to separate himself, with the same level of internally objectivity, that external science uses, externally. Objectivity and data analysis is a key component that makes it science. One might be able to generate lots of data, but if you don't do anything with the data, you are only an experiment. Introspection research is both data generation and data analysis.

A good place to learn how to use the data is study collective human symbolism, such as in the collective works of Carl Jung. He calls the personality firmware the archetypes of the collective unconscious. His collective works contain a huge library of collective human symbolism, from which you can analyze data. It can get very complicated, which is why you need clear periods to help the scientist,  within, focus.

His most advanced book, which is called Mysterium Conjunctions or the mystical union, is about synthesis symbols or symbols of integration. These can be used to reintegrate the personality; experiment, without  the need of drugs. The introspection scientists does this from the inside and does not need props. This is an extremely intense aspect of introspection research. Symbols are the 3-D language which the unconscious mind uses and which the firmware understand.

When I went through this phase of introspection research, I had to invent a tool to help me. It is called thought dimensional theory, which organizes brain generated information from 0-D to 4-D thought, wth the limits of 0-D and 4-D included for completeness. What I found are the firmware are spread out into three zones within that range. If you know any of the three zones, some of which are easier to observe, you know the other two. It made it easier for me to keep my bearings. It was based on many years of previous observational data. This is getting long. Maybe I will develop the basics of thought dimensional theory in another post.

An interesting and informative post, thank you!

"Augmented human sensory perception" is the title of a paper detailing my research into the human psyche?

I have  done research into human sensory perception, some of which involves altered states of consciousness. Which include introspection as one of its facets of the human psyche.

In it,  I explored the possibility of a universal superconsciousness that pervades all reality, which suggests that all conscious beings are interconnected causing an effect which affected all other sentient minds,  in some a yet unknown way.

Alan

« Last Edit: 12/07/2016 12:57:42 by Alan McDougall »
The Truth remains the Truth regardless of our beliefs or opinions the Truth is always the Truth even if we know it or do not know it (The Truth remains the Truth)

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #34 on: 12/07/2016 12:55:29 »
One of the hazards of introspection type research, are the more advanced data inductions; way beyond dreams, which are the most interesting to study through introspection, have a social taboo. If you look at schizophrenia, unconscious inductions, separate from the conscious mind and ego, are overlapping and becoming more dominant. This is a stage of introspection research when personality firmware become active so they can be observed in action.

These firmware and/or subroutines are traditionally observed from the outside using standard science practices; from output affects. However, from the POV of introspection research, there are additional dimensions of data that can be observed from the inside, you just can't see from the outside. However, the idea of wanting to induce schizophrenia in the scientist, so he can collect this extra dimensions of data, is scary and unsettling.  Introspection research may not be for everyone. It is more for those with a certain temperament and daredevil spirit. Introspection will see other data allowing different theories. Tkadm30 may well have generated extra internal data which makes the status quo seem incomplete. But unless one goes inside to see for yourself, one may well to rely on the prestige of external science as the final say. 

As far as marijuana type inductions, this may help one trigger certain types of internal data; experiments. But chronic use can weaken the scientist's ability to separate himself, with the same level of internally objectivity, that external science uses, externally. Objectivity and data analysis is a key component that makes it science. One might be able to generate lots of data, but if you don't do anything with the data, you are only an experiment. Introspection research is both data generation and data analysis.

A good place to learn how to use the data is study collective human symbolism, such as in the collective works of Carl Jung. He calls the personality firmware the archetypes of the collective unconscious. His collective works contain a huge library of collective human symbolism, from which you can analyze data. It can get very complicated, which is why you need clear periods to help the scientist,  within, focus.

His most advanced book, which is called Mysterium Conjunctions or the mystical union, is about synthesis symbols or symbols of integration. These can be used to reintegrate the personality; experiment, without  the need of drugs. The introspection scientists does this from the inside and does not need props. This is an extremely intense aspect of introspection research. Symbols are the 3-D language which the unconscious mind uses and which the firmware understand.

When I went through this phase of introspection research, I had to invent a tool to help me. It is called thought dimensional theory, which organizes brain generated information from 0-D to 4-D thought, wth the limits of 0-D and 4-D included for completeness. What I found are the firmware are spread out into three zones within that range. If you know any of the three zones, some of which are easier to observe, you know the other two. It made it easier for me to keep my bearings. It was based on many years of previous observational data. This is getting long. Maybe I will develop the basics of thought dimensional theory in another post.

Very good post puppypower, as usual. I just would like to emphase that "schizophrenia" is not internally objective
via introspection. Peoples will label someone a "schizophreniac" just because of its personality and their inner perception of nonconformity. However, I agree that thinking outside the box is sometimes scary and unrational to others. Thus I believe introspection is a tool to explore the unconscious mind through imagination and creativity. I'm convinced someone is not a "schizophreniac" simply because he believes in the power of imagination to discover and examine science based on its conscious experience.
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 593
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #35 on: 12/07/2016 13:25:57 »
What do we know about the link between cannabis and psychosis?

Thats a great example of how the pharmaceutical industry is a proponent of anti-cannabis laws. Cannabis doesn't cause schizophrenia/psychosis. This is a myth... Having myself experimented with cannabis for long enough, I can tell you that schizophrenia is a fictious disorder and theres no causal link between cannabis and "schizophrenia".
While I agree that cannabis likely has little causal impact on schizophrenia disorders, it is foolish to ignore the reality of these disorders.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #36 on: 12/07/2016 13:44:03 »
While I agree that cannabis likely has little causal impact on schizophrenia disorders, it is foolish to ignore the reality of these disorders.

Schizophrenia is human nature. When someone think outside the box, peoples cannot be aware of the objectivity of how the mind is working. Conscious experience is subjective but with introspection it is possible I think to potentiate metacognitive skills.
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 573
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #37 on: 12/07/2016 13:55:48 »
Thanks everyone!

One of the hazards of introspection type research, are the more advanced data inductions; way beyond dreams, which are the most interesting to study through introspection, have a social taboo. If you look at schizophrenia, unconscious inductions, separate from the conscious mind and ego, are overlapping and becoming more dominant. This is a stage of introspection research when personality firmware become active so they can be observed in action.

These firmware and/or subroutines are traditionally observed from the outside using standard science practices; from output affects. However, from the POV of introspection research, there are additional dimensions of data that can be observed from the inside, you just can't see from the outside. However, the idea of wanting to induce schizophrenia in the scientist, so he can collect this extra dimensions of data, is scary and unsettling.  Introspection research may not be for everyone. It is more for those with a certain temperament and daredevil spirit. Introspection will see other data allowing different theories. Tkadm30 may well have generated extra internal data which makes the status quo seem incomplete. But unless one goes inside to see for yourself, one may well to rely on the prestige of external science as the final say. 

As far as marijuana type inductions, this may help one trigger certain types of internal data; experiments. But chronic use can weaken the scientist's ability to separate himself, with the same level of internally objectivity, that external science uses, externally. Objectivity and data analysis is a key component that makes it science. One might be able to generate lots of data, but if you don't do anything with the data, you are only an experiment. Introspection research is both data generation and data analysis.

A good place to learn how to use the data is study collective human symbolism, such as in the collective works of Carl Jung. He calls the personality firmware the archetypes of the collective unconscious. His collective works contain a huge library of collective human symbolism, from which you can analyze data. It can get very complicated, which is why you need clear periods to help the scientist,  within, focus.

His most advanced book, which is called Mysterium Conjunctions or the mystical union, is about synthesis symbols or symbols of integration. These can be used to reintegrate the personality; experiment, without  the need of drugs. The introspection scientists does this from the inside and does not need props. This is an extremely intense aspect of introspection research. Symbols are the 3-D language which the unconscious mind uses and which the firmware understand.

When I went through this phase of introspection research, I had to invent a tool to help me. It is called thought dimensional theory, which organizes brain generated information from 0-D to 4-D thought, wth the limits of 0-D and 4-D included for completeness. What I found are the firmware are spread out into three zones within that range. If you know any of the three zones, some of which are easier to observe, you know the other two. It made it easier for me to keep my bearings. It was based on many years of previous observational data. This is getting long. Maybe I will develop the basics of thought dimensional theory in another post.

An interesting and informative post, thank you!

"Augmented human sensory perception" is the title of a paper detailing my research into the human psyche?

I have  done research into human sensory perception, some of which involves altered states of consciousness. Which include introspection as one of its facets of the human psyche.

In it,  I explored the possibility of a universal superconsciousness that pervades all reality, which suggests that all conscious beings are interconnected causing an effect which affected all other sentient minds,  in some a yet unknown way.

Alan

The superconsciousness that you sense is actually inside you and can be investigated with introspection. If you live only by an external perception extroverted reality, the inner self will project like a movie overlay to make content conscious, where one expects to find it. It is better you see it as an overlay than not at all.

We have two sides of the brain. Although both sides work at the same time, we are usually conscious of one side at a time, unless you make an effort through introspection. The unconscious side sees the same thing but through the prism of instinct, which connects us and it to nature and therefore reality.

For example, if you went to another country, say Japan and when to a baseball game, you may notice, initially how everyone seems to have common characteristic. This is from the right brain; It creates a 3-D perception; unifies lot of data. The left brain is more differential and will notice differences. Both work together but one may not be conscious of both at the same time. Often the missing one is sensed to be there but projected outward, where western thinking believes all good can be found.

To help this discussion, I am going to develop my thought dimensionality theory. It will bring this all together in a very compact and powerful tool for investigation.

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 573
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #38 on: 12/07/2016 13:56:56 »
Thought Dimensionality Theory

In thought dimensionality theory (TDT), geometrical analogies are used to express different types of thought and perception. I discovered that these math plotting analogies gave me an easy way to plot consciousness data so it was easy to explain, remember and correlate while in the field.

Let me just dive into it!

There are three basic levels of thought 1-D, 2-D and 3-D. The 1-D thoughts are analogous to a line; linear. These are thoughts with a one to one correspondence; x=k. For example, the letters of any alphabet are 1-D, in that they always means the same thing. Dogma tries to be 1-D since it is not allowed to change, at risk of censor or death. Even though 1-D is simple, it is quite important to all thought, since it represents the foundation and the hard data that we all agree upon.

The next level is 2-D thought. In terms of geometry this is a plane, with an x-axis and y-axis. Logic is an example of 2-D thought, which labels the two axis x=cause and y=affect. Logical thinking follows a curve that is plotted on the 2-D plane, between these two axis. The two axis of 2-D thought can also be good and evil, male and female, right and wrong, black and white, liberal and conservative, etc,. Once the axis are set, we then go through a process similar to reason, drawing curves on the plane between these axis.

Although logic is the most advanced use of 2-D thinking, other axis labels, like polarizations; good and evil, can also be used to process data in 2-D. The difference between logic and the other types of polarizations, has more to do with the types of curves we draw on the 2-D plane. I will get into this later, after I develop the basics.

The next level of thought is 3-D thoughts. Like in math, 3-D has three axis, x, y, z and can seen as a ball or cube. Symbolism, which is the language of the unconscious mind is 3-D. It has an extra z-axis which one senses through intuition. It is not rational or 2-D due to the extra z-axis.

For example, the statue of liberty is both a sign and a symbol. As a sign, it is 1-D thought. It is a very specific statue in New York City with a very specific history; one to one correspondence. As a symbol it represents liberty and freedom, which are both nebulous concepts and not do easy to pin down, since it also contains an intuitive component, open axis. Books have been written about liberty using that z-axis.

Dogma, which attempt to portray itself as 1-D; linear truth that never changes, does so because it also unconsciously assumes the truth is 3-D; sign and symbol. For example, God is resented as Allah, Buddha and Jesus; 1-D, while also being defined as infinite in possibilities; 3-D.

In physics E=MC2, defines a very specific connection between matter and energy; 1-D, yet its application scope has no bounds; 3-D. The two sides of the brain will blend the two, with the 1-D dogma more connected to the conscious mind and 3-D the unconscious mind. It 3-D nature, often unconscious, gives its a compelling asymptote effect; eternal feeling, due to the z-axis.

E=MC2 is also unique because it is 1-D; dogma, 2-D logical math, 3-D universal. Humans can connect to E=MC2, at any of its levels, with the other two active, at some unconscious level. We all meet our minds in the blend no matter where we begin. This is useful for identifying firmware. If one is in a strong induction, losing objectivity, you don't need to analyze a complex abstraction in 3-D, but just look for a simple 1-D sign, that is part of its integration. Each firmware has its own 1-D tell sign.

I will pause here. Next time I will explain the dimensional ranges between from 0-D to 1-D; 1.5-D, 1-D to 2-D; 2.5-D, 3-d to 4-D; 3.5-D.

*

Offline PhysBang

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 593
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #39 on: 12/07/2016 14:04:53 »
While I agree that cannabis likely has little causal impact on schizophrenia disorders, it is foolish to ignore the reality of these disorders.

Schizophrenia is human nature. When someone think outside the box, peoples cannot be aware of the objectivity of how the mind is working. Conscious experience is subjective but with introspection it is possible I think to potentiate metacognitive skills.
I'm sorry that I did not notice before the you got sucked in by the Scientology cult. I am sorry for you and I hope you make it ok.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1441
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #40 on: 12/07/2016 14:17:07 »
While I agree that cannabis likely has little causal impact on schizophrenia disorders, it is foolish to ignore the reality of these disorders.
Yes, heavy cannabis use appears to be associated with some disorders, but as I understand it, those sufferers often show a predisposition to the disorder (genetic, e.g. familial, or long-term behavioural predictors).

It's not always clear in which direction the correlation is causal (if indeed it is) - are such personality types more likely to self-medicate with cannabis? does cannabis trigger psychosis in the predisposed? can cannabis cause psychosis? or is it some combination of the above?

The other confounding factor is the type and strength of cannabis involved. In the 1960's and '70's, a wide variety of cannabis was imported from Asia and India, mainly as varieties of hash, including oil. Herbal cannabis was a far lower percentage of the market than it is today. All these forms were rich in cannabinoids and relatively lower in THC than many modern strains. Cultivation of herbal cannabis and breeding programmes to increase the strength of the product have markedly reduced the percentage of cannabinoids in favour of extremely high THC levels in varieties like Skunk.

Cannabinoids have been shown to have protective effects against THC-related psychosis, and it may be the huge reduction in cannabinoids in 'super-strength' varieties that is behind the apparent rise in diagnoses - I say apparent rise, because it's possible that some of this reported increase may be due to greater diagnosis with cannabis posited as contributory, and some may simply be due to wider reporting via the internet (social media, etc).

What is clear is that, for the vast majority of cannabis users, there are no significant health effects of long-term regular use other than those attributable to the unfortunate habit of mixing it with tobacco.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #41 on: 12/07/2016 14:21:27 »
I'm sorry that I did not notice before the you got sucked in by the Scientology cult. I am sorry for you and I hope you make it ok.

LOL. Could you please enlighten us why you think I'm a scientologist? I'm fascinated by how you connect "Scientology" to introspection in general.
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #42 on: 03/10/2016 12:05:33 »
Is cognitive introspection a form of scientific meditation ? Can THC-mediated introspection be used to meditate about metacognitive subjects not accessible without chemical activation of CB1 receptors? I believe cognitive introspection is a form of scientific method to gain access to higher functions of consciousness, including imagination and critical thinking.
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1041
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is introspection a reliable scientific method?
« Reply #43 on: 16/10/2016 21:48:10 »
What is meditation exactly?

I believe endocannabinoid synthesis can trigger meditation and cognitive introspection
via intracellular CB1 receptor activation.

Higher levels of consciousness exists and depends on neuronal phase coherence
to hypercompute reality.

The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.