No.49027
I have a theory. The reason why some people are highly susceptible to hypnosis is because they have no free will i.e. NPCs. Not only that, those who are psychical, those who are just barely aware of themselves (see video below), are also susceptible to hypnosis and can revert themselves to NPCs if they are not careful. Notice how the majority of erotic hypnosis consumers here are sissies, faggots, trannies, and B4mb1s, and shills who are all collective identity groups who don't think for themselves, and many of them converted into one of them by listening to hypnosis. Hence, NPCs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTn6UMzAgZY
Discuss.
No.49028
Yeah. What you have is solipism with a clear case of ethical egoism. Get therapy.
No.49030
>>49028
Typical NPC response.
No.49032
You've been playing too long. You should take a break.
No.49037
Your theory is wrong. Susceptibility to hypnosis goes up with your ability to read facial expression, vocal tone, and social cues, so the "I can't be hypnotized" fags are outing themselves as idiots or actual autists.
>Notice how the majority of erotic hypnosis consumers here are sissies, faggots, trannies, and B4mb1s, and shills who are all collective identity groups who don't think for themselves, and many of them converted into one of them by listening to hypnosis
They aren't interested in hypnosis per se, they're interested in fucking themselves up and see bad hypnosis files + flashing videos as another tool alongside drugs and hormones.
No.49039
>>49037
>bad hypnosis files + flashing videos
… as long as they work …
No.49041
>>49039
>work
These people are lonely guys with bad self-esteem who fell for the trap meme instead of fixing their problems. Reddit-tier music videos with flashing PornHub clips won't magically turn someone gay.
No.49044
>>49041
>Reddit-tier music videos with flashing PornHub clips won't magically turn someone gay.
What will?
No.49049
No.49052
>>49037
The ones who can't be hypnotized are the ones who don't want to be hypnotized. A big part of hypnosis being successful is going along with the narrator and being told what to imagine and doing it. Saying them wanting fuck themselves up doesn't explain how all of these groups subscribe to the same progressive ideologies. But if you are saying they find life too difficult as a PC and they want to give up their humanity to have an easy "life" as an NPC, that I do agree with.
No.49053
This is a great theory. I've never understood hypnosis as anything more than a stage play social spectacle. If you've purposefully explored ego death and loss of "control" then its highly unlikely that you would succumb to any form of hypnosis you didn't want to particpate in.
You can gaslight someone into the sunken place but it requires constant attention.
Perhaps it relates to the pineal gland and it's supposed function of overseeing the brain operate. Aka an observer meta layer.
The frontal cortex is largely attributed to willpower and decision making. Perhaps the NPCs are physically poisoning their minds on top of an already low tier genetic disposition.
I like the idea that we are all on different sections of the process of "waking up" and that with enough laziness and lethargy you too could sucumb to your urges. And that with enough gusto and effort/attention, even a NPC/muggle could become a player.
I just know sooooooo many people that only ever progress in life when I'm in the room. As in the skills and ideas they claim to care about never actually progress unless they are in front of me actively larping.
No.49056
>>49052
>The ones who can't be hypnotized are the ones who don't want to be hypnotized
Also false. If you believe you cannot be hypnotized and aren't retarded/severely autistic, you're actually more at risk for impromptu or covert inductions. Those are rare in our circles lack of imagination and talent but they still exist and can still affect you.
The best defense against unwanted hypnosis/conditioning isn't pretending that you're some sort of immune superman, but accepting that your mind is vulnerable and instead cultivating your ability to analyze things.
If you want an example of an unhypnotizable person, I used to know a low-functioning autist in his mid-30s who did Pokemon roleplay in his spare time. He took everything so literally that talking with him in anything but borderline toddlerspeak was almost impossible, but despite his crippling mental impairment the guy somehow found a job as an embedded systems programmer.
People used this retard to read out semi-interactive template hypnosis inductions starring their favourite Pokemon.
No.49059
>>49044
>>49049
Even real hypnosis is unlikely to change someone's sexuality, but by associating certain images and thoughts with bursts of hypnotically-induced pleasure, you can create a Pavlovian response that mimics it somewhat.
No.49064
>>49030
An unfalsifiable theory. Perfect.
No.49065
>>49059
Ehhh ….. even that I would doubt. There's kind of a long history of gay people being conditioned to "'be straight"'; it doesn't actually make them straight though.
No.49069
>>49027
https://youtu.be/_Lki2FlXX64
d e b u n k e d
No.49121
>>49069
>Thinks posting a link without a summary of its key points is an argument
>Expects me to spend 25 minutes watching it
>Probably thinks "Heh, if anon doesn't watch the video to address this specific point, then I win!"
>Already declaring victory
Bombarding the opposition with information to burn them out should be an argumentative fallacy if it already isn't.
No.49122
>>49037
I don't think this is it at all. I think NPCs don't have an inner voice, but most people have an inner voice and the ability to visualize.
I saw an article a few years ago that said around 5% of the population are unable to visualize things. This blew my mind, I always though it was just a figure of speech and in my head just sort of verbally described things to myself. I asked others and they said it's more like "seeing" something in your mind even though you're not seeing it, as if it skips where the visual would be processed and is just manufactured in their mind.
I think this is a skill that can probably be learned, but I believe it has a large impact on hypnosis. I can enter "trance", but the only way I can visualize anything is describing it to myself, not letting the voice paint a picture for me see. If I "let go" I see nothing.
No.49125
>>49122
Wow.
Okay.
Wow.
This is fascinating.
I'm not sure you yet have a good grasp of what's going on with other people's mental images, as I (and presumably the other people in that 95% group) can picture things in my mind with absolutely no words needing to be associated with them. If somebody says "a white house" I can form a mental image of a white house, but if I want to just start imagining things I can picture literally anything without the need for labels. Even when there's a specific informational prompt like "a white house" I will automatically fill in everything that would be associated with a house like a yard, street, people, etcetera, without individually thinking "yard," "street," "people," etcetera, it's all just filled in without specifically thinking about the little details.
I'm honestly having a hard time trying to grasp what it would be like to NOT be able to do so. If somebody asks what color your house is, how do you access that information without being able to picture it? Is it just stored mentally as a data point of "my house is X color"?
No.49127
>>49027
Strong hypothesis, good luck testing it.
No.49135
>>49121
Wow, you think I give a fuck about this kinder-garden level discussion, lol.
Just quickly gave you a chance to stop being a moron, don't care if you take it or not.
My mistake I guess… Ive assumed sense you have the time to be an autistic around here, you'll have time to watch a video.
No.49136
>>49125
I mean I have an idea of what things are and how they look, I just don't see them.
For example if you asked me to picture a table I wouldn't just have a mental image pop into my head. Instead I would just sort of recall the general appearance of a table.
I guess think about how if I asked you to describe how your bed looks without looking at it. How would you describe it to me? Obviously you can't show me the image in your head of the bed, so how would you relay it to me? Now I take that description and just remember the description. I can understand how pieces fit together and how it may appear, but I guess in my head it's more of an analytical thing.
Some things don't really need description, but they're subconsciously there. So for a bed I'll already assume it's a rectangle with a mattress and blankets and pillows etc. I know all those objects, I know the colors, I know the fabrics, there just isn't an image in my head of them.
Try not to visualize and tell me what a chair in your kitchen looks like. Just as quickly as you can write down the description directly from memory rather than from your visualization of the chair itself. That might be a good way for you to get an idea of how it works for me, but honestly I have no idea.
For what it's worth I'm not sure if I'm autistic or not. When I was younger I did have some trouble socializing and reading social cues.
Around 13 I started naturally improving and developing a sense of humor, but I still had problems.
At 16 I had a breakup with my girlfriend and it was like I had an epiphany that although I developed a likable personality I didn't really know how to use it to really fit in and make connections with people, so I made a point of improving my ability to talk with and behave around people.
People tend to like me, think I have a good sense of humor etc. I also feel like I can fit into most groups. I tend to be able to recognize the general group dynamics and highlight the aspects of my personality that fit in well with that group and suppress the ones that don't.
Again I purposefully learned this. I'm pretty introverted and prefer to have a few close friends to hang out with and talk who are introverted as well. I can fit in with normie groups but it's just so fucking exhausting because I can't just do it naturally.
On the same topic here is a video suggesting that people's minds work very differently from one to another than we might think:
https://youtu.be/Cj4y0EUlU-Y
https://youtu.be/jrk3GbJU0k0
No.49138
>>49136
>>49125
I forgot a few things
Oh another interesting thing I was thinking about a while ago on this subject, that actually seems really interesting given the way I have to just remember the descriptions of things.
I believe I'm fairly smart.I know everyone says that but I've always been good at things like math or English. Unfortunately my memory is absolute shit. I'm not forgetful in regards to not knowing where I put something, when I have an event coming up or anything like that. I just have a lot of trouble with information recall. Although I absolutely crushed math, I absolutely could not do geometry because I couldn't remember the formulas. In science there was no way in hell I would be able to memorize the periodic table.
On the other hand I can drill number sequences into my head such as a credit card number if I use it enough times.
I'm very unsure how my memory works. People always look up to the sky to remember things. I used to think this is because when I need to remember something I just stop or slow down the processing of what's in front of me to access my memory. I don't need to do this all the time as a lot of things are just there, but I have to sometimes.
Now I've questioned if people are looking up to the sky to access visual memory while I'm accessing my inner voice memory, though I can't be sure if that's what people are doing.
I really enjoy writing and I've always done well on things like essays. I never finished high school and found some success without it. My friends in university sometimes ask me to proof read their papers for them and I end up just rewriting a lot of it and they always get an A. On the other hand in school when I was asked to write a fictional short story I would just sit there with a blank sheet of paper in front of me and have no idea where to even start as if I couldn't just imagine a story.
I do have to revisit things quite a bit though, that's why I had to do a second post. It's like I'll write something and think it's complete. Then I'll post it and process what I wrote and realize there is more I want to say or change how I worded things. When I post on boards that allow me to edit my posts I almost always make several edits when I make a long post. I spend too much time discussing/arguing shit on the internet because I'll take a long time writing a post to try to put out all the thoughts I have in my head, and then have to go back and add more or clarify things I wrote because I've almost had an entire discussion with myself by trying to put my inner voice into words.
Then posts get really long like this because it feels impossible to actually get all the ideas and thoughts out.
No.49139
>>49136
>>49138
FUCK I just wanted to clarify another thing, this is what I'm talking about.
I do very well at writing papers for people because I have that ongoing conversation inside my head. So I'll write something and read it over and over and try to think how other people will process it. I'll make a ton of changes several times but eventually when I'm done I think it actually becomes coherent and puts forward a clear message people can understand.
Jesus Christ maybe I really am autistic
No.49148
>>49138
>>49136
>>49139
Thanks much! That was really interesting! Have you ever looked at the typology? For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socionics
By what you write you look like a logical subtype of the Logical Intuitive Introvert (INTj in the Myers-Briggs sense of things). Autistic elements DO skew every typology, though.
Interesting. Thanks again, and please continue!
>>49138
>I'll take a long time writing a post to try to put out all the thoughts I have in my head, and then have to go back and add more or clarify things I wrote because I've almost had an entire discussion with myself by trying to put my inner voice into words.
Same!
No.49155
>>49136
>Try not to visualize and tell me what a chair in your kitchen looks like. Just as quickly as you can write down the description directly from memory rather than from your visualization of the chair itself.
See, I can't do that. The image pops to mind automatically when trying to think about an object, much less its attributes, and thanks to the white bear problem I'll picture it more if trying not to.
>>49138
>Now I've questioned if people are looking up to the sky to access visual memory while I'm accessing my inner voice memory, though I can't be sure if that's what people are doing.
People look in different directions when accessing different parts of their brain (imagination, memory recall, thinking about how to solve a problem, etcetera). If you're not able to access a part of your brain in the same way, it may well manifest differently for you.
>I do have to revisit things quite a bit though, that's why I had to do a second post.
That bit isn't unusual.
>I spend too much time discussing/arguing shit on the internet
Also normal.
Unfortunately.
No.49173
>>49121
Not the person u were responding 2. But don't you think it's hypocritical that op can show a video that tells a theory without any supportive evidence other than the misinterpretation of a case study.
And that when somebody offers a rather destroying counter argument in the same format including at least context, it's now somehow a fallacy?
The level of this convo like the other guy states is low level.
1)Video is posted that has no context to it's source material and opening comment has no context to the video. The guy posting it says: boooh…. it's Halloween…be careful and don't become an npc. Also side note group a till d ( the group's I likely don't like ) are likely npcs and giant fags. I don't belong in this group.
2) first response: this shit debunked back in 1800's yo seek therapy. Worst part is he is right. Then some memes thrown in for good measure.
3) Some guys says the theory is wrong. Sentence later jumps into converse error.
( actual fallacy btw )
Group a is likely to be more A. There for group b must be giant autistic fags. Logic doesn't work that way, although they might be just that.
Also says Group a till d isnt really into hypnosis. They are just hypnotized to think that way? Seriously youd think that a B4mb1 in full sissy attire staring blankly into a wall is kind of being into hypnosis to much. But this guy says no…it's probably nepotism.
4) Introduction to foreign impulse while aroused won't widen sexual spectrum man says, while most science disagrees. Sexuality is binary, binary man says. No it's not. Non binary man says it's a spectrum.
5) video says the result of case study without context is blowing steam on message boards. When all the study says that sometimes while doing mediocre tasks we autopilot.*insert scary music*
6) this video that doesn't talk about spirit and souls like ops is one giant fallacy because I don't feel like looking at videos that don't support my narrative.
5) Then out of the blue 2 individuals share some totally unrelated personal stories without conclusion. One guy exclaims that he doesn't know how memory works. The other guy occasionally writes emails.
No.49176
>>49173
Update: they now have come to the conclusion that this is normal. And call it unfortunate.
No.49206
Hahaha, this NPC shit is a symptom of disconnection from reality.
People couldn't possibly disagree with me, I must be living in the Matrix!
I couldn't possibly be an idiot with childish and unrealistic opinions that have been fostered unchallenged in a hugbox environment, it's the rest of society that's stupid and unrealistic!
Stop spending so much time on imageboards filled with angry uneducated morons and talk to some real people who don't have bizarre vendettas against society, you're going to end up actually insane.
No.49207
>>49027
I'm fine with trannies and even ADBL, but not with autists like this guy.
No.49242
>>49206
>Being this assblasted over a meme
No.49243
No.49247
Lel so this is a thread here finally.
No.49256
I know i have psychotic tendencies. I want hypnpsis to work, to have HFO and feel the rest of the shit they tell you to feel. But i never do. I got into this shit 16 years ago and not once has it ever worked. File after file, tist after tist. my sexual tastes have never changed nor have i felt anything…. and i keep trying hoping it might. maybe find the right tist or file. but i also know it will never work. now some fucking moron is gonna go on a reply streak saying "it wont work because you dont want it to work" that defies reality. Just because I believe a car can run without oilnfor lubrication or gas to power it, doesnt make it true. Sadly it goes along eith religion. Believing in your fake god doesnt make them real…. if belief was all it took to chamge reality, then I would simply believe in being god myself, with mystical powers, and bam, it would be. but guess what, thats not how it works. which leads me to believe those who actually get hypnotised are just braindead asshats who should be wiped from the genepool as to purify the human race. then some cunt will come up with the "youve been hypnotised your whole life through marketing and television" nope. thats not how that works either. of course some twat will be like "they suggest you buy a burger so you buy one, and just like hypnosis you accept that trigger, so you buy one" not how it works. if tuats the case hypnosis still isn't real, telling someone they are a sissy fag doesnt magically make them gay, they already are. like a dog that likes hearing that its a "good boy" and dances around each time you say it…. acceptance vs hypnotism. which is why you fucks are npcs. which is why these losers out there in the lbgt community running around essentially screaming "look at me, accept me". no one gives a shit! youre all npcs in my book. sheep for the slaughter, whatever the fuck that is…..
No.49257
>>49122
I'm one of those 5% to some degree. I only can see stuff in my head when very high / on amphetamines and usually right before I fall asleep in bed. It means a lot of hypnosis files that are glorified guided imagery just dont do much for me. Still like the idea of triggers though. Also check out a thing called SDAM, a lot of people with visualization problems also seem to have fucked autobiographical memories.
No.49282
The alt-right is the biggest hivemind in recent memory and they are accusing others of only being able to give scripted responses.
Hilarious.
No.49311
>>49256
" which leads me to believe those who actually get hypnotised are just braindead asshats who should be wiped from the genepool as to purify the human race."
literally nothing you said leads to this conclusion, go back to logic anon
No.49318
>>49256
>now some fucking moron is gonna go on a reply streak saying
Just give up. You should've taken the hint and stopped more than a decade ago because what you're trying for is clearly outside of your ability.
>"it wont work because you dont want it to work"
Oh.
I mean, I could say that if you'd prefer.
You should really just give up, though.
No.49325
Sooo anyone have some top secret npc drone brainwashing files?
Just so we know what NOT to listen to and all.
No.49328
>>49325
>>>49325
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKqXEWsK0qg&t=1s
>here you go
No.49332
in order to have a higher thought process to override, you have to HAVE a higher thought process
i posit that for NPCs, hypnosis is like reprogramming, but for them it would not be relaxing - it's only relaxing if brainless obedience is not your normal way of being
No.49341
>>49325
who is this and why does she have two black eyes?
No.49344
>>49341
I wonder too.
I'm guessing either nosejob or "walked into a door" or "didn't know when to stop talking"
No.49345
>>49028
>egoism
>"get therapy"
Therapy is a spook. I own you now. Get to work for me.
No.49570
>>49256
Good job Neo. Now that you're enlightened, what are you going to do with your wisdom?
No.49592
Anyone who thinks NPCs are a thing is just accepting some bullshit they saw on the internet uncritically and is, thus, an NPC.
No.49594
>>49592
Following this logic anything you trust makes you an NPC. The only thing that can be fully proved is mathematics. But if you believe it you are an NPC.
No.49596
>>49592
Why so emotional? It's not like any of this applies to you… right?
No.49599
>>49594
In different words and not excluding mathematics that is in fact a philosophical theory.
What can I even trust, if anything I've ever seen, could have been lies? Imagine that someone escaping from a life in a sect actually has to go through this for a significant part of what they had taken for granted.
That out of the way, being critical towards new information, does not necessarily include the need to fact check everything, but to accept the possibility, that it may be wrong, and to take the necessary precautions when relying on said information to be "right". So basically think like a scientist.
As humans we might not ever have access to any universal truth, but we can get reasonably close. (Is this even true?)
>>49592 is just trolling by declaring everyone, who believes NPCs exist, to be one by their own definition. Seems like some NPCs lacking in critical thinking didn't get that.
No.49608
>>49599
>As humans we might not ever have access to any universal truth, but we can get reasonably close. (Is this even true?)
It's not possible to (fully?) understand the system of the n-th level if you belong to n or lower. You need to step up to at least n+1. What means it's not possible to understand how our minds work, by using our minds.
No.49621
>>49608
Can you please expand on this, Anon?
No.49622
>>49608
>Trying to answer philosophical questions with maths.
Mathematics only work within the boundaries it's been constructed in. There might be special conditions where it's not applicable or produces wrong results without this having been noticed so far.
My question is of purely theoretical nature and if you apply the uncertainty, your answer entails, to its justification, you'll see, why there is no point in trying to finally solve it in a real world sense.
No.49627
>>49622
there is a discussion whether math is made by humans or by nature. I think the only reasonable approach is to think in pharmacological ways. For example, you cannot prove a natural law, but you can make an argument about the usefulness of these laws. This is also the way we know other people have consciousness, we ask what is a conscious object like what are its specification, then we observe other people suit this and we conclude they are conscious. if you need more philosophy read Heidegger
>>49622
Gödel's incompleteness theorems?
No.49628
>>49621
>Can you please expand on this
This is what I mean. If you hear diametrically opposite opinions about the same subject in 2D (level n), go to one dimension higher (n+1), and you will see that both opinions are correct.
No.49629
>>49622
>>Trying to answer philosophical questions with maths.
I can replace n and n+1 with different words. For example, "Box" and "outside of the box". If you are inside of the box, you will not fully understand where you are, unless you get outside of it.
If you live in one country and have only one source of the information, you will not know what's actually going on, unless you move to another country with more independent sources of the information.
Etc…
No.49630
>>49629
>If you live in one country and have only one source of the information, you will not know what's actually going on, unless you move to another country with more independent sources of the information.
You will not understand what's going on anyway (until you move to 5D), but it will give you another projection.
No.49631
>>49627
>Gödel's incompleteness theorems
Looking over it, that's pretty much what I meant in a more general sense.
I have learned a little bit about philosophy of science in school, but I tend to forget the names behind the principles, theorems and so on.
For me the deciding factor is how those influence me, not who wrote them down first, even though this complicates philosophical discussion somewhat.
Nothing is really absolutely certain. You might be just a simulation or part of a it (NPC he?) running on some otherworldly machine. What counts is how you deal with the uncertainty.
The NPC theory in its essence seems counterproductive to me, because there is no direct use or consequence that could be drawn from it for oneself. It's irrelevant if one is or is not directly in charge of the actions taken, as long as they are taken somehow. What's the problem with relaxing and enjoying the ride? What if the assumption one could gain control was wrong and an enormous waste of time? Nothing.
It's not relevant what you can do as long as you accept the perception of your being, free will and reality. You don't really have much of a choice anyway. Everything else would inevitably lead to disadvantageous consequences for the situation you are in, which, for the time being, is the only one you can be sure of is there in one way or another.
No.49650
No.49652
>>49622
>Gödel's incompleteness theorems
Proving this one's really fancy.
No.50304
NPC squared, triangled and all around:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksb3KD6DfSI
No.50330
>>50304
The npc theory is based on a flawed summary of a scientific study that when person does the dishes or drives to work, he can occasionally be on autopilot. ( subconsious actions).
Some groups read it wrongly. Rather than the time spend on autopilot a group of people live on autopilot entirely. Hence the npc theory. Wrong interpretation of the study though.
Now lets say someone cuts up different media containing quotes and is the summary of fight of several channels against fake news. Then that paints a picture that is not entirely real. It could be interesting video, but hopeless for the basis of any narrative.
In this case your message is. Dont believe in news. Don't be a npc. But believe in the news a politician tells you directly.
No.50348
>>50330
>Dont believe in news
Yes
>>50330
>Don't be a npc.
>>50330
>But believe in the news a politician tells you directly.
Not quite. I would say, "check" the source, not "believe" the source ;)
No.50350
>>50330
>Don't be a npc.
Yes ("Yes" disappeared from my response)
No.50457
>>50330
not just that though
study found many who never think in words
No.50465
>>50457
>study found many who never think in words
You mean they do not have internal dialogue/voice? That's a huge step forward.
No.50467
>>50465
Forward? How that?
Language is not strictly necessary for complex thoughts, but there seems to be at least some sort of connection.
No.50485
>enter thread hoping some good samaritan would surprise turn the thread around by posting drone/mindless type files, because I don't have any really
>actual 65 post thread that, for this board, is lively talking about this shit
>all I have is the F10n4 inner voice change to this day
You people disappoint me and I was hardly expecting it to happen anyway
No.50490
>>50485
Always a pleasure my dear.
Can't you loose your mind reading this thread?
No.50498
>>50490
>Can't you loose your mind reading this thread?
Just this?
No.50500
>>50457
Study didn't find that all. It just followed subjects throughout the day and let them reminise what they were thinking.
So 30 students ( that isn't a big sample size mind you ) were tested with a method still not peer reviewed to this day. What they were doing. Simply said right now you are thinking. But if you quickly throw your trash away, you might see a picture of your old dog following you. Or you might have inner monologue or you might just have no thought at all.
The measurement was done 6 times a day. And the conclusion was that during those measurements 3/4 didn't mention an inner monologue at those given times.
Reddit explanation: robots.
No.50502
>>50467
>>>50465 (You)
>Forward? How that?
>Language is not strictly necessary for complex thoughts, but there seems to be at least some sort of connection.
I meant the practice of stopping the internal dialogue. Basically, you stop thinking in words.
No.50518
>>50502
I got that.
My question is: In which way that would be any better? Are you are referring to proving the NPC theory, think, to have a wordless thought process is preferable, or what exactly is the perspective, you apply to get to that conclusion.
There is a correlation between the variability of speech and one's intelligence, hinting at benefits of thinking in more complex word structures.
Maybe you remember the discussion about the assumption of Trump having a low intelligence due to his limited active vocabulary.
No.50519
>>50485
Got a link to the mega of f10n4's inner voice change file?
i've missed the recent F10n4 dumps, sorry for asking to be spoonfed
No.50530
>>50518
>There is a correlation between the variability of speech and one's intelligence
Actually no. There are genial mathematicians who are dyslexic, autistic or plainly bad in making speeches.
>>50518
>Trump having a low intelligence due to his limited active vocabulary.
Yet another desperate attempt of democrats and the media to spit on Trump. If he had an unlimited vocabulary they would say that he's a phrasemonger, or that he's trying to hide his stupidity behind words.
No.50531
>>50518
>My question is: In which way that would be any better?
"Better" in terms of the ability to achieve internal silence.
>>50518
>Are you are referring to proving the NPC theory
Oh no-no-no, it's not related to the NPC theory at all. It's' about meditations and "mindfullness" (I hate this word).
No.50536
>>50485
>Why u no share files?
>REEEEEEEEEEEEE
There are dozens of other threads that are dedicated to sharing files. God forbid we have one thread with actual discussion that doesn't trigger those who are just here to collect files.
No.50538
>>50531
Thanks for clearing that up.
>>50530
Correlations are not less true, if you find some exceptions.
Also maths seems to be one of those subjects, where savant syndrome is more common at the elite level. Not to suggest that it's the norm, but more likely compared with many other disciplines.
No.50543
>>50538
>savant syndrome
Shouldn't be that extreme :) All "normal" people have strong and weak sides.
No.50547
>>50519
Sure, you can have what I have. It's not very much because I'm a bit picky and I only subbed to her patreon once.
HFE (hypn071c f007 3n2l4v3m3n7)
m32m3r1z3d by f337
b1mb0 7r4nsf0rm4710n (and slu77y ver)
3nsl4v3d f007 f4n7t4sy (HFE trains to acquire the fetish, then tribute to her feet, this one is an unrelated one off)
I have some other stuff too, but I do enjoy a good f10n4
Link
mega.nz/#F!WnAmGa7I
Key
RNY4nBIMwncxZaQ9tkpZ7A
No.51145
>>50518
Highly suggest reading this book (not an autism meme, it's a good read).
Short version: "A picture is worth a thousand words". Next time you're hungry and not sure what to eat, instead of trying to debate the merits of different options, imagine what you're hungry for. See the difference for yourself.
No.51294
>>49136
>Try not to visualize and tell me what a chair in your kitchen looks like. Just as quickly as you can write down the description directly from memory rather than from your visualization of the chair itself.
Impossible for me. The picture of the chair pops into my head first, and THEN I can describe to you what I see in my head. The visual information is accessed immediately, but the verbal information must be consciously put together
No.51311
>>50518
trump talks simple so his words reach the most people. if you genuinely didn't figure this out and just thought he was "dumb" you are either not too smart yourself or have falling into the "orange man bad" NPC trance.
No.51317
>>51311
> the "orange man bad" NPC trance.
This!
No.51329
>>51311
Reading and understanding is not your forte, is it?
I never said, he is dumb, although there might be a lot of reasons to believe, he is. What I wrote was an example of a real-world discussion, in which context, you may have heard of the correlation depicted. Also a correlation is just a general tendency, and by definition does not apply to everyone.
The connection of him being dumb was ironically made by your own mind, because you are used to view him as someone under constant attack by almost everyone else, and therefore instinctively try to defend him.
No.51775
>>49328
This vid any good? I'm interested about the data they gather through the survey, but one needs to have really accepted those suggestions I guess. Or be quite open … about a lot of things about themselves.
No.51830
>>51775
> This vid any good?
From a quick read through the auto-subs…
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
It relies on the "drone" to already have a large amount of "baggage" on the topic. Very little is stated explicitly, which means results will be highly variable. What's in the video? (Almost) only what you bring with you, it turns out.
> needs to have really accepted those suggestions I guess
A careful reading indicates that a few of the items on that survey are intended to be "modified" by the video. The survey is, in part, a measure of how well the suggestions have been accepted, and, in part, a survey about what the drones are bringing with them.
> Or be quite open …
That's one of them, yes.
I think I know why that project fizzled and no more recordings seem to have been made, now that I've read that transcript. A pity, the concept was quite interesting.