Anosognosia & the power of belief

a·noso·gnosia: without disease knowledge

This is a condition in which a normal intelligent individual is unaware of their own paralysis or some other illness. The person with anosognosia will insist that their paralyzed arm or leg is perfectly functional. They aren't intentionally lying about it, rather they are essentially lying to themselves. Ramachandran gives some excellent insight into this phenomenon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRva64K40VU

In summary, the phenomenon manifest primarily in patients with damage to the right side of their brain which in turn causes the left side of their body to be paralyzed. This stems from fact that the right hemisphere of the brain controls the left side of the body and vice-versa. When asked to do tasks with their paralyzed arm, they will hallucinate doing what is asked or failing that produce a rationalization of why they didn't (e.g. I didn't want to, or I am tired).

Ramachandran's analysis is that the brain has a world-view which builds up over the course of life. As new information is encountered it is fit into the existing belief structure. However, there are occasionally anomalies that do not fit. If the anomaly is small and determined to probably be insignificant then the brain will throw it out and suppress it to maintain stability. From an evolutionary perspective, if the belief structure is routinely needing to be reworked, then it hinders the ability to survive in the environment by focusing too directly on matters of insignificance. But one cannot go on ignoring everything and anything, so there is a part of the brain that signals when the belief structure needs to reevaluate. That is the part of the brain that Ramachandran contends is damaged in these patients.

One experiment, that is better described in the video, is to test the anosognosia patient's non-paralyzed hand. Place a white glove on it and set up a box such that the patient can see their hand and tell them to move it up and down. They see it moving up and down. Then do it again, but this time they are looking at someone else's hand that doesn't though due to optical illusion they still think they are looking at their own hand. When it doesn't move what do they report? They say "I see my hand moving." Normal people register the discrepancy and get a jolt of shock. Anosognosia patients fail to notice it and calmly act like everything in the world is perfectly normal just as their preconceptions deem it to be.

So the lesson in all of this is that the denial, repression, rationalization, confabulation, and hallucination by these patients is not a direct result of their brain damage. These are brain mechanisms that all of our brains engage in to various extent. It is only magnified in those patients.

In fact we all engage in hallucination every time we use our eyes. We all have a blind spot in the center of our vision, but do you ever notice it? That can be thought of as a basic form of hallucination. You can also see how the brain changes what you think you are hearing just based on what it expects from the McGurk Effect which was posted awhile back: http://www.politicalforum.com/science-technology/186617-mcgurk-effect.html

Now I told you all that so that I could come to this. We are often too quick to chalk up blatant lies and hypocrisy of anti-science and anti-evolution on the part of the creationist to intellectual dishonesty. I am not claiming that there are not dishonest people in those circles, but I think delusion is often much more explanatory of their behavior. Take conspiracy theory nuts: do they really believe that the government is controlled by shape-shifting reptilian humanoids or are they just being dishonest in the face of all evidence to the contrary? The answer is they really do believe that (*)(*)(*)(*) and are blind to reality.

 

I'll try the Ramachandran link again:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRva64K40VU"]Ramachandran on Denial (Anosognosia) - YouTube[/ame]

 

I think anyone with the capacity to understand what you have posted is already at that level.......... SO?

People do not see beyond ignorance and simply choose ignorance..... I think delusion is pretty obvious without all the long windedness.
As far as dishonesty..... Again, if someone can see that being 'dishonest' is in fact just dishonesty to self and it's very core of expression.... Well, it's just another form of self delusion.

I mean really, if you want to simply indulge in intellect.... Why not go a bit further back in History and discuss the Allegory of the Cave?

Ancient philosophers used a way of communicating against powers of control in a way that was well above their capacity of understanding..... Doing so ensured that they were not tortured into submission or put to death by them.

Luke 19
22And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:

23Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?

24And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.

25(And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)

26For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

27But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Those who understood them were of like mind...... Are you testing to make sure you are not alone?

We don't face being tortured and killed by the Christians anymore; you are not bringing the deluded to a point of understanding...... It is only possible to do so with solid but gentle diplomacy.
I think a more poignant realization is the one where we are able to become an example to the free expression of humanity where these absurdities will naturally fall away...... In this current monotonous expression of humanity where we are all jumping through ridiculous hoops, is it so odd that so many minds live within these colorful delusions created to exist beyond it?

We are all currently living in a very sad delusion, when we begin to awaken.... Every life will be able to see themselves within it's vision.
Of course within such a realization, isn't it rather profound how perfectly brilliant life can be?

 

a very good thread.
similar to this: "http://www.politicalforum.com/religion/226407-belief.html#post4952598"
but put in theory.

that's one of the reasons why i love the qur'an.
various passages warning you of

• going after your own suppositions / delusions,
• pursuit of whatever your forefathers have been doing w/o questioning,
• following social tendencies and groups

ramachandran should have a look at our book.
maybe he has.

the denial of "small percentages" in a functioning environment
is indeed a reflex of the mind to stay in the comfort zone.
they feed you with so much fear and disappointment, once you
find something to rely on, even if it's 15% you're stuck with it.

(the extreme of this, is stockholm syndrome - the complete denial)

otherwise you err.
but you in fact err either way (at the end).
you just don't realize it until all is said and done.
thus you just postpone the inevitable and in fact make
things more complicated.

(procrastination)

in belief that small percentage is called the leap of faith...
but prior to that jump you must be sure that all the organs are working.
checking that information is your primary duty.
legs? ok. arms? ok. hands? and so on...
you jump without checking those, well...
then why have you been given the reason?

so yes, the theory is correct about this...

but the leap is also valid in science, in love, in friendship or in business.
there is always a risk. no such thing as risk free action in this world.

i don't think you can experience 100% of anything either.
it's always you filling the blanks, completing the picture and making
something out of what is given, by free will and choice; by the
permission of Allah, with his guidance alone.

that's of course according to my belief.

looking for "the only 100%" in an incomplete environment.
what are the chances?

 

It's interesting, but I think you're making a wildly huge assumption that what Christians believe is false. I think the evidence points to a real god doing real things in history. I'm personally also an evolutionist, though I believe that god directed all of it. The truth is available for study and I think you should look into it.

 

And here is our example....... We discard Genesis or take a very abstract view of it.... Fill in between the lines and alter it's temporal meaning.

If the bible is an offering of information as the 'inspired' word of God, it is obscure and easily deluded beyond, or short of it's meaning.

This is what the 'thinking' mind would consider to be ambiguity in writing....

Certainly an omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent God having directing all of it; would have knowledge of the outcome in providing such an 'inspiration'.... The 'biblical evidence' of Jesus Christ which is what Christians use to substantiate this declared truth; proves that God has also directed mass confusion within it's offering.

A brilliant God having produced the most magnificent and symbiotic expression of life; then unleashes such an unruly written offering of 'truth' that isn't eloquent enough to create the same offering in expression?
What have we become in acceptance of it, if not a fool's fool?

 

I used Luke 19 in my first post which is Jesus speaking in a parable....
Likening himself in example to a lord of the land that would ask his loyal servants to bring all those that don't accept his reign before him and then slay them.
He compares money to the knowledge of his work and murder to the final death of those disloyal subjects brought before the kingdom of heaven..... Money and murder is the eloquent offering in the example given from the very mouth of Jesus, the imagery of heaven?
No wonder the confusion..... I don't want any part of it, can't even begin to imagine who would. This comes from the very sane portion of my mind.

 

I cannot express any better than Hittchens on this;
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbOUBUVLvKw"]Why Christianity is Impossible to Believe (Christopher Hitchens) - YouTube[/ame]

Let’s say that the consensus is that our species, we being the higher primates, Homo Sapiens, has been on the planet for at least 100,000 years, maybe more. Francis Collins says maybe 100,000. Richard Dawkins thinks maybe a quarter-of-a-million. I’ll take 100,000. In order to be a Christian, you have to believe that for 98,000 years, our species suffered and died, most of its children dying in childbirth, most other people having a life expectancy of about 25 years, dying of their teeth.

Famine, struggle, bitterness, war, suffering, misery, all of that for 98,000 years. Heaven watches this with complete indifference. And then 2,000 years ago, thinks “That’s enough of that. It’s time to intervene,” and the best way to do this would be by condemning someone to a human sacrifice somewhere in the less literate parts of the Middle East.

Don’t let’s appeal to the Chinese, for example, where people can read and study evidence and have a civilization. Let’s go to the desert and have another revelation there. This is nonsense. It can’t be believed by a thinking person.

Why am I glad this is the case? To get to the point of the wrongness of Christianity, because I think the teachings of Christianity are immoral. The central one is the most immoral of all, and that is the one of vicarious redemption. You can throw your sins onto somebody else, vulgarly known as scapegoating. In fact, originating as scapegoating in the same area, the same desert.

I can pay your debt if I love you. I can serve your term in prison if I love you very much. I can volunteer to do that. I can’t take your sins away, because I can’t abolish your responsibility, and I shouldn’t offer to do so. Your responsibility has to stay with you. There’s no vicarious redemption.

There very probably, in fact, is no redemption at all. It’s just a part of wish-thinking, and I don’t think wish-thinking is good for people either. It even manages to pollute the central question, the word I just employed, the most important word of all: the word love, by making love compulsory, by saying you must love. You must love your neighbor as yourself, something you can’t actually do. You’ll always fall short, so you can always be found guilty.

By saying you must love someone who you also must fear. That’s to say a supreme being, an eternal father, someone of whom you must be afraid, but you must love him, too. If you fail in this duty, you’re again a wretched sinner. This is not mentally or morally or intellectually healthy.

And that brings me to the final objection – I’ll condense it, Dr. Olafsky – which is, this is a totalitarian system. If there was a God who could do these things and demand these things of us, and he was eternal and unchanging, we’d be living under a dictatorship from which there is no appeal, and one that can never change and one that knows our thoughts and can convict us of thought crime, and condemn us to eternal punishment for actions that we are condemned in advance to be taking.

All this in the round, and I could say more, it’s an excellent thing that we have absolutely no reason to believe any of it to be true.​

Since this thread is about the mechanisms of delusion in the brain to maintain a belief structure, I am not going to personally delve into this. This thread wasn't even about generic religion, but rather the anti-science and specifically anti-evolution mind sets.

 

Faith is not denial of evidence. Faith is belief in the absence of any evidence.

If there is absolutely no evidence to believe something and you believe anyway, that is faith.

If there is absolutely no evidence and evidence to the contrary and you still believe anyway, that is delusion.

“Faith by definition is believing in things without evidence. And personally I don't do that because, I am not an idiot” - Kate Smurthwaite

 

It is not ignorance that I am addressing. Most people are ignorant when it comes to science and believe lies fed to them as they have a flimsy basis to know any better. I am referring to those who are actively anti-science in which they put forth in propaganda fashion blatant lies and misinformation repeatedly even after being shown the correct information or why what they have said is demonstrably false.

You say that it is obvious that this dishonesty is self delusion, but I don't think that most people would agree. I rarely see this confronted in a delusional context and instead see them referred to as liars and hypocrites (thou shall not bear false witness).

Nor do I think that delusion is obvious. The tendency is to think someone to be deceitful or stupid. You see someone commit the same errors over and over and wonder if they really are that thick. People tend not to think that the other's brain is suppressing the pass failures and it is merely a delusion that they think they still have a great argument.

And the reason is simple I think. We do not acknowledge our own delusions and capacity to behave as such. But we can and do acknowledge past stupidity (e.g. 'how could I have been so stupid') and dishonesty (only white lies, right? ). So it is not natural to project that behavior onto others. Projecting such a capacity for delusion is to acknowledge your own capacity even if you cannot readily see any delusion.

I find empirically based exploration much more fascinating and useful. If you are giving me a choice between Ramachandran and Plato, I will choose Ramachandran without hesitation. Also, I fail to see how we can determine any factual information about our brains and thus behavior from the Allegory of the Cave.

I think there is a natural tendency to overweight things that have been around longer and which are static. Why is there a reluctance to appreciate the great minds in our own time?

My intention is only to discuss this phenomenon, not to help (or batter depending on one's complex) any potential individual. As for the last part, is that your particular dream of a utopia? Do you envision it as realistic?

Was that an adequate start at gentle diplomacy to help you come to some kind of understanding of delusion?

 

So are you suggesting that there are people who have grasped a concept but find some odd solace in ignorance instead?
Or that they were so stubborn that they don't want to admit being wrong, hiding it even from their self?
Do they want to deceive because they believe it benefits them in some way?
Aren't these all examples of ignorance?
Always found it interesting that people incorrectly quote the saying "Ignorance is bliss"
In actuality it is "Where ignorance is bliss tis folly to be wise" It is describing where the burden lies saying nothing of ignorance or that it is in fact blissful.

I found the comparative reasoning to be rudimentary, perhaps that is why I brought up Plato's Republic

Wow really? I need to invite you over to sit around the fire pit at an average gathering of my friends.

Don't find it all that riveting or phenomenal.... Sad? Yes!

Unequivocally yes, it is possible..... Effortless in fact!
We work very hard to exist within our absurdities.
The ability to live in unfathomable abundance; but instead living with lives that are impoverished, malnourished and riddled with disease....
The ability to live with zero waste, zero consumption of nonrenewable resources and zero pollution; yet we bury ourselves in landfill and burn fossil fuels....
The ability to educate minds where money is no object where expression becomes boundless and exponential in growth; yet we only go as far as to train a monkey to jump through a ridiculous hoop for a shiny trinket.

Yes, we are all highly delusional that the potential of intellect is being realized even by a mere fraction in this very moment.
There are no great minds in the world today, only limited expressions of the ego next to what they could have become.

 

Set a mid free within it's own knowledge nurturing every aspect of it..... It will never look away, it will be motivated on it's own to find it's fullest potential.... The offering to humanity in doing so will be immeasurable.... Our lives will be filled with physical abundance as well as expressive abundance of knowledge, you could not enter such a beauty and brilliance without seeing yourself within it!

Effortless!

 

How we currently carry ourselves now, this is the very definition of delusion!

 

evidence is an arguable term.
to me the universe is an evidence.
for some it's a trivia question.

in faith;
reason is the evidence.
heart is the evidence.
own experience is the evidence.

"you" are the evidence.

so the question is how do you keep the infectious
self-justifying thoughts away? from "you"...

i have an answer, but curious about yours.

 

Your definition of evidence is meaningless. You are saying the universe exists, therefore my explanation for the existence of the universe is true. That is tautology and completely useless.

With your “evidence” anything that anyone makes up about the universe is “evidenced” by the universe's existence. What nonsense that is.

Personal experience is notoriously bad when it comes to reality. Christians don't conjure up experiences of Krishna, Hindus don't have experiences of Jesus, but what experiences do they come up with? Those within the context of their preconceived belief of course.

Chants, repetitious preaching and singing are all proven methods of getting human brains into hypnotic states in which personal experiences can be manifested.

It is quite amusing that you think you know how to recognize delusions when you in fact proclaim delusions as valid “evidence.”

 

You first said that the dishonesty was obviously self-delusion, now you say the delusion is ignorance. Are your definitions of dishonesty and ignorance the same?

It seems to me that you are coming at this from a perspective that delusion is a conscious choice. But maybe not, maybe it is just a poor use of language.

In your first example, you directly imply a conscious choice to be ignorant. There are in fact examples of people like that, but that is not what I was referring to. There are grown adults that will literally plug their ears to not listen. But they haven't satisfied the condition of having grasped any concept have they? There are also people know the evidence and discard it anyway because they assert faith is more important that evidence. But that is not what I am referring to either as the delusion I was talking about is unconscious. If those people that consciously choose faith over evidence go out and actively lie about the evidence, then they are being intentionally dishonest.

Your second example is repression, but again there is nothing conscious about it. If you are thinking of a type of repression where one willfully attempts to change the subject or distract one's thoughts, then that is not what I am talking about. An example of unconscious repression from the video was experiments of rewarding the anosognosia patient if they could perform one of two tasks. They can only choice one – the first has a lesser reword but can be completed with a single hand, the second has twice the reword but requires two hands. Repeat this every hour and you find that the patient repeatedly goes for the harder task without any realization of their past failures to complete the task. Non-anosognosia patients with paralysis will go for the easier task every time because after all, a lesser reword is better than nothing.

The third example you refer to one's belief. Since these are all unconscious mechanisms, do you mean that in a way that the brain unconsciously believes? Is this different from conscious belief?

I'm sure if I had all the knowledge of the human brain - human behavior, and the knowledge of how to achieve worldwide peace and prosperity, I too would find the advances in the field of mere neurology dull. Fortunately I do not know everything and know that I don't know everything and thus find the work of giants in modern science, whether it be neurology, physics, biology, etc... interesting.

 

the table suggesting the existence of the carpenter.

in my opinion, this is not a delusion but a fact acquired
by the surrounding laws. nothing calculated becomes what
it is, unless there is a force behind.

there is a maker, a designer. someone that calculates
and holds that calculation coherent and intact.

check this thread if you haven't yet.
i think people discuss the notion of 'evidence' there...
you might find it interesting.

the reference point is not krishna or jesus (pbuh).
it is Allah (God).

sure, true in some cultures.
also in kabbalah or in tasawwuf. yet;

why am i here?
the reason of existence?
what is my task?
why create all of this?
why there is evil and tyranny in this world?
why the suffering?
why people keep doing the same mistakes?​

i don't think you can sort out these questions merely by chanting.
you actually need to ponder and most importantly;
you need someone to explain them to you.
through written material, through (life) experience.

but you are right, remembrance of Allah is very important.

"everything has its polish and the polish of hearts is zikrullah *."
muhammed (saw)​

or maybe you are stamping actual facts as delusions.
the chicken or the egg *?

 

Can delusion and dishonesty exist outside the realm of ignorance?

Let's not play word games here, this is a tactic used by less than savory characters on this forum.... Instead let's apply it.

Delusion and dishonesty by all aspects of reason are products of ignorance; if you believe this is incorrect, give an example and we'll test it.

 

Nope, a carpenter is a fact acquired only by your conception that a table requires a carpenter.

You do the same with the universe. If your idea of the universe requires a creator of the universe then a creator is a fact acquired by that idea - and nothing more than that idea.

As XVZ points out, this is nothing but redundancy. It is utterly useless for anything else than studying the underlying psychology.

 

if all the laws point to a carpenter (a maker)
then what is your solution apart from:

"well the table is here ain't it? it made itself."

 

The laws do not point to a carpenter, the laws pertain only to the most finite aspect of mass.

Physicists actually enter the same type of conclusion as you have with different attributes..... This is why I find this interesting...
The universe has to be a continuum.... The only debate in this concept is whether the universe through thermonuclear fusion, radiates all it's matter away into energy which then reaches a static point where it reconstitutes matter; or that it reacts upon existing matter where it reaches a static point 'falling' back upon itself at an exponential rate.

Now we can indulge God in this thought..... If God created the universe and all the properties of mass contained within it; it is something that only God can create or destroy..... Therefore, when investigating mass that only God can create or destroy; mass has an observable property within itself that it has existed for infinity as a continuum..... Hint, hint.... We would not be able to see any point by which it could be created or destroyed; only viable conclusion is that it has always existed.
Now here is the problem in doing so...... We cannot ever observe mass within intellect and attribute it to a creator, even if God was the creator...

Mass in the observable world has always existed, it is the 'intellectual' creator of itself, it couldn't have been created in any other way in appearance.

If you want to supply the universe with a creator, that creator alone in observation has quashed your ability to prove it or even begin to conceptualize it..... The laws in fact point to everything but a creator.

 

I never said that what you constitute as evidence is actually delusion. This business of evidence for your particular belief is what you brought into the discussion.

Delusion is the mind suppressing experience or making up false experience.

Nature is full of complex things that have no conscious designer such as snow flakes or crystals. We know of things for which there is actual conscious design because we actually see conscious beings design them. We can watch carpenters construct a table, we see builders constructing buildings.

 

Sorry if this is too blunt, but from my perspective it is you that is using word games.

Ignorance is a lack of experience.

Dishonesty is having the experience and lying about it.

Delusion is having false experience. Or put another way, experience that the brain manipulates in order to fit it within the parameters of the brain's belief structure.

 

Unfortunate, I asked for an example so that we could apply it, now we are indulging in the words themselves..... This is the very thing that I sought to prevent...... Oh well, here we go!

Ignorance is a lack of information or knowledge; of course experience is something that can supply one with information or knowledge, but it is also possible to gain information or knowledge without the need of experiencing it.... So yeah, not an encompassing definition of it.

Regardless of the problems associated with the use of the word experience, this is highly subject to how far we wish to carry information and knowledge....
I stated that dishonesty was a form of self delusion and that both are a constituent of ignorance.
I was hoping to get an example of how dishonesty or delusion is independent from ignorance, so that we can carry it to it's very limits in thought.... Can we start over so we don't get stuck in word games?

Let's apply it in thought so that we can give the parameters and mechanics of it meaning.

 

I actually did write that first with knowledge instead of experience but knowledge is more of a higher level concept. As in Plato's forms, we can consider a concept of perfect knowledge, but we are limited by imperfection and cannot realize anything but an inferior image of it. Perhaps information is a better word to use.

I used examples previously that seemed to have went ignored. I kept writing reword instead of reward for some bizarre reason, was that it?

Anyway one of the problems with diagnosing delusion is that it is hard to see unless it is exaggerated and obvious. I gave the example of the McGurk effect in the OP. I'll post the video directly:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0"]Try The McGurk Effect! - Horizon: Is Seeing Believing? - BBC Two - YouTube[/ame]

In what ways do you consider that to be an example of ignorance or dishonesty?