The Couch

King Of Pop Music No More...

Comments on King Of Pop Music No More...

Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 06/25/09 - 11:17 PM:
Subject: King Of Pop Music No More...
Michael Jackson died at an age of 50 years,due to a cardiac arrest,on Thursday,after being into a coma for a while.

What a life it was!

What did you find interesting about that guy?


Thank You
Nihil Loc
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 16, 2005

Total Topics: 56
Total Comments: 864
Posted 06/25/09 - 11:24 PM:

Thinker wrote:
What did you find interesting about that guy?


That he turned white... and everything else that people find interesting about the guy.

The whole media sphere is crazed right now.

Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 06/26/09 - 8:12 AM:

Yahweh wrote:
Also: I think Farrah Fawcett deserves some mention, too. I, personally, am much, much more interested in Farrah than I am with anyone else who died yesterday; but, that's just my opinion.

Farrah Fawcett; one of televisions original angels, mega-roboto-babe. For serious.


It is the first time I have heard about her. MJ was Charismatic,bizzare and enigmatic legend. A rare creature!



Thank You
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 06/26/09 - 12:03 PM:

Disclaimer: These are fleeting remarks based on observations made very recently,therefore,skeptics are advised to not to take offense.


As Yahweh mentioned the name of Farrah Fawcett,it was observed by me that:

Farrah Fawcett was born on Feb2--root number=2.

Michael Jackson was born on Aug29--root number=2+9=1+1=2

So,both of them had the root number '2'.


The interesting thing to note is,both of them died on 'June25,2009'.

The year 2009 also has a root number '2'

[2009=2+0+0+9=1+1=2].

It is worthy of being mentioned that root number of a person plays a critical role,,throughout his life,only if you observe.

Some of the most important events of your life,occur on days which have root number similar to that of yours. And most important years of your life,for events like marriage,achievements and significant experiences are also those which have root number similar to that of yours.



Thank You

Edited by Thinker13 on 06/26/09 - 12:39 PM
Sweet Candor
Junior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 28, 2009
Location: Hungary

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 13
Posted 06/28/09 - 5:16 AM:

Hi Thinker13

I'm not so good at math; I'll leave that to you, but I'm good at psychology. Yah I studied it at college. Don't worry about those numbers - you've just got too much dopamine flying around, that's all blush.

"Synchronicity is the experience of two or more events which are causally unrelated occurring together in a meaningful manner. In order to count as synchronicity, the events should be unlikely to occur together by chance.

...

Jung coined the word to describe what he called "temporally coincident occurrences of acausal events." Jung variously described synchronicity as an "acausal connecting principle", "meaningful coincidence" and "acausal parallelism". Jung introduced the concept as early as the 1920s but only gave a full statement of it in 1951 in an Eranos lecture[1] and in 1952, published a paper, Synchronicity — An Acausal Connecting Principle, in a volume with a related study by the physicist (and Nobel laureate) Wolfgang Pauli.[2]"

...
A possible explanation for Jung's perception that the laws of probability seemed to be violated with some coincidences[7] can be seen in Littlewood's law.
In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias is a tendency to search for or interpret new information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions and avoids information and interpretations which contradict prior beliefs. It is a type of cognitive bias and represents an error of inductive inference, or as a form of selection bias toward confirmation of the hypothesis under study or disconfirmation of an alternative hypothesis. Confirmation bias is of interest in the teaching of critical thinking, as the skill is misused if rigorous critical scrutiny is applied only to evidence challenging a preconceived idea but not to evidence supporting it.[8]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity

"hyperabundance of dopamine causes widespread salience: an impression of significance attendant to statements, events, things, etc. in the immediate environment. This heightened significance can frequently be disturbing since it may have no rational basis. The individual experiencing this heightened significance may attempt to account for it and in this way paranoid ideation begins as a theoretical structure designed to account for this disturbing impressionistic significance.
On this model, the impression of heightened significance ("Meaning beyond meaning" or "things are not as they seem" as Carol North put it[38]) is primary and gives rise to the theoretical efforts - the paranoid ideation."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine#Salience

Michael Jackson was a beautiful guy before his skin colour changed. Poor thing, it must be what all that fame so young did to him.
libertygrl
Administrator
Avatar

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Location: San Francisco

Total Topics: 425
Total Comments: 4673
Posted 06/28/09 - 10:29 AM:

wikipedia wrote:
This heightened significance can frequently be disturbing since it may have no rational basis.

i can imagine how this would be so for someone who only values rational experiences. as for me, i rather enjoy my abundance of dopamine smiling face (assuming that's the only cause for experiencing more synchronicitous events than the average person). one could conceive of it as a simple manifestation of self-affirmation, which of course everyone expresses in various, most often irrational, ways.

cheers,
zenlib
libertygrl
Administrator
Avatar

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Location: San Francisco

Total Topics: 425
Total Comments: 4673
Posted 06/28/09 - 10:33 AM:

i've been having some debate with folks on my facebook about whether michael jackson was a child molester. my thoughts are that he wasn't.

i do believe he was deeply troubled, though, and i hope he can be at peace now.

rest in peace MJ hug
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
Posted 06/28/09 - 1:18 PM:

Sweet Candor wrote:
Don't worry about those numbers - you've just got too much dopamine flying around, that's all blush


I feel you are being a presumptuous psychologist blushlaughing! Do not rush into psychoanalyzing others based on what they say! Do not claim to be a good psychologist until unless you have known the boundaries of the thoughts of your interlocutor. Not even a thing I claimeddozey.Now,if you are a true 'skeptic' and if you get a high level of dopamine,in my brain,upon consistently testing me, for a week,we shall agree laughing. What if someone changes levels of dopamine,in their brain(above and below the 'normal') just after two hours of meditation raised eyebrow. Dramatically enough,a true skeptic,if any,would never try to study Psychology as a 'science' because it is a 'Pseudoscience' much like 'Numerology' which along with many such sciences,may qualify to be 'Protoscience'.wink




Sweet Candor wrote:

In psychology and cognitive science, confirmation bias is a tendency to search for or interpret new information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions and avoids information and interpretations which contradict prior beliefs. It is a type of cognitive bias and represents an error of inductive inference, or as a form of selection bias toward confirmation of the hypothesis under study or disconfirmation of an alternative hypothesis. Confirmation bias is of interest in the teaching of critical thinking, as the skill is misused if rigorous critical scrutiny is applied only to evidence challenging a preconceived idea but not to evidence supporting it.



Have you been into Skeptic's Dictionary? A good source,for you! 'Skepticism for sake of itself' does not resonate well with mewink. Having a gift of holding views about something as well as contradictions is a rare one,still,plausible.

Numerology/Astrology/Palmistry/Shamanism/I-ching/Tarot/Reiki and likes are nothing but 'tools to enhance human perceptiveness'. You know that there are no objective proofs of 'Prana' but there are several subjective cases of healing because of the same.(you are into Reiki,I gather)smiling face

Toniognomy,Physiognomy,Postognomy are pseudosciences,hence ought not to be applied in public without certain degree of caution. Your diagnosis,done for me,is based on a few posts,which is,very likely to be inappropriate and inaccurate.zen. There are no true skeptics,because,they themselves are caught into the 'confirmation bias' for a single ideation called 'Skepticism for its sake'.

In my disclaimer,it was clearly written to 'not to take offense' but as you have already written in your quote " A tiltott gyümölcs a legédesebb."laughing


Thank You:

Edited by Thinker13 on 06/28/09 - 1:37 PM
Sweet Candor
Junior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 28, 2009
Location: Hungary

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 13
Posted 06/29/09 - 1:33 AM:

i rather enjoy my abundance of dopamine
(assuming that's the only cause for experiencing more synchronicitous events than the average person)

Hi Librtygirl, it's the hyperabundence of dopamine that makes people see too much significance in coincidences. You can see that in the information I posted to Thinker13. smiling face

i've been having some debate with folks on my facebook about whether michael jackson was a child molester. my thoughts are that he wasn't.

If he was, then it is interesting that so many people have forgave him because of his music. Since I was in childhood his songs were a deep inspiration to me. Because of that, I never believed the bad things they said about him. It seems like people were jealous or something and said he wanted to change his looks even though he had problems with his body. RIP Michael. hug

I feel you are being a presumptuous psychologist blushlaughing!blushlaughing

Oh, OK! laughing

Do not claim to be a good psychologist until unless you have known the boundaries of the thoughts of your interlocutor.

What is a interlocutor?

if you get a high level of dopamine,in my brain,upon consistently testing me, for a week,we shall agree

Oh, sure. How will I test you now? wink

What if someone changes levels of dopamine,in their brain(above and below the 'normal'wink just after two hours of meditation raised eyebrow.

If the nuroreceptors in the reward center are over-used it doesn't matter what the dopmaine levels are. grin

Why do you ask this? Do you do meditation?

Dramatically enough,a true skeptic,if any,would never try to study Psychology as a 'science' because it is a 'Pseudoscience' much like 'Numerology' which along with many such sciences,may qualify to be 'Protoscience'.

Really?

'Skepticism for sake of itself' does not resonate well with me

I am not a skeptic, we must test things like scientists do, no?

You know that there are no objective proofs of 'Prana' but there are several subjective cases of healing because of the same.(you are into Reiki,I gather)

Reiki uses Ki: "Tenohira is a technique whereby practitioners believe they are moving "healing energy" (a form of ki) through the palms."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiki

"Mrs. Takata received daily treatments and got progressively better. In four months, she was completely healed. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawayo_Takata

In my disclaimer,it was clearly written to 'not to take offense' but as you have already written in your quote " A tiltott gyümölcs a legédesebb.

It's OK, I didn't take offence. So you can read Hungarian?!
A tudás hatalom.wink
libertygrl
Administrator
Avatar

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Location: San Francisco

Total Topics: 425
Total Comments: 4673
#10 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/29/09 - 8:37 AM:

Sweet Candor wrote:
Hi Librtygirl, it's the hyperabundence of dopamine that makes people see too much significance in coincidences. You can see that in the information I posted to Thinker13. smiling face

i would caution against feeling too certain that it's the only possible reason. could lead to a confirmation bias, don't you think?

smiling facelib
henry quirk
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Location: here

Total Topics: 47
Total Comments: 1298
#11 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/29/09 - 9:32 AM:

"What did you find interesting about that guy?"


Not one goddamned thing.

Jackson, Fawcett, etc.: taking up valuable space in my finite brain.

Oh: that I should be able to selectively excise the useless, the pedestrian, the Mickey Mouse, from my skull!
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#12 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/29/09 - 11:58 AM:

Sweet Candor wrote:
What is a interlocutor?


"Someone,who takes part in a conversation."


Sweet Candor wrote:
How will I test you now? wink


Am sure,you cannot,leave it heresticking out tongue


Sweet Candor wrote:
If the nuroreceptors in the reward center are over-used it doesn't matter what the dopmaine levels are. grin


May be they are not,how can you tell for sure,without examining actual state of affairs,then,there is a good deal of plasticity too,methinks. grin

Sweet Candor wrote:
Why do you ask this?


Just to check your conviction.wink

Sweet Candor wrote:
Do you do meditation?


None of your businesswink


Sweet Candor wrote:
Really?


'Real enough' as per the value assignment of the axiological agent known as Thinker13,in his own context,need not be true for any other agent,until and unless,contexts(tentative) as well as 'value assignments' coincide for them and not 'real' 'in general',until and unless,the value assignment of agent(s) is as same,as that of the current 'Might'(axiological standard,in general).disapproval


Sweet Candor wrote:
I am not a skeptic, we must test things like scientists do, no?


But dismissing 'observations' of a particular type,in the name of 'dopamine hyperabundance' even before sufficient data has been collected,is not 'scientific',methinks. Is it?shaking head


Reiki uses Ki: "Tenohira is a technique whereby practitioners believe they are moving "healing energy" (a form of ki) through the palms."


Suggested similar thing,the point of contention was 'skepticism for its own sake'.



Sweet Candor wrote:
So you can read Hungarian?!
.wink


May be,was just interested in yousmiling face

A tudás hatalom


6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me
finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through
them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder,
after he has climbed up on it.) He must transcend these propositions,
and then he will see the world aright.wink

Wittgenstein,Tractatus.

Thank You
henry quirk
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Location: here

Total Topics: 47
Total Comments: 1298
#13 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/29/09 - 12:20 PM:

"'Real enough' as per the value assignment of the axiological agent known as Thinker13, in his own context, need not be true for any other agent, until and unless, contexts (tentative) as well as 'value assignments' coincide for them and not 'real' 'in general’, until and unless, the value assignment of agent(s) is as same, as that of the current 'Might'(axiological standard, in general)."


Translation: There are no 'universals'. Thinker 13 is an autonomous individual with his own, singular, take on the world. His perspective is his alone and may or may not align with yours. The 'rightness' of Thinker's perspective, or yours, is determined solely by his, or your, capacity to assert and defend that perspective. Please note: asserting and defending a perspective has absolutely nothing to do with convincing the other guy of a damned thing (though, that may indeed figure into things), and, everything to do with simply applying one's 'self' as agent. --Henry 'savin' the world from philoso-jargon, one post at a time' Quirk

HA!

Edited by henry quirk on 06/29/09 - 12:28 PM
Sweet Candor
Junior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 28, 2009
Location: Hungary

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 13
#14 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/30/09 - 6:19 AM:

i would caution against feeling too certain that it's the only possible reason. could lead to a confirmation bias, don't you think?

There are many different possible reasons, I am sure. I am using the best scientific evidence available. It is worth investigating it - not many people are knowledgeable of it.

May be they are not,how can you tell for sure,without examining actual state of affairs,then,there is a good deal of plasticity too,methinks.

If there is hyperabundence of dopamine then the nuroreceptors in the reward system will become damaged. Too much excitement makes this happen. Do you have much excitement in your life, Thinker13?

'Real enough' as per the value assignment of the axiological agent known as Thinker13,in his own context,need not be true for any other agent,until and unless,contexts(tentative) as well as 'value assignments' coincide for them and not 'real' 'in general',until and unless,the value assignment of agent(s) is as same,as that of the current 'Might'(axiological standard,in general)

I can't believe this is english. laughing

May be,was just interested in yousmiling face smiling face

That is interesting for me, too smiling face But I am sure you won't tell me why - you are being very mysterious.

6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me
finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through
them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder,
after he has climbed up on it.) He must transcend these propositions,
and then he will see the world aright.wink

rolling eyes oooh - mystery man! haha. laughing

Translation: There are no 'universals'. Thinker 13 is an autonomous individual with his own, singular, take on the world. His perspective is his alone and may or may not align with yours. The 'rightness' of Thinker's perspective, or yours, is determined solely by his, or your, capacity to assert and defend that perspective. Please note: asserting and defending a perspective has absolutely nothing to do with convincing the other guy of a damned thing (though, that may indeed figure into things), and, everything to do with simply applying one's 'self' as agent. --Henry 'savin' the world from philoso-jargon, one post at a time' Quirk

HA!

Hello Henry Quirk - thank you for saving me from all that puzzlement hug. It's OK with me for people to have different ideas.
libertygrl
Administrator
Avatar

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Location: San Francisco

Total Topics: 425
Total Comments: 4673
#15 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/30/09 - 10:25 AM:

Sweet Candor wrote:
rolling eyes oooh - mystery man! haha. laughing

no name calling, please. you may mean it in good humor, but it has the tendency to get out of hand. your consideration is appreciated.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#16 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/30/09 - 12:50 PM:

henry quirk wrote:
--Henry 'savin' the world from philoso-jargon, one post at a time' Quirk

HA!


thumb uplaughinglaughinglaughingthumb up
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#17 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 06/30/09 - 12:56 PM:

Sweet Candor wrote:
Do you have much excitement in your life, Thinker13?

None of your business,premature conclusions about fellow interlocutors are not good,methinks.zen

Sweet Candor wrote:
I can't believe this is english. laughing


You have not to believe because 'it is'.smiling face

Sweet Candor wrote:
you are being very mysterious.


Let it be so,if it is so.laughing

Sweet Candor wrote:
rolling eyes oooh - mystery man! laughing. laughing


Great compliment. Was meant for Wittgenstein? For me ? For both of us?



Thank You


Search thread for
Download thread as
  • 0/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5



Sorry, you don't have permission . Log in, or register if you haven't yet.



Acknowledgements:

Couch logo design by Midnight_Monk. The photo hanging above the couch was taken by Paul.

Powered by WSN Forum. Free smileys here.
Special thanks to Maria Cristina, Jesse , Echolist Directory, The Star Online,
Hosting Free Webs, and dmoz.org for referring visitors to this site!

Copyright notice:

Except where noted otherwise, copyright belongs to respective authors
for artwork, photography and text posted in this forum.