bogdan9310 wrote:

Explain where you have sourced your material. Engage with constructive disagreement. Acknowledge some of the errors that are plainly present.

I made it up, and I've put a lot of work into it too.

I wasn't asking a question. All of those were answers to your question "What more can I do?". You were upset that someone called out your plaigarism, I was explaining how that could have been avoided.

bogdan9310 wrote:I don't have other evidence, because I'm not rich, and can't hire scientists to prove it for me.

Even if you were rich you couldn't hire scientists to prove it for you. That isn't how science works.

bogdan9310 wrote:Work with what you have, and if not, that's fine. But don't shoot a potential good idea to the bin just because you can't understand it.

I do understand it. It doesn't work.

bogdan9310 wrote:And again, independent confirmation is the ultimate proof, and I provide you with the tools to check it out for yourselves.

Why do you think I didn't try independent confirmation or disconfirmation? I tested your "memory is more vivid than experience" claim - it's patently 100% false. You too can test this, I already gave you an example of how you could.

I backed this up by scoping out a few abstracts of the scientific literature into NLP. Turns out it's pseudoscientific bollocks.

From my point of view, you are just trolling me. No chance I can make you treat this seriously...

bogdan9310 wrote:From my point of view, you are just trolling me. No chance I can make you treat this seriously...

Really? You actually think that I didn't try something as hard as "Take a moment to think about a good memory, stop reading, and when you are ready, read the next part".

Well, you're obviously wrong, this is not a hard thing to do. Anyone, even you, can see that remembering something good is very easy. It's also obviously wrong that when recalling a good memory it is more vivid than real life. If you imagine a moment of, let's say joy or laughter at reading a book, you don't burst out laughing more intently. If you remember losing your virginity you don't suddenly lose control in orgasmic delight. If you think of something quantifiable like a favourite book you can't remember every word on every page.

It is total, and obvious, nonsense to say that memories are more vivid than life, you lose almost everything that makes an experience vivid and hold on to a mere fragment. Saying so is not trolling.

But I suspect you already know all that perfectly well.

Thommo wrote:

bogdan9310 wrote:From my point of view, you are just trolling me. No chance I can make you treat this seriously...

Really? You actually think that I didn't try something as hard as "Take a moment to think about a good memory, stop reading, and when you are ready, read the next part".

Well, you're obviously wrong, this is not a hard thing to do. Anyone, even you, can see that remembering something good is very easy. It's also obviously wrong that when recalling a good memory it is more vivid than real life. If you imagine a moment of, let's say joy or laughter at reading a book, you don't burst out laughing more intently. If you remember losing your virginity you don't suddenly lose control in orgasmic delight. If you think of something quantifiable like a favourite book you can't remember every word on every page.

It is total, and obvious, nonsense to say that memories are more vivid than life, you lose almost everything that makes an experience vivid and hold on to a mere fragment. Saying so is not trolling.

But I suspect you already know all that perfectly well.

You are wrong, I doubt you know how to think.

No one cares what you doubt. That you say this to Thommo of all people shows your opinions are worthless. You're definitely trolling - you know Thommo no more than you know me, and you are happy to pass comment despite this. It is not worthwhile engaging with someone who feels fine about making claims without any knowledge. Do jog on.

bogdan9310 wrote:
You are wrong, I doubt you know how to think.

Yeah? Well, why don't you impress us all with the efficacy of NLP by providing a sound explanation of where Thommo is going 'wrong' instead of just leaving a vacuous Ad Hominem steaming on the forum carpet.

Thommo wrote:

bogdan9310 wrote:From my point of view, you are just trolling me. No chance I can make you treat this seriously...

Really? You actually think that I didn't try something as hard as "Take a moment to think about a good memory, stop reading, and when you are ready, read the next part".

Well, you're obviously wrong, this is not a hard thing to do. Anyone, even you, can see that remembering something good is very easy. It's also obviously wrong that when recalling a good memory it is more vivid than real life. If you imagine a moment of, let's say joy or laughter at reading a book, you don't burst out laughing more intently. If you remember losing your virginity you don't suddenly lose control in orgasmic delight. If you think of something quantifiable like a favourite book you can't remember every word on every page.

It is total, and obvious, nonsense to say that memories are more vivid than life, you lose almost everything that makes an experience vivid and hold on to a mere fragment. Saying so is not trolling.

But I suspect you already know all that perfectly well.

"This is called anchoring, you take a sensation and associate it with a trigger, in this case the lever. Now whenever you wish, you can pull the lever again and re-trigger that feeling and memory if you want to. You could use anything as a trigger: a word, sound, situation etc.

Even if the content remains the same, when you change the quality of the picture, its size, brightness, distance, and color, your whole experience changes."

Sorry to tell you, you've lost your flavour. People have moved on to other, more interesting silliness.