Meaningless and obscure thoughts

Free Guides For Authors

Why Facebook Cannot Help You Sell Books

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Stephen Drake

Guest
I sometimes get these strange thoughts and wonder where they come from.
Examples:
Who says that the color of the sky is blue? I don't mean the chemical reasons, I mean who determined that the color I see is blue? Maybe I see it as green and because I was raised with people who constantly told me that that color of the sky is blue.
Am I different because I had trouble coloring inside the lines? Does that make me rebellious or just a contrarian? It didn't seem to matter how much trouble I got into by coloring outside the lines, I still did it. Even if I tried to do it perfectly, there would still be a few places that the crayola escaped the predefined edges. Is my unconscious mind rebelling against the lines and structure?
Who determines what "reality" is? Is it me? If so, how I can be delusional? If I am delusional, what qualifies someone to label me that? Or is "Reality" that part of our existence that we have agreed with someone else about what constitutes "Reality" as group? Or is "Reality" an attempt to define "normal"?

Sometimes, these thoughts just jump into my consciousness. I don't know why or where they come from and I can spend hours thinking about it and researching it. The things that take us off on tangents.

Anyone else get these? or am I the only one?
 
You are not alone. The colour business has fascinated me since, as a child, I found that grass was yellow-green when viewed through one eye, and blue-green through the other. It is possible that you see the grass to be a colour that I would describe as pink and another as orange. We can never know. Colour, like other perceptions, even pain, is essentially a construct produced by the brain. Consider what happens - you touch or see something, and electrical impulses go from the sensing organ [skin or eye], through the neurons, and into the brain. In the brain, it is translated into something which the conscious part of you [if there is such a thing - but that is whole other conversation] perceives as colour or pain. In fact it is 'just' a pattern of charges. Furthermore, a good deal of what you see isn't there - the brain fills in the gaps with it thinks ought to be there. I have written a bunch of short stories exploring aspects of brain and consciousness which I will bring to the Houses one day.

Normality = largely a social construct. Reality - philosophers have debated it for centuries, whole books written on the topic.

As for finding it difficult to colour between the lines - you just have a rubbish crayon. :)
 
You are not alone. The colour business has fascinated me since, as a child, I found that grass was yellow-green when viewed through one eye, and blue-green through the other. It is possible that you see the grass to be a colour that I would describe as pink and another as orange. We can never know. Colour, like other perceptions, even pain, is essentially a construct produced by the brain. Consider what happens - you touch or see something, and electrical impulses go from the sensing organ [skin or eye], through the neurons, and into the brain. In the brain, it is translated into something which the conscious part of you [if there is such a thing - but that is whole other conversation] perceives as colour or pain. In fact it is 'just' a pattern of charges. Furthermore, a good deal of what you see isn't there - the brain fills in the gaps with it thinks ought to be there. I have written a bunch of short stories exploring aspects of brain and consciousness which I will bring to the Houses one day.

Normality = largely a social construct. Reality - philosophers have debated it for centuries, whole books written on the topic.

As for finding it difficult to colour between the lines - you just have a rubbish crayon. :)

I first ms has some of what you said in it. Seeing something that may or may not be there. But in my ms, I have creatures that interfere with the transmissions to the brain. Interesting, though!
 
No, I definitely get random thoughts all the time. I think it's the curse of being a writer. My thoughts are usually less abstract, but I think they make great story points!

That they do! Phillip K. Dick was determined to be paranoid and schizophrenic. He managed to write things like "Total Recall" and "Minority Report" (to name a few). But who is to say he didn't have it right? Maybe he did?

I'm wondering if "Reality" is something from the early days of our evolution. Agreeing with a group as to what is reality would be a survival behavior as it would lead to acceptance by the group. Hmmm.
 
No, I definitely get random thoughts all the time. I think it's the curse of being a writer. My thoughts are usually less abstract, but I think they make great story points!

I have had these thoughts all my life... before I ever started writing anything. (Yes, I drove people crazy asking "why").
 
The colour thing also fascinated me as a child. I too wondered if my blue is the same as your blue..what if your blue was my red...lol!!

As a kid I looked at a droplet of water and wondered how small can we keep halving the droplet until it was as small as it could be...little did I know at the time I practically rediscovered the atom! :D

As an adult I admire architecture and structure - usually tutting 'they don't make them like they used to'. I like reading people's body language and am so certain I know what they are thinking! Sorry was that what you meant - or have I gone into that crazy part of myself.
 
e84.jpg

You can hallucinate any perception — visual, auditory, gustatory, thermoceptive, nociceptive... I knew a girl once who had synaesthesia, and then on top of that seizures from a car accident, and crazy-ass side-effects from medications. She hallucinated that the walls were covered in bugs and tentacles came out of the ceiling and lampshades, and had proprioceptive hallucinations where if she touched her arm, she would feel it in her forehead instead, or some damn thing. Then she would say things like a certain song tasted blue...
 
I am truly fascinated by synaesthesia. The only exposure I've had to it was a Criminal Minds episode, but watching words change color in the guy's sight was cool. I've done some research into it, and it's definitely going to show up in a book someday.
 
The colour thing also fascinated me as a child. I too wondered if my blue is the same as your blue..what if your blue was my red...lol!!

As a kid I looked at a droplet of water and wondered how small can we keep halving the droplet until it was as small as it could be...little did I know at the time I practically rediscovered the atom! :D

As an adult I admire architecture and structure - usually tutting 'they don't make them like they used to'. I like reading people's body language and am so certain I know what they are thinking! Sorry was that what you meant - or have I gone into that crazy part of myself.

The body language thing was outside what I was talking about, however, the color issue was right on! What if your green was my red and I was told enough that what you say is green is correct? Would that screw everything up when it comes to colors? I know that some of the color thing is evolutionary (something red is "danger" and something "green" is not) kind of thing.
 
The body language thing was outside what I was talking about, however, the color issue was right on! What if your green was my red and I was told enough that what you say is green is correct? Would that screw everything up when it comes to colors? I know that some of the color thing is evolutionary (something red is "danger" and something "green" is not) kind of thing.

The only reason we know that we see the same red or colours (in general excluding colour blind which actually confirms the rule) is due to the identical layout/structure of the eye and the consistency in the laws of physics which can be directly measured by anyone.

Unless you extend the differences to shapes, textures and all sorts of mis & match factors in the world of each reality.
 
As for identifying danger and safety...yes green is grass, trees, i.e. land translated as safe. Red is fire, blood, anger ie. danger. I'm so brainwashed by it I can't seem to distinguish further from that.
 
The only reason we know that we see the same red or colours (in general excluding colour blind which actually confirms the rule) is due to the identical layout/structure of the eye and the consistency in the laws of physics which can be directly measured by anyone.

Yes, but how much of that is a sociological adaptation? If what I see is green, but you call it red, do I call it red as well to be accepted into your group? (Acceptance would mean my survival)
 
View attachment 433

You can hallucinate any perception — visual, auditory, gustatory, thermoceptive, nociceptive... I knew a girl once who had synaesthesia, and then on top of that seizures from a car accident, and crazy-ass side-effects from medications. She hallucinated that the walls were covered in bugs and tentacles came out of the ceiling and lampshades, and had proprioceptive hallucinations where if she touched her arm, she would feel it in her forehead instead, or some damn thing. Then she would say things like a certain song tasted blue...

Synesthesia would be hard to live with. I've seen some documentaries about it.
 
Yes, but how much of that is a sociological adaptation? If what I see is green, but you call it red, do I call it red as well to be accepted into your group? (Acceptance would mean my survival)

Oh Gordan Bennett! lol

There are two perspectives plus an absolute perspective (i.e reality regardless of who is viewing it). Assume they are different i.e. your hypothesis is correct.

This cube is blue - absolute perspective.
To me I see it as red (from an absolute perspective)
To you you see it as green (from an absolute perspective).

I 'say' this is red.
You agree because green is termed 'red' to you. Even though your green is my red.

It is arbitrary who terms it first. Both notions are correct from both perspectives. So you could call it green yet I would still see red but my red is now termed green. Absolutely it is blue (if neither one of us exists).

So not only are we seeing different colours we are still terming them consistently and neither is the wiser for it. :D
 
Oh Gordan Bennett! lol

There are two perspectives plus an absolute perspective (i.e reality regardless of who is viewing it). Assume they are different i.e. your hypothesis is correct.

This cube is blue - absolute perspective.
To me I see it as red (from an absolute perspective)
To you you see it as green (from an absolute perspective).

I 'say' this is red.
You agree because green is termed 'red' to you. Even though your green is my red.

It is arbitrary who terms it first. Both notions are correct from both perspectives. So you could call it green yet I would still see red but my red is now termed green. Absolutely it is blue (if neither one of us exists).

So not only are we seeing different colours we are still terming them consistently and neither is the wiser for it. :D

You know, that is one of the best explanations I've ever heard! It is just one of those crazy thoughts that come from nowhere, but it was just an example of what I was talking about. I was talking about the thoughts themselves. Why is it I get these types of thoughts when I'm in the middle of something else? Is it my brain going off on its own and thinking whatever it wants to? Is my reality altered? Maybe they come from my counterpart in a alternate universe.
 
You know, that is one of the best explanations I've ever heard! It is just one of those crazy thoughts that come from nowhere, but it was just an example of what I was talking about. I was talking about the thoughts themselves. Why is it I get these types of thoughts when I'm in the middle of something else? Is it my brain going off on its own and thinking whatever it wants to? Is my reality altered? Maybe they come from my counterpart in a alternate universe.

But then more questions - how does your counterpart connect with you if they come from him in that alternate world.

Where they come from - they're a distraction to not writing!! That's my reasoning. Or..or ...they could be the subconscious way of exploring a potential plot in another story 'The Madness Within Withs out'.
 
But then more questions - how does your counterpart connect with you if they come from him in that alternate world.

Where they come from - they're a distraction to not writing!! That's my reasoning. Or..or ...they could be the subconscious way of exploring a potential plot in another story 'The Madness Within Withs out'.

I find that I have lots of plot ideas, usually that come to nothing. I guess it could be a fascination with how things we take for granted came to be.
 
I find that I have lots of plot ideas, usually that come to nothing. I guess it could be a fascination with how things we take for granted came to be.

I tend to go off on a tangent for the sole purpose of humouring myself. I love puzzles and analysing similar things to this and conjure up thoughts purposefully to explore that. We are the controllers the thoughts are the tools or path or a key to unlock whatever we like to unlock. The question that is begged from that is who is the We..and the I. :D
 
I tend to go off on a tangent for the sole purpose of humouring myself. I love puzzles and analysing similar things to this and conjure up thoughts purposefully to explore that. We are the controllers the thoughts are the tools or path or a key to unlock whatever we like to unlock. The question that is begged from that is who is the We..and the I. :D

Now you're getting deep! o_O
 
Now you're getting deep! o_O

Ooops!:eek:

I'll go in a minute I promise lol!:D but just humour me...my thoughts are veering here...no this way...follow me for second more.

Language is an objective insight into this.

Every sentence must have a subject and a verb.

I ran.
We ran.

We don't say 'My legs ran!' It doesn't work (not talking grammatically here) unless my legs did run!! lol. So in language who is the I...and the we that is using the legs to do the running? :D

Righty ho...cheerio...
 
Ooops!:eek:

I'll go in a minute I promise lol!:D but just humour me...my thoughts are veering here...no this way...follow me for second more.

Language is an objective insight into this.

Every sentence must have a subject and a verb.

I ran.
We ran.

We don't say 'My legs ran!' It doesn't work (not talking grammatically here) unless my legs did run!! lol. So in language who is the I...and the we that is using the legs to do the running? :D

Righty ho...cheerio...

I didn't mean you couldn't get deeper into it. I'm game! In the sentence, "I ran", you could say "My legs ran." but that wouldn't make sense to most people. The legs do the running, but most think of it as "Did your legs run off by themselves?" That could be a problem with language itself. Does a paraplegic's legs feel like they are running even when they can't move them? I doubt that question has ever been asked. And by not asking, is it the language that is to blame?
 
I didn't mean you couldn't get deeper into it. I'm game! In the sentence, "I ran", you could say "My legs ran." but that wouldn't make sense to most people. The legs do the running, but most think of it as "Did your legs run off by themselves?" That could be a problem with language itself. Does a paraplegic's legs feel like they are running even when they can't move them? I doubt that question has ever been asked. And by not asking, is it the language that is to blame?

Even with the 'my legs ran'...there is a possessive 'my'. Who owns those legs?

If one can't move ones legs but can recall the feeling of running then doesn't that originate back to our thoughts/memories, maybe.

Blame can only be cast on the user not the tool...that's my point of view...the language is the tool. And with all tools there are limits. The user in using the tool must be aware - or try to by aware - of its limits.
 
Even with the 'my legs ran'...there is a possessive 'my'. Who owns those legs?

If one can't move ones legs but can recall the feeling of running then doesn't that originate back to our thoughts/memories, maybe.

Blame can only be cast on the user not the tool...that's my point of view...the language is the tool. And with all tools there are limits. The user in using the tool must be aware - or try to by aware - of its limits.

Excellent points!
 
Excellent points!

I was listening to Christina Aguilera's the Voice Within...that might have helped direct my thoughts lol! :D

Music is a great tool too...no shall we leave that venture for another day?

I like your thoughts @MontanaMan65 - I think we've both proved they're not as meaningless as originally thought ;)

Reminds me of the fascinating documentary of the human brain...and that it wants to study itself. Mind blown!:eek:
 
I was listening to Christina Aguilera's the Voice Within...that might have helped direct my thoughts lol! :D

Music is a great tool too...no shall we leave that venture for another day?

I like your thoughts @MontanaMan65 - I think we've both proved they're not as meaningless as originally thought ;)

Reminds me of the fascinating documentary of the human brain...and that it wants to study itself. Mind blown!:eek:

That does sound interesting. Maybe they aren't as meaningless as I originally thought. I was just trying to figure out how my own mind works, at least at those times that it functions at all in some cogent way.
 
You are weird MontanaMan, truly weird! Maybe, just a wild suggestion here, maybe you should write a novel! I have this sneaking suspection you might have the talent for it. :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Free Guides For Authors

Why Facebook Cannot Help You Sell Books

Back
Top