I saw my teacher explaining things, and thinking how to interpret them, and I saw him stared at the ceiling.
What is he staring at?
Well, there’s a whole school of thought about where a person looks when they’re thinking, and how the direction can tell whether the person’s lying or not, and what kind of information it is.
mindworks.uk.com/website/eyecues.htm
There’s a link to a fairly decent site regarding the ideas.
Too lazy to write them all out.
that was interesting, but I don’t believe it.
when a person stares at the ceiling while contemplating, we may say he is staring at the ceiling. But when he is thinking, how can he see?
What do you mean “When he is thinking, how can he see?”
The same way he can think while farting; even though is he isn’t thinking about farting.
Well, NLP does have a decent history of success when it comes to prediction. Its part of one of the arts a conman must learn to read someone properly.
But, if it doesn’t tickle your fancy, how about this:
They’re staring at the nearest blank canvas, to interpose their thoughts over.
If you can’t remove your sense completely, you can at least limit it.
…and if you can’t see when you look, then…how the hell are you typing on a thought-based web forum?
IF you can see and think, that you are not using your senses well enough.
IF you can think and fart, something is wrong. If you can think while typing something is wrong.
But I will believe the brain controls the limbs and other organs, unless each senses has a mind of its own, then you will win.
There are 6 directions you can look at thinking, activating different parts of your brain.
Proof: Try to tell a lie first while looking right, then while looking left.
One of the two is going to be difficult.
that goes back to the stuff talked about in the NLP article I linked to.
But, as for not using senses well enough, its not because a person’s not working properly that they can multitask, its because they ARE working properly.
Use of senses, and development of senses are evolutionarily taxing. Humanity copes with midrange senses because they are the Jacks of all Senses, so to speak: They can utilize multiple senses at the same time, can process the information, and, if they’re A.D.D.ers, they can also observe and catalog everything shiney in the room, all at roughly the same moment.
So…if you can’t think and work your senses properly at the same time, perhaps you’re expending far too many resources in order to keep your senses active, instead of switching them to peripheral mode, like our genetics are programed to do?
RE: “The same way he can think while farting; even though is he isn’t thinking about farting.”
That got me to think’n, how come people make weird faces when they have orgasms…what are THEY thinking about???
ROFLMMFGDBOAAAAA.
Okay. (stops laughing, composes himself)
One word: Muscle spasms. Overpowering of the mental by the unexpected extreme of the physical. Please note, its only some people that make fun faces while orgasming…others are just fugly.
G,
LOL! I do not recommend staring at the ceiling either. Looking into the other persons eyes…it’s much more up close and personal.
I tried that a few times…people get scared when I look them in the eye, so it turned into rodeo sex. Go fig.
==============
First, except when one is lying down, I wouldn’t stare at the ceiling but the blank wall. I’ll have stiff neck from contemplating on a ceiling. When one contemplates by looking at the wall or ceiling, I think images and scenes will form before you from your subconscious mind. Who knows some of your problems will be answered this way. Or you will be inspired by something or some truths will be revealed to you this way.
He is looking inward. When we look at something we are assessing and identifying (subconsciously). When he looked at the ceiling, we could say he was looking into open space, in the sense that the brain was not identifying visual content. He was sourcing clarity.
In response to wj: "to look into the other person’s eyes, it is more up
close and personal . . .
I agree - when looking into another’s eyes one can see deep within another’s soul - their most inner self - and discover feelings and emotions
they never knew before . . .
when I’m daydreaming or in deep thought, I’m usually looking into the furthest point away from me. I guess, I like to not be distracted by anything of caos toward my thought. Usually I stare outside, mybe the light or nature helps give me a sence of peace.
If you say that in a court room they will say it is not a valid argument.
Presumably some parts of thought are derived exactly from the senses, I mean, to remember seeing something may for some early seeing-and-remembering-species have been a non-disolution of the image-- as when we stare at a light and can still see the image when looking at a blank wall, or trails behind a burning ember in the dark or numerous optical illusions. (“Second sight”, “the image was burned into my memory.”) When I imagine something I have seen, even in my non-insect brain, parts of the visual brain may still be used, although the eyes themselves are not really needed. I believe that for many people, when they talk to themselves or read silently, some part of the throat or tongue is slightly activated. Picture thinking may still require some use of the physical eyes. Though this may or may not be true of blind people, and also speed readers claim to look at and not silently-speak the words, so not necessarily do all people remember or think in the same way. Thinking parts of the brain may use evolutionarily modified sensory brain-hardware.
Your professor is probably staring at the thing with the most interest in what he is explaining. Haha
Heard of Zazen?
It sounds like a form of that: where a person stops seeing what is in front of them, but turns inward (as previously stated by some of you guys already.)
To learn the art of Zazen: one sits in front of a wall, on a hard floor, and stares at the wall for a few hours, say - after days/weeks of this: one eventually turns inward.
After that it becomes second nature.