Erik Mueller (author of ThoughtTreasure) http://www.signiform.com/ has
written on daydreaming in machines.
"Mentifex" <mentifex at my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8q2ulk$u44$1 at nnrp1.deja.com...
> In followup discussion, "Unit 4" wrote on Sun, 17 Sep 2000:
>> > On Sun, 17 Sep 2000 02:17:55 -0400, "Dwayne Conyers"
> > <dwacon at theglobe.com> wrote, in alt.mindcontrol:
>> >} Mentifex <mentifex at my-deja.com> wrote in message
> >} news:8pv87p$1oo$1 at nnrp1.deja.com...> >}> Normally, however, we accept everything told to us
> >}> in a dream because we are the one telling it to us.
> >} I don't believe this is true. Many things can
> >} influence a dream and the subconscious mind will
> >} sort and process those things...
> > Of course it's not true. It's not even likely.
> > He scraped together a collection of disjointed
> > concepts trying to rationalize something he
> > decided to believe a priori.
> The theory of hypnosis has emerged over decades.
> The points of departure are a theory of mind at
>> Unit 4 also responded to the initial thread-post
> with <1fn7ssod18pukls8fncfd4ank2rl3tfaua at 4ax.com>:
>> > Very pretty, but wrong as a football bat.
> > Get on PsychLit and Medline and look up
> > Crawford, Helen J., ex-president of the
> > Society for Experimental and Clinical Hypnosis
> > and APA's group 30.
> > Hypnosis is attentional and disattentional control
> By which I presume that you mean that the hypnotist
> causes the subject to "attend" to some things and to
> "disattend" to others, such as, "Attend to the kitten
> by holding it and stroking its fur," but "Disattend to
> the fact that you are really holding a loaf of bread."
> > directed in large part by the anterior cingulate.
> Let's theorize about the logic of hypnotism without
> regard to its imputed brain areas, until final answers
> arrive from the Organization for Human Brain Mapping
>http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/OHBM/ -- East Coast; or
>http://www.geocities.com/~brainmapping/ -- West Coast.
> > It has little if anything to do with dream states.
> Without quibbling too much over terminology, let us
> explore hypnotism as one of three generalized states:
> 1) ordinary waking consciousness;
> 2) a dream state as non-waking consciousness;
> 3) a hypnotic trance.
> > On Sat, 16 Sep 2000 07:41:47 GMT,
> > Mentifex <mentifex at my-deja.com> wrote,
> > in alt.mindcontrol:
> The idea of "mind control" is very apropos here because we
> are building artificial minds over which we will have some
> control until we approach the Technological Singularity of
> >} A theory of hypnosis is a by-product of a project in robot AI at
> >} http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/7256/hypnosis.html (q.v.):
> >} Hypnosis fits into the PD AI theory of mind in the following way.
> >} To our dreaming selves, we are the ultimate authority.
> The etiological differences among the three states listed
> above are reducible to the simple on-or-off logic of brain
> pathways. If the massive structure of the input sensorium
> is on during full consciousness, off during the dream state,
> and commandeered by the hypnotist during a hypnotic trance,
> then hypnotism becomes a matter of attentional priority:
> the entranced mind rivets its attention to the hypnotist.
>> By the way, Unit 4, you are obviously knowledgeable. Is there
> truth to the common idea that one of the dangers of hypnotism
> is leaving people in a trance -- appearing but not being awake?
>> >} In hypnosis, however, we manage to fall asleep
> >} (or into a trance) without shutting down the pathway
> >} of the input sensorium of strong external sensations.
> >} We experience a dream-like trance and we give up our
> >} sense of discretion and trust to what we take to be
> >} our own sacred and trustworthy consciousness but what
> >} is on the contrary another mind alien to our own:
> >} the mesmerizing hypnotist. [...]
>> Arthur T. Murray mentifex at scn.org> --
>>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/> Before you buy.