Prolite

Do not place limits on what is, and what isn't. Just realize what could be, whether possible or impossible: To dream the impossible dream To fight the unbeatable foe To bear with unbearable sorrow To run where the brave dare not go To right the un-rightable wrong To love pure and chaste from afar To try when your arms are too weary To reach the unreachable star This is my quest, To follow that star No matter how hopeless, No matter how far. To fight for the right Without question or pause, To be willing to march Into hell for a heavenly cause. And I know if I'll only be true To this glorious quest That my heart will lie peaceful and calm When I'm laid to my rest And the world will be better for this And one man, sore and covered with scars Still strove with his last ounce of courage To fight the unbeatable foe To reach the unreachable star

No. The notion of "healthy mind" is a constraint of the conscious mind and thereby a limit of creativity itself that you have placed upon yourself. Many times, the best things of nature and of our human existence comes from great human suffering, such as human rights movements. John F Kennedy: "we choose to go to the moon." -- because of the national security threat from Russia's space program. "He (President Kennedy) infused the speech with a sense of urgency and destiny, and emphasized the freedom enjoyed by Americans to choose their destiny rather than have it chosen for them"

You said: "free from toxic mind." You are already placing limits on your ideas based on whether they are conducive to creativity or not, based on whether they are toxic or not. This undermines the whole point of creativity. Creativity is the freedom of the mind without the mind realizing that there weren't any constraints there to begin with. I would sometimes dream about an elephant balancing on the tip of a needle. In my conscious world, I ordinarily would never consider the idea. However, once I realized something is impossible, than I realized the limit to my own creativity. Dream the impossible dream.

You are not thinking about the immediacy of TIME as IMMEDIATE THREAT to one's survival (amygdala hijack) when it comes to the first system that is most important to SAVING our LIVES, which is the 1st Law of Social Fabrics.

To me, everything has pattern even if it doesn't deserve a pattern. Ideas, things, people have stories, sort of the way how our brains work when dreaming. You can do the same thing when awake. People tend to compartmentalize our social world. Stop doing that and combine things with other things just because there's an emotional salient story to be explored or told.

IMMEDIATE SAFETY (an amgydala hijack) is the first, most important system or tier that SAVES our LIVES. You can run away from a predator in 7-10 seconds without breathing and SAVE YOUR LIFE, but you may not be able to SAVE YOUR LIFE if you had to first THINK about breathing before running away (in which case you might die). Let me give you example from the literature of the amygdala hijack and the notion of TIME and IMMEDIATE SAFETY: "If the record of experiences in the hippocampus tells the amygdala that it is a fight, flight or freeze situation, then the amygdala triggers the HPA (hypothalmic-pituitary-adrenal) axis and hijacks the rational brain." Hijacking the rational brain because TIME is of immediate essence: The amygdala triggers the hypothalmic-petuitary-adrenal axis to HIJACK the rational brain, because this shortens the TIME of thinking, allowing you to react QUICKER to immediate threats. And if all it takes is 3 seconds to pull back from the water's edge from a crocodile attack, you're going to do it and probably without breathing, thereby potentially saving your life. Rather than saying to yourself, "oh crap, here comes a crocodile attack, let me breathe first!

Anaerobic respiration will allow you to run away without breathing for a very short amount of time. Again, the 1st Law has to do with TIME and the immediacy of TIME in IMMEDIATE SURVIVAL.

You said: "Well, that assumes you've already got enough air to hold you over." Immediate SAFETY presides OVER air, regardless. Lets say you are out bodysurfing waves (even though I prefer bodyboarding). You get winded out there fighting the waves. Suddenly, a big set of waves comes in and you get "held under" (as its called) when you're already out of breathe -- which has happened to me many times. Many times and including for surfers, you don't have enough air, but you enter into "survival mode" until you can surface again to get another breath of air. TIME and immediacy of TIME has everything to do with the 1st sub-law of social fabrics: IMMEDIATE SAFETY.

Self-actualization explained: 1) My model has no overlap with Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. 2) "Self-actualization" in my model is an emergent property of social and technological complexity. Notice how the 1st through 4th sub-laws (on the left-hand side of the equation) represent simple survival. Once simple survival is fulfilled, and society is technologically complex enough to permit fulfilling higher sub-laws, the individual goes on to becoming more "self-actualized" by integrating themselves into the ECONOMY (the 5th sub-law). As people are able to PROTECT higher needs such as FAMILY and LOVE (6th-sub-law), they may fulfill even higher needs such as MENTAL HEALTH and PHYSICAL WELL-BEING (7th sub-law, such as going to the gym, and meditation). And if they CHOOSE to PROTECT these lower sub-laws to a much higher degree meaning with higher levels of meta-cognition, creating more social and psychological complexity (reaching higher levels feedback looped to the super-ego in the consciousness) , they become even more "Self-actualized." Therefore, I say to you, my model doesn't have a "region" for self-actualization. "Self-actualization" is merely a representation of social, technological, and psychological complexity. The brain is basically a nested, hierarchy, self-recursive, fractal feedback loop (wherein everything looks like itself, nested inside itself, with different regions of the brain geared towards higher complexity and specialization, to which feedback loops mirror upon self ("Fractal Brain Theory," Wai H. Tsang). You are what you perceive (sensory feedback), and WHAT you think changes who you are and what you perceive, feedback looped into itself." And this happens at every level of the brain. There is a level of simplicity (of the id) to greater complexity (of the ego), to greater levels of complexity (the super-ego) to which feedback loops into itself. The model below explains A LOT more than what is apparent to the eye but shows the entire social world as 5 Laws (the 1st already shown above at the start of this thread). For example, "self-actualization" is a pathway of brain and mind from simplicity to complexity: 8th-sublaw to PROTECT all lower sub-laws, creating a level of social and psychological complexity that feedback loops into the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Laws (as shown in the model above: "feedback loop to society" and "self to society"), which represents a spiraling dopamine projection pathway. "A feedback loop is the part of a system in which some portion (or all) of the system's output is used as input..." Here, you can begin to realize meta-cognition into levels of higher complexity of the neuron-circuits in the brain as survival mechanisms are fulfilled, feedback looping into society, working as the brain further develops. People's brains from infancy to up to 30 years old can only handle a certain level of complexity because of the brain's current level of biological development. For instance, children at some point, transition from concrete thinking to analytical thinking. As adults, we may realize "Self actualization" based on a certain level of social and psychological complexity. "Self-actualization" is a representation of the consciousness working at high levels of social complexity with the super-ego (the neo-cortex), to which it feedback loops to the ego and and id (survival mechanisms).

You said: "The need to drink is next in priority after breathing." Exactly, the need to drink is SECOND in priority than breathing (which is still the second tier), but immediate SAFETY and SURVIVAL is 1st in priority (escaping an immediate threat, hence our flight-or-fight system.

The first law of survival is NOT breathing. Our bodies allows us to run away from predators and to quickly react to immediate dangers without breathing for a very short time using ATP (our anaerobic system), which is more important to saving our lives and our immediate safety (1st law) than physiological needs (such as food, water, or breathing). That is why IMMEDIATE SAFETY (amygdala hijack) is the 1st sub-law of the first law of social fabrics. Eventually, breathing, water, and other physiological needs become essential to LIFE, but not to its immediate safety.

The contention is the following: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is wrong. I will prove it to you: 1) I will post an image of what I call the 1st Law of Social Fabrics, which represents the subconsciousness, as the 'id', which is our human instincts. 2) I will claim how the subconsciousness should be redefined. 3) Then I will describe HOW it works and WHY it is CORRECT, based on the new model (the 1st Law which is the image). 4) I will claim how the current understanding of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, is WRONG, which is taught in universities all around the world. 1. The new model: 2. CLAIMS: I used the word "Law" because the "Laws Of Social Fabrics" describe our bodily systems that work in accordance to flight-or-fight, energy and homeostasis, immune system, and survival of the species (reproduction) which works in accordance to our body's in nature. The 1st Law of Social Fabrics, I claim: Represents 8 sub-laws, which defines human instincts. Is made up of two distinct parts: simple survival, and complex survival. Goes from simplicity (at the bottom) to complexity (at the top). Starts with simplicity (1st sub-law: flight-or-fight), and works its way to complexity (8th sub-law: protect or not protect lower sub-laws). Defines the subconsciousness as instincts (survival). The phrase: "survival mechanisms," meaning, that which represents human instincts. The first 4 sub-laws represents simple survival: our bodily systems that keep us alive. This includes the following: 1) immediate safety, 2) energy and homeostasis, 3) immune system, and 4) survival of the species, meaning reproduction. The 5-8th sub-laws I claim represents complex survival, meaning, social complexity. "Simple survival" I claim represents simple spacetime and simple social-spacetime. "Complex survival" I claim represents greater complex spacetime and greater complex social-spacetime. 3. The 1st Law of Social Fabrics: WHY it is scientifically correct and HOW it works: WHY the 1st Law of Social Fabrics is scientifically correct: Biology: the first 4 sub-laws are systems of our body which turn on and off in order, based on the current state of our body and in nature. Individual simplicity to social complexity: the sub-laws are how our bodily systems respond to survival, homeostasis, and survival of the species interpreted through individual survival and survival of the species (1-4th sub-laws) to social complexity (5th-8th sub-laws). I have placed everything in its proper respective order in accordance to our biology and how its works in nature. HOW the 1st Law of Social Fabrics works (systems turning on and off in accordance to the current state of the body in nature: Examples of SIMPLE survival: Sub-law 1: If you are in the forest searching for food and all of a sudden a wild animal like a lion or bear starts chasing you, you will NOT continue eating or searching for food. Your body will react in accordance to flight-or-fight. You will either run away, or fight the animal. Sub-law 2: If you come down with an illness or sickness such as the flu, your body will reduce food and water intake through appetite or repress it altogether, depending on the severity of the illness or sickness in order for your body to put as much ENERGY into your immune system to fighting the illness. Sub-law 3: If you are about to have sex with someone and you find out they are bedridden due to having an illness, you will likely not engage in sex with them. Likewise, if you find out they have H.I.V., you will likely not engage in sex with them. Examples COMPLEX survival: Sub-law 4: If you were planning to have a child, and you suddenly lost your job or suffered a serious financial loss because of the ECONOMY, you will likely decide not to have a child (because of financial burden). Sub-law 5: If you were in a LOVING relationship (6th sub-law) with your spouse and kids (family), and all of a sudden the ECONOMY got worse, or your lost your job, there is a likely chance that any financial hardship will cause problems with the relationship of your family. When parents argue, it's usually because of a financial burden, thereby likely to cause problems within the family. Sub-law 6: the LOVE for your family takes priority over exercising. For example, during the holiday Thanks Giving, you might spend 30 minutes to an hour running outside for exercise (working off all that junk food). But the rest of the day, is spent with family. Sub-law 7: If you become obese, you may decide to lose weight (to prevent high blood pressure), or not. If you become depressed (mental health), you may decide to protect your mental health by seeking help, or not. Protecting or not protecting a lower sub-law is the 8th sub-law. 4. Abraham Maslow's model on the "Hierarchy of Needs," is scientifically wrong. Here's why: Maslow has SAFETY as his second tier in his hierarchy, which doesn't agree with our body's natural flight-or-fight response. According to his model, if you are eating something and suddenly a wild animal starts running towards you, you may decide to keep standing there eating. Accordingly, SAFETY (immediate threat) is not as important as physiological needs in his model, such as food. Note that Maslow has "physiological needs" as his first, most important tier. See link below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs On Maslow's 3rd tier, he has listed: "love, belonging, intimate relationships (meaning sex), and family." These should not all be clumped together in the same tier, because that would imply that all of these "needs" are of the same equal importance. They are not. For example, sex takes priority over family. More to that point, people risk losing their jobs over sex, and sometimes their entire careers. Secondly, sex is more important than friendship. Friendship is not required for preservation of the species, and reproduction should be a lower tier in his hierarchy. Lastly, family is more important than friendship. Family is for life.