Carl-Richard

Give me your best explanation. Best explanation gets a cookie (laced with meth).

You can distinguish between self-awareness (meta-cognition, meta-consciousness, self-reflection), sentience (feelings, perceptions, senses) and pure consciousness (Consciousness as an infinite field, before any I, body, or self). A rock would be pure consciousness, but it is not necessarily sentient (which in the normal worldly realm seems generally related to sense organs) or self-aware (which in the normal worldly realm seems generally related to having big brains and especially complicated social interactions). That said, there is nothing in principle that stops rocks from being sentient or self-aware, but from a perspective of observing things in the world and drawing conclusions about them, you'll probably have a harder time arguing for that than e.g. pigs or humans.

It may involve that as a common feature but it's not limited to that. And "misidentification" is key here. Misidentifying whether something is your own internal voice or some external thing is on a spectrum of the human tendency to sometimes misidentify and misattribute the causes and sources of perceptions and events, where the types of experiences I described earlier exist somewhere on the normal part of that spectrum. A professor told me about a case where a person with schizophrenia described seeing a ghost and the ghost passing through them, and as it was passing through them, they could feel tactile sensations of the ghost and also smells of rotten fish. It's a pretty wide spectrum of possible experience. There is a point where "misattribution" or "misidentifying" doesn't do the experiences justice, but indeed hallucination or simply dreaming. And you can experience this yourself if you've been very sleep deprived or stressed or ill. Suddenly the distinction between "reality" and dream becomes very foggy. Or simply laying and taking a nap, you are floating on between "true external" and "generated external" (which really is only a distinction made for cultural convenience; modern cognitive neuroscience is all about prediction models or "controlled hallucination"; schizophrenia is sometimes conceptualized as a breakdown of the prediction machinery).

I'm simply going by what I remember from my statistics courses in psychology (and Bernardo Kastrup talking about it as a side note in various videos). So essentially a statistics book (maybe specifically inferential statistics). They go through the bare minimum of concepts like causality vs correlation (and related concepts like mediation, moderation, perhaps less relevant in this case).

Nope, it doesn't have to be a sole determinant. That would simply be a perfect 1-to-1 causal relationship (or a collinear correlation which is causal). Very few causal relationships are like that. In the heat transduction example, it's often the case that the heat is tranduced from (and to) other objects as well not currently under consideration.

The behavior doesn't have to be interpersonally evident. It can be mostly private or internal to ones own mind. You're assuming a behaviorist or objectively visible definition of behavior. I'm talking about behavior as in how something unfolds, e.g. behavior of the mind. If science is the study of the behavior of nature (how it unfolds), then psychology is the study of the behavior of mind. The example is not about the internal voice. It's about hallucinating. Now you just displayed signs of thought disorder. Have you ever been at the verge of falling asleep (e.g. when reading something but being too tired and you start dozing off) and you start hearing things that sound external to you but as you drift in and out of sleep, you notice that the sounds were not in fact external to you? Or you think you heard somebody call your name in a public place but you're not sure if you even heard it correctly or if it was directed at you? That could be a hallucination or it could be a delusional belief or state (but it's less easy to know in that moment). Such subtle misattributions and confusion about perceptual content are the seeds of pathology seen in conditions like schizophrenia.

Identifying with the change. You can have the belief that working out is better for your health, but if you don't care about health (which if you truly question it, maybe you do, but let's assume a surface-level understanding of health like "not being fat, weak, out of breath or living shorter") or other things associated with working out, then you probably won't start working out. But if you start caring about the things that is associated with working out, maybe by expanding your definition of health (to include mental well-being, emotional stability, bodily comfort, higher functioning in everyday life), then you might start to care enough to start working out. But even if you know all these things intellectually, even if you think you care about these things, if it doesn't resonate organically or intuitively with your very body or being, then it's not necessarily going to happen. It has to be identifying with the change on an authentic "karmic" level, you must simply be ready to do it, or wanting to do it. And this is less easy to pin down when or how it happens. For example, I've observed my little brother go from not caring much about working out, to caring about it on an intellectual level, to then finally embodying it on a more intuitive level and then actually starting to work out on his own accord (before, he needed to go with his buddies). My mom was always like "how do we make him start working out?". And I was telling her ever since the beginning that he simply has to start wanting to do it on his own accord, it's not ultimately something you can force from the outside (but outside influences help, of course, but it's not something you can easily pin down exactly what will help or how to make the change truly happen). He already knows so much about the benefits, it doesn't really help him to tell him about those again and again, and he knows he cares about many of those benefits. He must simply get to the point where he feels moved to actually manifest it. And not long after, he came to that point. And it could happen perhaps after seeing how he feels on a physical or mental level after he has trained vs not training, that he starts to make the connection intuitively that this is something that his body and mind wants, and then over time, the shift happens that way. So small experiences like that can start pulling you in that direction. But all experiences do this in their own way. It's in the end simply a question of time.

Mental disorder is normal human behavior pulled to such extremes that most people would like you locked up because they can't tolerate you, or you're just simply unable to function at a basic level such that your physical survival is threatened, or it's causing you or other people so much suffering that you want to change it. Take schizophrenia for example. Everybody has probably at one point in time heard a voice they thought was real but was actually imagined (really search your memory, you will find something), i.e. hallucinations. had trouble thinking clearly or making themselves understood, i.e. thought disorder. thought somebody was out to harm them or that somebody was conspiring against them when it was actually not the case, i.e. persecutory delusions, paranoia, psychotic beliefs. Schizophrenia is just drawing these things to the ultimate extremes. Same with anxiety, ADHD, autism, OCD. We only label it a disorder once the problem becomes so severe and obvious that most people want to do something about it. And of course psychedelics can produce such states that appear as mental disorders, because they tend to make things more extreme, like a magnifying glass.

Your perception of what they are saying has simply lost a dimension of depth. That you can't imagine or make the mental connection that I'm typing these words from a limited perspective, that's just what it is, a limitation of your ability to imagine. Is that "true"? What a weird thing to be "true". It's like if I had lost my ability to wiggle my toes but I'm still able to walk, that this specific thing somehow gives me insight into what is really true.

How do you conclude they did that once or twice and how would that lead to you being in there for 5 months?

By the way, "properties" here would be "mechanisms" (or processes) in the causality language framework. For example, object A increases the temperature of object B through the mechanism/process of heat transduction. To infer causal relationships in science, you often have to point to a causal mechanism (a way that explains the causal relationship), or else you're simply stuck with correlation. That's essentially the problem of consciousness in the materialist framework (not the idealist one of course): how does neurons firing cause colors, sounds, tastes? If you can't point to a mechanism there (in a way that links the two phenomena in a satisfactory way; i.e. it must actually feel like it explains the relationship, or else you feel like the mechanism is incomplete and needs a second mechanism to explain it further), then you're stuck with a correlative relationship. Also, interesting how the definition of causality on Wikipedia actually contains the word "influence": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality

Many people like that lack any sort of emotional self-regulation and de-escalation, it either ends in somebody else submitting or not engaging with them or them throwing a tantrum and going into complete meltdown and demonic exorcism. The best way to deal with them is probably to talk as little as possible and not respond to any of their disrespect. The police officers were way too chatty with her. They should have shown more verbal restraint and she might have left the store and actually less physical restraint if they had still gotten to the point where she clearly didn't comply.

So you got committed by somebody who thought you were acting inappropriately (but it was actually also out of spite), then you get a diagnosis of schizophrenia based on an assessment of your symptoms (but it was actually illegitimate/inaccurate), then when you were talking to a psychiatrist every week, it took 5 months for them to think you might be fit to leave (which was actually due to somebody smearing you from behind the scenes for 5 months)? I don't know, either you're really unlucky, or you might not be giving the most accurate portrayal of your situation.

How many times were you given a reevaluation of your state and whether you could leave or had to stay for longer?

Why not the next day? Why not a week?

On what grounds were you free to leave after five months?

My understanding is you end up in a psychiatric care if you act inappropriately (unless somebody somehow forced you to go there when you were not acting inappropriately). And you get a schizophrenia diagnosis if you meet enough criteria for the diagnosis. I don't know the practices or standards of care in your country or whether your parents did it out of spite or simply missplaced concern so I can't comment on that. Nevertheless, the core point is awakening does not mean you meet the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia.

@Michal__ What happened afterwards? Have you been to the psychiatric hospital since that?

And at one point you realize you can't go purely by emotions so you create an arranged marriage/relationship for yourself. For a relationship to work, you can't expect them to be completely like you or reflect your desires and wants perfectly. And ironically, traditional arranged marriages partially solve this by marriaging somebody together when they're young so that they grow up together and become more like each other.

What were your other symptoms?

If Buddha was not hallucinating (e.g. hearing voices) or having persecutory delusions or psychotic paranoid beliefs or exceedingly weird lines of thinking and trouble functioning in everyday situations in an appropriate way according to the surrounding society, I doubt that. Being awake is not equal to schizophrenia.

Materialism and Jesus, interesting combo.

I don't even take creatine, never have, no pre-workout, never have, no protein shakes, actually basically never have (except some weird chocolate milk with barely any more protein than regular milk from the store 12 years ago; and I tried my brother's whey protein shake once and felt like a pile of shneash), no coffee, basically never have (except one or two cups in high school), no caffeine (anymore). I drink water, eat food and have long hobo beard. Cavemanmaxxing. 💀

Just don't hurt anybody or yourself. But also question whether you "believing" there are no other people is necessarily something true. As for the palpable effects, you might just be destroying your ability to think and imagine things outside your current experience. It might not reflect anything true about reality. Because even if you were able to perceive reality "as if" it is not solipsistic, this wouldn't have to change whether or not solipsism is true or false. Again, it might just reflect your own lack or state of functioning.

Good to have a Plan B I guess. "I can fix her".