Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3

[Shannon]

-Subconscious mind not receiving properly the orders of the conscious mind (communication problem)

It can't be this, because some people get results and some do not, for the SAME PROGRAM; and, programs that have less controversial goals achieve more success than those that have more controversial goals for the SAME TECHNIQUES.

But they don't have the same subconscious mind. Not the same content, not the very same nature probably, nor the same blueprints and understanding of the reality. So that's still a possibility. Or are you trying to say the subconscious mind is of the same backbone for everyone and suffer no deformity or specificity in its functioning? If we compare it to the body we (each of one) for sure have different body that react differently.

No two people have the same exact brain or body, yet in general, all humans can communicate. They can almost universally walk. They can do a variety of functions that are basic to the human body and experience.

What you're saying is that humans have different subconscious minds, so they can't all comprehend a statement, or they can't all comprehend it the same way. Well I assure you, as long as they speak the language they are listening to sufficiently, they understand it, and the reason I spend so much time using predictive models is to get them all to understand it the same way. This does not hold water, given the experience we have seen on this board, and the results of my experiments. Comprehension is not the problem, and neither is variation of the subconscious. I would not have had to develop the predictive models if there was not an issue with variable comprehension in the first place, but that is no longer the case as a result.

-Subconscious mind 100% understanding the task but unable to carry it out because of lack of means and ways.

But how then do we explain some people achieving the goals and others not, given the exact same script?

Like ^. Different people, different subconscious, different knowledge, different means available, different gates. Basically the amount of different variables that aren't the same are endless. Someone which is running a business already with many ways for money to flow will probably get better results with a subliminal program to get rich than someone who's starting from scratch with close to 0 means of generating money besides his job. That's a common observation.
So for DMSI for example, the way the user and his environment are can totally determine the success of the program by a large amount. Don't you think ? If the environment of the user doesn't matter (as well as the endless other external variables) than that mean the subconscious can manifest a goal from thin air. Which never happened so far.

Which is why I developed self optimizing polymorphic scripting. It can adjust to any set of variables you speak of, and still arrive at the same outcome for each. Thinking that just because you don't have any other thing you can think of besides A or B doesn't mean the reality is limited to A or B.

And taking responsibility does still remain in effect. It requires personal growth, and people can do that. Contrary to what you might like to think.

Yeah right...Let's say I'm working on a project in team work. I want to move forward and get things done and the other guys are just slacking off and worse, sabotaging myself. And in spite of my good will and whatever I come up with they just overpower me.
Then at the end of the deadline nothing much have been achieved.

Wouldn't it be interesting, if this was a clever ploy by your subconscious to give you the perfect excuse to not have to take personal responsibility and not have to execute.

When you're working on a project with a team, the team leader's job is to get the whole team to work on the project in sync. Anything else is not a team, it generally devolves into a bunch of monkeys trying to type out Shakespeare on typewriters. What you're saying is, "I'm helpless to influence anyone else on the team, so fail." But you aren't. And the subconscious parts are also YOU. And your conscious mind is the team leader...

That's the setup you just described in your post by confirming that the subconscious has a will on its own and can take decisions to go against the user's will.
Now I don't see how taking responsibility help here. And responsibility for what ? How does that make things better for that poor part under powered by the others ? There may be a better way to handle that. And if we don't have any, then better leave the user as is rather than blaming him.

Taking responsibility for your own choices and actions is something that is done by the mature and the adult. Those who are not mature and adult, don't want to step up and take responsibility, so they find excuses why it can't be done, or they just ignore it.

There are different parts of your awareness, and they have different characteristics. Some have short attention spans, and some can focus forever; some need sleep and some do not; some can't remember shit and some can't forget shit; some understand logic differently than others; some have a different level of awareness; some have a different perspective. But they are ALL YOU. And if you have any part of you trying to get away with impeding your progress or success, and you give it permission to do so by absolving it of personal responsibility, then you will never get to that success or progress. You will stagnate and fail, because the team leader (your conscious mind) failed to properly understand, motivate and control the team. These are the facts. They don't change just because you don't like them.

EDIT:

Since when has it not? You have to be pretty clueless to ask that, given how much evidence we have seen for many years just here on this forum that the subconscious has one or more parts of itself that can and do make decisions. Like the decision to execute or reverse execute or do nothing...

This is a earth-breaking theory because that's definitely not the consensus to this day. The subconscious is pretty much still seen as the component of the self that can't argue back and just express whatever is impressed inside.

[/quote]

Let's look at the consensus, shall we? It was the consensus for how long that the Earth orbited the Sun? And how long was it the consensus that the earth was flat? How about the "fact" that humans cannot and never will be able to fly? Or go to space? Or communicate over long distances by waves in the air? How about how preposterous it was to think we could cut metal with light? Or that a machine could not only think, but think faster and more accurately than a human? What about ships that travel underwater for moths on end without surfacing? Or the knowledge that any of a hundred other things we now take for granted as true and common sense were once, according to the consensus, impossible, ridiculous, preposterous, laughable, etc.?

Researchers on the cutting edge often make groundbreaking discoveries, and they usually have to deal with people like you who tell them, "That's not possible, the consensus said so!" The consensus is what is currently "in vogue" with the majority. That means it's what they all agree is safe to believe and accept, because they're all afraid that someone might question their credentials or the validity of their skills or knowledge or take away their funding or mock them if they step outside that box. But the consensus is always going to be wrong, because it is the status quo, and the nature of science is to discover what we didn't know before. Not hold on to what is comfortable, accepted beliefs.