Shannon's Journal Discussion Volume 3

[Shawn]

And this is an example of not fully understanding how the human subconscious reacts to things, because you're assuming that everything is done as the conscious does it.

If the sub is too far from the perceived reality of the user, then you have a situation in which they react subconsciously with fear because it exists outside of their little reality. What they have accepted as possible and true, which is "safe". There are parts of the subconscious that can see that that is not all there is, that all things are possible, but not all of those parts can handle the fact that all of those things are possible. In cases like this, the person creates a little prison from their beliefs and anything outside that prison is "unsafe" and "scary". They create that prison because they can see that there are things outside it. The prison of their beliefs is designed to hedge out those other things and limit them in ways that they are familiar with, and thus that are "safe". It is simply a fear of the unfamiliar/unknown.

The more limiting and rigid the belief system, the more the fear they are giving away they have at their core. This is why too much skepticism is just as bad as not enough: too much limits the person to reject what is and what is possible, because it threatens their safe and accepted belief system and their accepted world view. If that is wrong, then everything must be re-evaluated, and they have no sense of security in knowing what is what. Even though a prison of beliefs is not an accurate understanding of the big picture.

From our time, we know that heavier than air flight is possible, because we have seen it, and done it. Our reality is built early on to include it. The same would be true for anyone who had never seen a plane, but who had been told early on that they are possible, and maybe had it explained why.

But once we form our world view, things that violate it are responded to according to how much they violate it, and thus threaten our sense of security in knowing what is what. Someone from the 1100s would have built their entire world view on "It's impossible to fly", and thus would reject that possibility as a violation of their world view, as t creates a very uncomfortable possibility that maybe we don't know all of what is what.

But you take someone from that same period of time, and tell them that planes are possible from childhood and they could have the same response we do, because it was included in their world view as it was formed.

Ok, I don't know about the subconscious because I didn't do any research here or something. But if we stay for a moment at the out-of-reality example I think that subs with very enthuisiastic goals can at least trigger some extra conscious resistance.

Please do share with me. I've been trying to invalidate this fear theory for more than 5 years now, and I have failed. After all, isn't that how we know with certainty that something is what it seems to be? So far as I have seen, all counter-arguments are based on an inadequate understanding of fear and the way the subconscious awareness works. If you can advance my understanding, I would love to have that happen.

Simple example: if someone tells you to jump off the clip you won't do it because you want to live. This is a good reason not to jump off the clip, because you want to reach something in life, whatever it is, business goals, private goals, etc. Some kind of positive motivation. The result here is the same with fear or without fear. It's possible that with other examples it is not that clear like here but the priciples would be the same. Even if it would be something that simple like not wanting to deal with consequences of something and have a nice day instead.

Jumping off a cliff is a red herring in this case. It has nothing to do logically with what the subliminal is telling you to do. The program is telling you that you can make yourself completely successful, and to go do that. There is no correlation between that and being told to jump off a cliff.

I brought up that (extreme) example because I thought the bold statement was related to my sentence that the decisions can sometimes be the same with or without fear because there is a good enough reason to do/not do something.