Whether I choose my thoughts or not has little bearing on how I live my life.

Murders aren't sent to jail because they're accountable for their thoughts/decisions (and thus must be held accountable for their behavior). Rather, murders go to jail so as to discourage others from engaging in similar behavior. Same thing with gun-control and multiple other issues where people's liberties are stripped away from them.

So regardless of whether or not one is accountable for their thoughts/decisions, laws and morality will continue to be upheld (thus argued to exist) and life will go on all the same.

I recall your SMP thread about locus of control. I think your reflections on the value of an internal locus of control are reasonable, but incomplete in an interesting way. I think it mostly stems from thinking in terms of blame.

Psychologically, it is more productive to blame yourself than to blame other people. But blame itself has limits to its usefulness. People tend to think that they (themselves, but also others) have more control over outcomes in life than they really do. Perhaps that illusion of control is what leads to feeling like someone must be to blame in the first place. But the emphasis on blame can be problematic in its own way. Maybe this is all summed up in the somewhat trite serenity prayer: "give me the strength to accept the things I can't change, the the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to tell the difference"

I don't think you have to devalue entrepreneurship, experimentation, success, or other outward-oriented focuses to find something useful in more introspective, contemplative spiritual practices. In India there is a tendency to see them as different stages of life. But you do have to see the value of dispassion or meditation in order to think sannyasa is a stage of life worth pursuing (for example).

I think it is somewhat of a mistake to conflate the value of those with self-discipline. Discipline is needed to achieve any kind of goal, whether it's success in business or in meditation, but the discipline is a means. But I think the comparison between east and west that Robin is trying to get at is not so much that the east values discipline and the west doesn't, but that the east values inward spiritual life more.

You don't have to get too mystical to find some value in it. Lots of people in the west practice a kind of yoga that is almost entirely demythologized and demysticized, or take up a secularized form of buddhist practice with regard to viewing attachment as the root of suffering. There are fairly mundane psychological benefits to be found there. There is a method that involves cultivating a detached awareness about the contents of thoughts and our patterns of thinking (especially negative patterns) that is almost like a form of cognitive therapy in and of itself.

Of course I think there are other (more traditionally "religious") benefits to pursuing certain virtues but it's a reasonable enough place to start

That is all that anyone can come up with on any subject, though, so in an of itself it is not a valid criticism.

So what do I do when a negative thought occurs? And if they continue to arise? How do I learn something new?

Notice that they arose, and that you didnt chose them, didnt "do" them. They will continue to arise, because there isnt a you to stop them arising, and never has been. But if there is recognition that they are automatic and spontaneous, then they are less likely to be believed.

Edit: just saying to yourself "I didnt choose that thought, didnt do it" will not really do anything, because thats another thought. What really makes the difference is looking and noticing, observing and seeing.

I am not saying learning doesnt happen, that change doesnt happen. "you" have learned stuff all your life, its just that there isnt an entity that gains extra characteristics, or improves. There is no entity doing it. There is just an organism, life, whatever, responding to the environment. My post prompts you to look ( or not), same as the smell of freshly baked bread in the morning makes you hungry ( or not)

One possible suggestion: attempt to become aware of the habits of thought, presuppositions, memories, and emotions that you have which lead to and condition the negative thought. Becoming aware of more of that process can help you to gain the ability to change those negative precursors. It seems like conscious awareness in and of itself helps us to modify or heal previously unconscious injuries and habits of thinking.

Recognize that any thought that occurs in the ego mind is a lie.

This video is what neeeeel is talking about. You can also search Advaita as well as Ramana Maharshi for more on these ideas/concepts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=197k-ZVZNEY

This is the foundation of all mental/spiritual understanding. The more you study your negative thoughts, the more insight you acquire. Eventually you'll realize that negative thoughts are preceded by negative feelings. Then, once you start seeking out and observing your negative feelings through meditation, you start falling down the rabbit hole.

Well, its hard to say which comes first, but in my experience its usually thoughts come first, followed by a physical or emotional reaction, which then prompts more thoughts, which then intensifies the emotions, which leads to even more thoughts, and so on.

Its also important to realise that the thoughts and feelings arent in fact negative. Thats just another value judgement, which is also a thought.

That's fine if you don't want to label them as negative as long you recognize them as false.

It can be just as important to examine your positive feelings, and recognise them as false too.

How would you beat depression then for example?

Of course, I just find it hilarious and possibly borderline racist that you assert "in the East" a man considering such a step will begged by his family to do what he feels he should and that there is no chance this will be viewed as stepping away from his responsibilities.

You are aware that "the East" is not some vast patchwork of Hollywood version Tibet-like provinces chock full of hardy-yet-wise peasant folk constantly yearning for enlightenment, right? I don't doubt that there are families here and there who will willingly spare a dreamy son or two to full time spirituality but the idea that this is some kind of universal paradigm in non-Western nations is ludicrous.

There's nothing to beat. Depression is just identifying with the narratives you tell yourself about your past and how that will affect you going forward into the future. Once you recognize the entire narrative is a lie you no longer have to identify with it.

The entire construct of who you believe yourself to be is made up of narratives you tell yourself. If you recognize that narrative and the entire construct to be a lie then you don't exist as the person you believe yourself to be and there is simply no one to be depressed.

By noticing your negative thoughts, and the feelings that these thoughts produce. By noticing the vicious circle of thoughts and feelings. And most of all, by noticing that none of these thoughts and feelings are being produced by you. Its all on automatic. If these thoughts are just popping up out of nowhere, and then fading away, why are they any more important than the buzzing of your PC fan? If these thoughts are just products of beliefs, memories and conditioning, why is the content of these thoughts so important? If you arent doing them, if there is no actual you that these thoughts refer to, what then? If theres no you to be depressed, but just thoughts about depression , and feelings that are labelled "depression" by thought, what then?

these thoughts and feelings will still happen , even after you recognise that you arent doing them. Why? Because there is no you to stop them, and they are all automatic and spontaneous. But if there is recognition of this, then they are less likely to be believed, and so are less likely to be reinforced.

If you are in control of your thoughts and feelings, why not just stop being depressed? It should be easy, no?

There is a deeper level of awareness than what you guys are presenting but it won't be productive to go back and forth on it. Once you understand what the root cause of depression is, then you understand the root cause of all suffering whether "physical" or "psychological". You can't skip steps in the process of understanding or you'll make mistakes, so my advice is not to try to understand depression yet.

So there is no emotions.

For clinical depression I'd recommend a psychiatrist first

This is a good idea too.

There is certainly the awareness of emotions. The emotions themselves aren't static though, they are always changing. The only thing that is real is awareness, if it can even be called a thing...the only thing that always remains is the awareness that experiences them. Your perception of the same exact emotion will change over time though.


Just the same, your awareness of experience is real but your perception of the experience is in constant flux based on the narrative you tell yourself. When you recognize that the narrative you tell yourself is a complete and total lie and has no basis in reality then you are free to tell yourself any narrative you wish but it no longer becomes personal. You can simply tell yourself a narrative that is positive and enhances your experience rather than a negative one that degrades your experience.

My question then is: why is this process of bettering oneself called "religion" in this context? I'm not questioning your integrity in this process, I'm confused with the definition of "religion" if it is not about a higher power or faith based experience in this discovery, but rather a personal journey to self betterment defined by your own standards not a prescribed/adhered to standard that religions require.

Does this not beg the question of why thoughts, feelings, emotion etc exist at all as compared to inanimate objects (the cpu fan)? While a fascinating idea, I lean towards thinking the premise of the argument in itself is depressing. If one has nothing to live for, then life in itself isn't worth living. Further, if thoughts don't exist, then feelings dont exist - and the attempt to be a "better" person is impossible - meaning no amount of effort/thought can achieve happiness (emotion)

You're right that blame is not the academically correct word to use. I just prefer to use it, as it facilitates the use of simple examples in demonstrating the concept. Its more to do with the extent individuals believe they can control events that are affecting them.
Sure there may be tragic instances where attributing the outcome of a particular event to yourself is not productive, but rather debilitating (e.g., you accidentally hit a bicyclist on the road). And in such circumstances it is more productive to "have the wisdom to tell the difference". However, I am (and LOC literature) of the opinion that people in fact have more control over their life than they truly believe they do. Those who fully internalize this, benefit in unparallelled ways.
I wouldn't use the phrase "illusion of control" because its slightly misleading. If it was an "illusion of control" then no benefits would be yielded from holding an internal locus of control. But the literature very clearly demonstrates that there are enormous benefits across every major aspect of one's current and future potential.
Sure there's truth in this, but it doesn't take away from the fact that believing you have more control will yield positive outcomes (+EV in the long-run).
Yes, I would agree that the east values inward spiritual life more than the west, but more often than not - at what cost? At the cost of living and experience - and by experience I mean exposure to the highest highs and lowest lows one can endure. For example, let's say that I've gone through a "stage in my life" where I've experimented with business and entrepreneurship and I've earned enough wealth to either travel the world for the rest of my life, or to live a more inward spiritual life. I'd take the travel option every time, for I value experience more. With increased experience comes more introspection naturally, so its not always that they're mutually exclusive either.
I agree that there's therapeutic benefits to such values and practices, but I think that in life - given that its limited by time - there is always an opportunity cost involved with every trajectory one may choose to go down.

Feelings and emotions are important (not that I am in control of them) they are the first step in taken action towards a certain something. So for example I love playing poker which leads me to study the game and get better at it but I can't the same about ballet because I don't love it and no desire to study it.

So its true if I'm in control of my emotions and feelings and I observer those feelings all that happens is nothing. An empty life.