A thought is defined as a natural part of the brain's functional mechanisms, a part of the human experience we think therefore we are, intelligence and the depths of feeling and personality are thought to come from our innate ability to be able to function the formation of thinking, it’s supposed to be directly from the mind, many culminated synapses firing off at lighting speed a second.
Most people including psychiatrists mistakenly presume that every conscience thought including the ones that are quite troubling to some suffers as a vocal entity speaking or acquiring the use of known understandable language to be able to complete the functionality of thinking, so a by-product is a newly pronounced thought, of which was formed by the use of words.
Now what’s of value to think about is every time you move your arm to reach out to pick something up or walk around moving your legs, switching your glance at something in the middle distance, have you ever heard your mind or brain’s processing of produced thoughts. Or would this be a mainly silent affair?
What’s termed as sub-vocalization or self-talk can be misconstrued as the thought itself, where it’s just your inner dialog of which most of us have.
Another example of this would be dreaming or imagining a new idea or gaining insight into a problem or puzzle-like say mathematics. Intuition is a good place to start as its messages are direct and emotionally clear for interpretation of the meaning, as when the penny drops it rarely announces its self out loud, so you subvocalize it afterward.
So, would it be fair to say that if most actual bodily thoughts are of a nonvocalized manner either instinctive or of emotional basis how reasonably could we have a thought disorder when most are nonvocal entities?
Would it be possible to recreate upon a yearly campaign of harassment by hidden perpetrators, or would there be another explanation?
The mind can be a puzzling thing, as impact or trauma can physically change your brain’s functional synapses, though other noticeable symptoms would be apparent.
In short, we need to examine what is a thought, would it necessarily be of vocalized consistency, how do we use learned associations as a guide to defining the meaning of cognitive processing i.e. (Language), and how to identify if the reading of information has become skewed.
I think this might prove insightful in the future of debate within the realm of fully understanding what it is to experience remote conversations and heckling abusers.
Another fair point to be made would be the notion that if the VH had no previous concept of spoken language, how would we interpret the strange noises and speech pattern's as they would not hold any associated meaning within them, the harmful intentions or efforts of conspiring entrapment would by default be lost in the translation of varying sounds made with intention but lost upon receipt.
So, would the idea of a thought disorder take on a different appearance like seeing things flicker or streaming in front of us, or would we interpret a unique narrative of which the majority would have been amiss to grasp, and be quick to judge negatively out of online group social politics?.
It's quite obvious to me that thoughts are not always vocalized entity's they can exist alongside the spark of silent knowingness or unspoken understanding, we as I tried to highlight earlier mostly use this given association of spoken words as actual thoughts themselves and not the initial spark which ignited the reaction or brain pathway in the earlier part of the process.
So, would a definition of thought disorder be best redefined as an associative disorder as it gives a better perspective of what a vocalized thought actually is, and what is a thought in terms of physical bodily functions towards foreign pathological diseases?
Most people including psychiatrists mistakenly presume that every conscience thought including the ones that are quite troubling to some suffers as a vocal entity speaking or acquiring the use of known understandable language to be able to complete the functionality of thinking, so a by-product is a newly pronounced thought, of which was formed by the use of words.
Now what’s of value to think about is every time you move your arm to reach out to pick something up or walk around moving your legs, switching your glance at something in the middle distance, have you ever heard your mind or brain’s processing of produced thoughts. Or would this be a mainly silent affair?
What’s termed as sub-vocalization or self-talk can be misconstrued as the thought itself, where it’s just your inner dialog of which most of us have.
Another example of this would be dreaming or imagining a new idea or gaining insight into a problem or puzzle-like say mathematics. Intuition is a good place to start as its messages are direct and emotionally clear for interpretation of the meaning, as when the penny drops it rarely announces its self out loud, so you subvocalize it afterward.
So, would it be fair to say that if most actual bodily thoughts are of a nonvocalized manner either instinctive or of emotional basis how reasonably could we have a thought disorder when most are nonvocal entities?
Would it be possible to recreate upon a yearly campaign of harassment by hidden perpetrators, or would there be another explanation?
The mind can be a puzzling thing, as impact or trauma can physically change your brain’s functional synapses, though other noticeable symptoms would be apparent.
In short, we need to examine what is a thought, would it necessarily be of vocalized consistency, how do we use learned associations as a guide to defining the meaning of cognitive processing i.e. (Language), and how to identify if the reading of information has become skewed.
I think this might prove insightful in the future of debate within the realm of fully understanding what it is to experience remote conversations and heckling abusers.
Another fair point to be made would be the notion that if the VH had no previous concept of spoken language, how would we interpret the strange noises and speech pattern's as they would not hold any associated meaning within them, the harmful intentions or efforts of conspiring entrapment would by default be lost in the translation of varying sounds made with intention but lost upon receipt.
So, would the idea of a thought disorder take on a different appearance like seeing things flicker or streaming in front of us, or would we interpret a unique narrative of which the majority would have been amiss to grasp, and be quick to judge negatively out of online group social politics?.
It's quite obvious to me that thoughts are not always vocalized entity's they can exist alongside the spark of silent knowingness or unspoken understanding, we as I tried to highlight earlier mostly use this given association of spoken words as actual thoughts themselves and not the initial spark which ignited the reaction or brain pathway in the earlier part of the process.
So, would a definition of thought disorder be best redefined as an associative disorder as it gives a better perspective of what a vocalized thought actually is, and what is a thought in terms of physical bodily functions towards foreign pathological diseases?
