Using your own definitions, yah, Television is a hallucination, and you make a LOT of comparisons between televisions and dreams.
On the other hand, where does the computer lie in this? Furthermore, what about music? Often radio broadcasts will lead to completely omitted vision, replacing it with sound, because this is where your interest and energy has been committed. Furthermore, then, when you read a book which contains colorful characters and well built settings, you will lose how many pages, how much time has passed, you lose even the words on the page, and replace it with a more truly dreamlike state than television is capable of inducing.
What I find interesting is that your assumption is that all of this is a bad thing. As art, actually, yes, any one person can create television. I work part-time as a media director of my father-in-law's business. I use television all the time to produce promotional material and advertisements. There are hundreds of considerations as to design, layout, timing, sound, color, and they are actually continuously judged by me, while I watch them again and again. Every aspect is repeatedly fine tuned.
By the end of your average 30 second spot, I have likely viewed the entire thing over 300 times, making judgments, and alterations to it all along the way. What you are saying is that by the 300th time I watch my 30 second spot, I should be agitated and have lost my ability to make judgments. This is, however not the case, when I compare my 30 second spot to the original 30 second spot concept I was presented with from my father-in-law, as it has been improved upon.
While, people often ALLOW themselves to enter a trance-like state while watching television, this happens all the time through regular tasks.
Have you ever fired a rifle? Now have you ever hunted? there is a difference between shooting at targets and hunting. When I hunt, every animal I have ever actually it, I never heard the gun fire, never felt the gun kick, I have no memory of reloading my weapon. Yet, every time, my chamber has been cycled, there is a fresh round in, and my safety is now on. The animal has not moved for over a minute, and I suddenly become aware that my shoulder is warm from the kick of the rifle, and my ears are ringing. Looking through a rifle scope you have a flattened image, further than you find in either dreams or television, but if you DON'T experience this, you aren't really shooting all that well.
In short. You make false assumptions that trance-like states or hallucinations are harmful, when they are, in fact, a regular part of the human experience, and are actually necessary for certain tasks. The only thing harmful about TV is when you choose to allow entry of ideas without making any judgments whatsoever, which is a mark of a lazy person, and good luck trying to make being lazy and lacking judgment illegal. I'm fully behind you on that one.
You complicate and distort matters. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and acts like a duck, then it is a duck. Keep it simple, but face the facts:
1) TV is an hallucination, and it is an extended form of dream vision. I have proven this in detail and with specifics.
2) An extended form of dream vision AS waking vision is an hallucination.
3) TV replaces and removes natural waking vision with something that is not possible for any ONE PERSON to ever ordinarily experience or create. (Autism is known to involve sensory processing disorders.) -- Fool, TV is good for us?
TV is a creation of generalized thought.
TV is even more like thought than what is seen in the dream.
Each person's visual experience is unique and different.
......AND everything else that I said in the article. I showed a linked progression from dream vision to TV using a variety of consistent and specific facts/linkages.
Dr. Joyce Starr agrees with me that the reduction of bodily feeling/bodily sensation that is REDUCING the feeling of fullness (and causing overeating) while watching TV is attributable to dream-like effects (of reduced bodily feeling, as in the dream).
Do any of you care about the children at least? Learn to think!
Serious replies only on here.
RobDegraves
3rd May 2009 - 05:42 AM
QUOTE
1) TV is an hallucination, and it is an extended form of dream vision. I have proven this in detail and with specifics.
You have not... see my point above.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| 1) TV is an hallucination, and it is an extended form of dream vision. I have proven this in detail and with specifics. |
You have not... see my point above.
2) An extended form of dream vision AS waking vision is an hallucination
An hallucination is not the same as vision. You mistake symptoms for causes.
QUOTE
3) TV replaces and removes natural waking vision with something that is not possible for any ONE PERSON to ever ordinarily experience or create.
Television presents us with images. You present no evidence that this is a different phenomenon than sight.
Your article would not be acceptable even at the lowest level of philosophical reading.
mielkman
4th May 2009 - 03:09 PM
QUOTE (Frank Martin DiMeglio+Mar 29 2009, 08:39 PM)
television is an extension of dream vision and an hallucination. I have shown that TV is a generalized creation of thought that replaces (and removes) natural and ordinary vision. TV is an unnatural extension of dream vision AS waking vision, and it is an hallucination.
Given:
Television = Dream vision/Hallucination
Television = Computer Monitor
What exists in a Hallucination is unreal
Your Post displays on my computer monitor
Then
Your Post = On my monitor = On TV = Hallucination = Unreal
Therefore, your method of delivery invalidates your theory, and since it's part of my hallucination, to believe it would be, according to you, a sign of mental illness.
So either you are mentally ill because you believe a hallucination which you have produced, which then invalidates your work, because we do not consider the ramblings of a hallucinatory person to be good observations for science, because a hallucination is not a part of the real world,
Else: You are incorrect, this is not an Hallucination, what you post can be considered a part of the real world, but... it's a useless part, because it does not pertain to the real world.
I'm voting for option one on this one.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click
here.