DrmDoc

How confident are you in your source's information? Can you be sure that the first link in your Google search is a complete or reliable source for the insight it appears to provide? Is it your practice to accept a reference without question or some additional research and discussion? From a studied perspective of mind and consciousness through brain function, it's clear your source isn't entirely accurate. Although these terms are frequently used synonymously, subconscious and unconscious reference distinctly different attributes of mind and brain function. For example, which of the two terms, subconscious or unconscious, describes a state of consciousness? Your answer, which is likely rooted in brain function, reveals a definitive distinction between the definition of these terms. This brain function based approach to our use of terms provides a clear and reliable distinction in how we should view the separate pieces of our mental construct.

How well do you understand the distinction between these descriptive psychological terms. In the way we might use affect and effect distinctively, subconscious and unconscious describe distinctively different psychological qualities. I know it's an old topic but one that has, I think, a lot of potential in the measure of what I'm studying privately and what many of us might believe about the nature of brain function and the mind it produces. I welcome your thoughts.

Frankly, yes! I don't think anyone here can give him what he may genuinely require. Only you can answer that, which is why a psychology forum is the best medium for this type of discussion.

You should, perhaps, consider posting your thoughts to the or a Psychology Forum. It's seems that much of what you have and haven't said regards issues of the mind rather than those related to the physical sciences or religion. Even better, perhaps you should consider discussing those issues directly with a specialist where you live. I doubt that any of your posts to this forum or science discussion site will generate the kind of responses you are apparently seeking.

Here is a SciShow YouTube video released August 1st, which is the 96th anniversity of Henrietta Lacks birthday. Enjoy!

I read the article and I'm going to go out on a very tenuous limb and say...yes, they...we are. We are frequently arrogant, dismissive, and much of the rest out of an abundance of confidence in the knowledge we've gained through our years of study, research, and experience. Perhaps it's more of an expression of our impatience with nonsense but it's not intentional or personal. In answer to the article's examples of whether we'd consider plumbers or mechanics arrogant, dismissive, or etc., I'd have to say yes--mechanic, as I have particularly witnessed, can be quite condensing to female drivers. What we are isn't necessarily a bad thing, unless our expression translate as obstinacy when we know we're wrong or really don't know what we say we know.

May be, but the consequences will be what it has been everywhere else in Texas. The same students who are now permitted to carry concealed weapons in classrooms have been allowed to do the same in public, for a number of years, where the potential for deadly conflict is likely much greater. Although I deplore the policy of weapons permitted in schools, I don't see how the environment or pressures of college might induce a potential shooting or gun battle in Texas anymore than life as usual in Texas. What we might see is more college campuses in Texas becoming a statistical or relative microcosm of the state's overall shootings per capita involving carry-permitted weapons.

I think it's the other way around, where my thoughts out pace my typing or, perhaps, I'm more focused on what I'm thinking rather than what I'm doing. Ugh!

Excellent suggestion, I'll try it.

Ugh! Now it's more than suffixes...the word is option not opposition! Ugh!

Because, if I may, conservatism is about extracting as much wealth from the system as one can while contributing as little wealth as one can to maintain the system. Conservatism, essentially, is about increasing and preserving one's personal wealth while thwarting any endeavor or agency that may impinge that effort. Bank regulations impinge a conservative's effort to increase his wealth and universal healthcare efforts impinge the wealth gained through privatization and the wealth of those who are called to fund a universal system. Under true conservatism, greed is good-charity is bad.

Why? Commercial advertising and public media exposure have presently proven very effective. I fear it is much too late for our concerns.

Pant...pant...pant...you guys are making it hard for me to breathe ​

Add another one. I just discovered Animalogic, very entertaining. Never heard of the Mane Wolf until today.

Announced July 20th, researchers have discovered 97 previously unknown cortical regions, which brings our total from 83 to 180 per hemisphere. This CNN article contains an account of the research, its discoveries, and a link to the paper published in the journal Nature. Enjoy!

I couldn't agree more; our candidates have already shown us who they are. Our only remaining opposition is to choose the lesser of what many of us consider two evils.

Nutter, probably. I recall reading an article about the brains of adrenalin junkies where people, like our jumper, likely suffer from some form of abnormal brain chemistry involving his adrenal and affecting his prefrontal function.

My earliest memory is from when I was about 2 years old. Some people claim to have memories of being born and some claim memories of experiences in the womb; however, memory isn't always an automatic process or as simple as it seems. Long term memories requires effort, reinforcement, and are dependent on a memorable experience's impact on our life and survival long term.

There are no limits to memory that would require erasure to provide "more space." Barring injury, illness, or genetic factors, you can add as many new memories as you desire. However, certain pharmaceuticals are effective against iterative thoughts and hypnosis has been very effective in altering the content and context of certain memories.

Although reproduction may insure the future of a group, a group also requires social cohesion to survive and ways to reinforce that cohesion. Sexual congress has also evolved as a way to reinforces the psychological bonds, social cohesion, and, in some cases, social status among a group's membership in the absence of offspring. In the absence of offspring, sex isn't about orientation; it's about the neurochemistry that compels and strengthening the psychological ties between partners whether or not they are of the same sex. Clearly, a group with strong psychological ties has a significant survival advantage above those that do not.

Beyond the biology of sexuality, there are perhaps stronger evolved psychological forces and factors that strengthens the intimate bond and social adhesion partners share. These forces and factors promote survival and are not gender specific or exclusive.

I agree; America is its opportunities, its freedoms, and its people--not its government. I love my country above other nations, not above its people--of which my family and I number.

And that's what I love most about America, the right to chose who and what I love prioritized by me rather than dictated by others.

For all its faults, it's still a land of opportunity if one is willing to persevere its withering challenges. We're not a perfect nation, but I love America and, for me, it is still the greatest country in the world.

All claims of consciousness near death are without merit unless an individual is fully cognizant of his or her surroundings and experience in physical/material reality during that event. If NDEs are as immersive as they are purported to be, then they are very likely not conscious experiences. NDEs appear to arise from an altered state of brain function likely associated with the physiological and/or mental distress of potential death. The answer to your question is not a simple yes or no and I doubt my opinion will assuage your concerns. The central issues here, as I perceive them, are depression and obsession, which you should seriously consider addressing through a mental healthcare specialist rather than rely on any opinion you might receive in this forum. I'm confident that a specialist in your area can and will help you resolve your concerns. I wish you well.