Talk:Stream of consciousness (psychology)

Internal monologue vs Stream of consciousness

This was previously just a redirect page to Internal monologue. I do not believe the concepts are at all equivalent. Internal monologue is a subset of stream of consciousness, at least until demonstrated or argued otherwise. I will undertake to flesh out some of the bones, especially the William James section. DCDuring 22:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you'd also like to take a look at some of the redirects to Internal monologue and see if there are any others you'd like to "break out" into its own article? Ewlyahoocom 03:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I might have eventually gotten around to looking at that or I might have forgotten. You motivated me to do it. About 25-35% of the links should have gone to Stream of consciousness (a glorified disamb page) or to this article. Many of the others are specifically verbal. Thanks. DCDuring 04:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements Needed

The last sentence in the first paragraph doesn't make sense. It should be clarified. Travia21 (talk) 05:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced addition

This material is unsourced, and highly dubious. The Buddhist "Stream of consciousness" concept is opposed to the Hindu Atman concept. Mitsube (talk) 23:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The addition, however, was about Samyama, not the Atman. And Samyama is a contemplative technique which explicitly deals with the flow of attention (stream of consciousness), its related effects and connection to the structure of the mind and phenomena it perceives. I think the removal was inadequate. NazarK (talk) 13:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:OR. Stream of consciousness in this context does not refer to meditation. Mitsube (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the unreliable website linked to from the Samyama article. It says "When a man can direct his mind to any particular object and fix it there, and then keep it there for a long time, separating the object from the internal part, this is Samyama; or Dharana, Dhyana, and Samadhi, one following the other, and making one. The form of the thing has vanished, and only its meaning remains in the mind." There is nothing here about a stream of consciousness. Further, the source is unreliable. Mitsube (talk) 17:18, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I might argue that any absorption into mental object is a dynamic process, some flow/stream being always naturally inherent within it... If you had any deeper practical Samyama experience, you'd know if... But, well, at the moment I'm not up to an upheaval like finding all those 100% reliable sources and putting them into this article. Just, based on my discrimination, thought the topics are strongly related, and it might be useful for people who research... Actually Samyama is what changes the characteristics of any Stream of Consciouness in first place... Whatever... :) Maybe it'll come up at a later stage. Thanks for the input and analysis. Just don't cut away too much :)) NazarK (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RS. In order to connect Hinduism to the concept "stream of consciousness" you must find this done in a reliable secondary source. Thanks, Mitsube (talk) 06:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wallace

The Wallace source doesn't mention "stream of consciousness" so don't use it. Mitsube (talk) 18:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

u r wrong B9 hummingbird hovering^{(talk • contribs)} 04:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find it in the page you cited. Where is it then? Mitsube (talk) 09:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is within the DIRECT QUOTATION Mitsube. 60.242.36.89 (talk) 14:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not. Mitsube (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Read through the following carefully and you will see "stream of consciousness" and it isn't Wallace it is Williams:

Williams (2008: p.182) frames the nondual "stream of consciousness" the enlightened "mindstream" in the Soteriology of the Gelugpa:

In the dGe lugs the dharmakaya has two aspects, known as the Intrinsic Body (i.e. the svabhavikakaya) and the Wisdom Body, or Body of Gnosis (jnanakaya). The Intrinsic Body also has two aspects. First, it is the absence of intrinsic existence (emptiness; sunyata) as it pertains to the Buddha's omniscient and nondual stream of consciousness. This aspect of the Intrinsic Body has always been the case. Even before the Buddha became enlightened his mind stream (like that of all of us) lacked intrinsic existence, and it was this lack with enabled it to change into an enlightened mind stream.^[1]

References

^ Williams, Paul (2008). Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. Volume 3 of Library of religious beliefs and practices. Revised Second Edition. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 0415356539, 9780415356534. Source: [1] (accessed: Tuesday April 27, 2010), p.182

Stream of consciousness and anatta

What is described is the experience of schizophrenics, not that of mentally sane individuals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.150.52 (talk) 23:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Williams, Paul (2008). Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations. Volume 3 of Library of religious beliefs and practices. Revised Second Edition. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 0415356539, 9780415356534. Source: [1] (accessed: Tuesday April 27, 2010), p.182

[1]