The pros and cons of mind reading

[banevader]

If people could read minds,how could they tell what's fantasy or reality in another person's mind?Or what is true and what the person just believes is true?

If people could read minds,it would likely be a long and drawn out process that wouldn't be as instantaneous as it's portrayed in various form of media.
Or by "psychics."

[goldengrain]

Originally Posted by banevader

If people could read minds,how could they tell what's fantasy or reality in another person's mind?Or what is true and what the person just believes is true?

If people could read minds,it would likely be a long and drawn out process that wouldn't be as instantaneous as it's portrayed in various form of media.
Or by "psychics."

Are there levels of consciousness? I mean, as we put a thought into words it is probably more concrete and readable, but is there another realm of thinking, a more artistic and creative space, which may be harder to intercept? Could we train ourselves to 'hide' things in that area? Is this where fantasy normally resides so it is distinguishable?

I think we share snippets of info from time to time, which might be a rudimentary form of mind reading. You know how you thing of some friend you have not heard from for a bit and the next morning find an email from him?

After enough of this, you kind of can tell when such a thought pops into your head that so-and-so must be thinking about you, no?

We hear sometimes about the kid whose in trouble and the mom, miles away, just 'knows' about it.

It's not as though we don't have the rudimentary beginnings of mind reading already.

Another thing that is not quite mind reading -

Carl Jung and the British scientist, Rupert Sheldrake (has an interesting website: Rupert Sheldrake Online - Homepage) believe/d that we have a shared repository for thought, I think Jung envisioned it as a cloud of sort in which and from which we place and take information.

Sheldrake has done experiments. One was getting three 'ability' matched groups of students. The first got the Times crossword the day before the paper was published, the next on the day of publication and the third on the day after that.

The first group took the longest to do the crossword. The third took the shortest and the middle was in the middle, of coarse.

His idea is that the more minds that are familiar with information the stronger the 'deposit' of thought concerning that (in Jung's cloud), so each succeeding group had an easier time retrieving information on how to solve that particular crossword puzzle.

I don't know how well I represented his idea, but you get the gist.

Sheldrake is no touchy-feely lighweight New Age guru. He has serious creds:

Cambridge, Yale, doctorate in biology
About Rupert Sheldrake - Biography

[LauraC]

I can't believe people think it's not the most intrusive thing imaginable to have people read our thoughts. And if you are doing the thought police thing, can you imagine the noise in your head in any crowded location with hundreds of thought bombarding your mind at the same time? You'd all go nuts but then again, I think some of you are already if you think having others invade your head is a good thing.

Quick, what am I thinking now?

[goldengrain]

Originally Posted by LauraC

I can't believe people think it's not the most intrusive thing imaginable to have people read our thoughts. And if you are doing the thought police thing, can you imagine the noise in your head in any crowded location with hundreds of thought bombarding your mind at the same time? You'd all go nuts but then again, I think some of you are already if you think having others invade your head is a good thing.

Quick, what am I thinking now?

It might not be that you'd be hearing a jumble of everyone's thoughts.

It's not invasive if everyone is doing it and we adapt.

I don't think there would be 'thought police' as you put it, because everyone would be wise to games and hidden agendas. We would each make an effort to be more positive and constructive rather than harbor resentful and nasty thoughts toward each other.

I think it would make us better people, and it would not be someone else having to tell you to be better, you yourself would learn to correct the evil in your own heart.

There would be some who would be hard hit, though. It would be people who say one thing and intend another. It would be sociopaths who are manipulative and say things just to appear good. People who plot behind the backs of others.

Whether or not you believe in religion, it approaches a state that religions promote: people who do good just for the sake of goodness without ulterior motives.

When we are told 'I love you' or 'You did a good job' we would know it was sincere. If the bosses kids screwed up at work, they'd know it.

On the whole, the pluses would seem to way outweigh the negatives.

[TheLuckoftheDraw]

Originally Posted by Neuling

wonder if the world would become a better place

Not that I wouldn't change anything if I could, but I quite like the world as it is. And maybe most of the things I'd change to suit my preferences wouldn't be preferable to many other people.

[Basiliximab]

Originally Posted by Neuling

I was just watching a movie called Thoughtcrimes and it made me wonder if the world would become a better place if we all were able to read others' minds. Or if at least some people without a doubt were able to and everybody knew about it. Could and would we better our thoughts just in case someone is reading them? Assuming that better thoughts are the foundation for better deeds, would thus the whole world become a better, more decent and moral place?

Hey now, haven't you seen the Twilight Zone episode where the guy's able to read people's minds and an innocent bank worker gets accosted for thinking about doing a crime he was never going to commit? (moral of the story is that mind reading is pretty much pointless since what people think is a lot different than how they act).

Seriously though, I do not think any good would come of that if it were possible. Thankfully it's impossible! And I do not think that if we better our thoughts the world would become a more decent and "moral" place. I believe our thoughts can be used as an outlet for things we know we shouldn't or couldn't do; it's a kind of sanctuary. Other people having access to them would just be bad all around.

[Green Irish Eyes]

Not a Great Debates topic.