| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Redsandro |
Posted - 01/27/2009 : 16:03:32
What is your zodiac/starsign?
Just for fun, I want to see if this is true.
According to astrology, it seems to me that Aries, Pisces and Scorpius are supposed to be most TMS-prone.
I am Aries. You?
____________
TMS is the hidden language of the soul. |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/14/2009 : 11:49:58
quote:
Originally posted by HellNY
TMS is a theory, yes. But it makes several testable predictions. It is absolutely testable, as testable as drugs for treating chronic pain or any other therapy treatment. Treatment group received TMS treatment, compared to one or more appropriate controls. Outcome measures such as pain and related symptoms can be measured using the Oswestry disability scale or the visual analog pain scale, or many other measures.
The problem is not that TMS is not a testable but rather I would think it would be very hard to attract funding for that sort of study from NIH.
I've got to agree with Hell on this one. And I'd go a step further...I think describing TMS as untestable is as dangerous to the cause of having it taken seriously as mixing it with astrology could ever be.
There's plenty of science, not under specifically TMS research, that backs up these ideas. Look at anxiety, alexithymia, back pain, tension headache (even bloodflow reduction stuff here), placebo, somatization, anger studies, placebo and mass hysteria research.
For those who want to believe TMS is some unique idea Sarno pulled out of thin air this may not be an option. For those who find those other areas unappealing and want to dissociate themselves, it may not either. But if you accept that Sarno's just a brightish guy who in his practice stumbled on an idea that, honestly, isn't all that new in most ways, you can find evidence all over the place...in research dating back 30 or 40 years. |
| HellNY |
Posted - 02/12/2009 : 18:18:25
Stanfr -
First off...are we all scientists for something? Im a research psychologist, Ph.D. in biological psychology, and professor of psychology. Whaddayaknow!
Im going to have to disagree with you here on TMS not being testable. TMS is a theory, yes. But it makes several testable predictions. It is absolutely testable, as testable as drugs for treating chronic pain or any other therapy treatment. Treatment group received TMS treatment, compared to one or more appropriate controls. Outcome measures such as pain and related symptoms can be measured using the Oswestry disability scale or the visual analog pain scale, or many other measures.
The problem is not that TMS is not a testable but rather I would think it would be very hard to attract funding for that sort of study from NIH. |
| stanfr |
Posted - 02/12/2009 : 10:52:42
I wouldnt have even commented on this topic (although i think astrology is far less harmless than has been argued above--think Ronald Reagan, for example!  ) if i didnt think there was a analogous problem with TMS as a subject: as a scientist i often feel extremely frustrated when faced with friends or aquaintances who are clearly suffering from TMS, because i dont have hard science to back up my personal experience, and the vast majority of MDs etc feel it is nonsense (not my assessment--it's Sarno's!).
The difference between astrology and TMS is that astrology can really be easily tested, since by definition it claims to have predictive abilities (thats why it has in fact been tested many times, and fails in every instance!). TMS falls in the realm of the psychologic, and while tests might be developed they would be a lot more challenging to find a good protocol. Unfortunately, the hard science of TMS is in its infancy and precious little has been done to really find out how exactly it works, what are the mechanisms etc. Until those details are worked out, all of us 'TMS'ers are going to suffer--no different than any other uncured disease.
That is the problem i have with mixing astrology anhd TMS--TMS will never be taken seriously if it is associated with numerous other pseudoscientific subjects. That would be a shame. |
| Kristin |
Posted - 02/11/2009 : 20:22:53
scorpio, scorpio rising
I've often wondered and mused about a connection.
I have also lately become aware of what looks like the tendency toward Attention Deficit Disorder symptoms in myself from childhood til adulthood, age 44. Pieces of the puzzle seem to be falling into place. All my life I've been compensating for a deficit of attention, I don't really care if it has physical or mental causes, half an age of coping with the effects of being chronically distracted has taken its toll. I also seem to be ultr sensitive to all sorts of stimuli. Of course it seems logical to explore psychological reasons but also it seems logical to look at a neurological condition that may have always existed within me.
I don't know if add is also related |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/08/2009 : 19:31:11
quote:
Originally posted by Logan
...life is so very random and the choices one faces so overwhelming that early humans developed divination techniques to take the pressure off their decision making processes so they could take the timely actions necessary to survive.
I think we all here can empathize with feeling paralyzed by perfectionism, goodism, and other kinds of indecision. If reading your horoscope in the morning helps to focus your thoughts and point the compass needle in some kind of direction - even as you know it's b.s. - then I don't see any harm in that.
Great summary! If someone tries to use this as a reason to wipe scorpios of the face of the earth I may complain, but until then, I say let the cocktail hour proceed. We modern humans are doing the exact same thing in so many ways --that's just survival for our little species. |
| roxygirl577 |
Posted - 02/08/2009 : 17:34:36
I'm a scorpio and yes what you say seems to be true!!!
I even had an astrologer tell me that Scorpios are more prone to hold things in and hold onto the past which in turn causes painful symptoms! |
| forestfortrees |
Posted - 02/08/2009 : 14:58:39
quote:
Often, I'll read Rob Breszny's weekly free will astrology forecast for all 12 signs and just pick one I like to meditate on for the week.
LOL. That's the spirit.
I'm really glad that people were able to have strong disagreements but keep it a debate rather than falling to the level of ad hominem attacks. |
| Logan |
Posted - 02/08/2009 : 14:37:19
I think this conversation is a great illustration of how TMSers can generate a tempest in any given tea pot.
I thought it was an amusing "cocktail" conversation as someone else characterized it and then it got all debate-y.
I don't take astrology seriously, it's just a bit of fun. As an old anthropology professor of mine explained these things, life is so very random and the choices one faces so overwhelming that early humans developed divination techniques to take the pressure off their decision making processes so they could take the timely actions necessary to survive.
I think we all here can empathize with feeling paralyzed by perfectionism, goodism, and other kinds of indecision. If reading your horoscope in the morning helps to focus your thoughts and point the compass needle in some kind of direction - even as you know it's b.s. - then I don't see any harm in that.
Often, I'll read Rob Breszny's weekly free will astrology forecast for all 12 signs and just pick one I like to meditate on for the week. |
| alexis |
Posted - 02/07/2009 : 15:28:02
quote:
Originally posted by stanfr
I guess the one "delusion" i insist on holding onto is that there are "truths" and that it's worthwhile seeking them.
I'd call that two separate delusions ... plus you slipped in a third: the soothing delusion that those two delusions are, in fact, only one. 
By "worthwhile" do you mean that could make money off them and be happy? Or something else?
quote:
Originally posted by stanfr
That's why I get frustrated with attitudes like Weathermans' ... because, I imagine that if I really had a firm convicttion in something like astrology, I would bend over backwards attempting to prove it. Put it to test in a controlled experiment, then once you pass the test (a given, of course) you start collecting the billions of dollars you have righfully earned. Action always speaks much louder than words!
But the great thing about astrology is you don't have to "prove" anything to make millions off it!
|
| stanfr |
Posted - 02/07/2009 : 14:28:49
Good points, Alexis. I guess the one "delusion" i insist on holding onto is that there are "truths" and that it's worthwhile seeking them. If i have to suffer with TMS in the meantime, so be it for now!
That's why I get frustrated with attitudes like Weathermans' (hey Weatherman, i know what you mean about the 'last word'  ) because, I imagine that if I really had a firm convicttion in something like astrology, I would bend over backwards attempting to prove it. Put it to test in a controlled experiment, then once you pass the test (a given, of course) you start collecting the billions of dollars you have righfully earned. Action always speaks much louder than words!
|
| alexis |
Posted - 02/05/2009 : 18:07:47
Hi stanfr, I agree about the it being a similar form of delusion, but I guess I just find delusion so prevalent it's not worth stressing that much over. Not that it never gets to me, but I also find it (and we humans in general) entertaining, and not necessarily as absolutely dangerous as you do. You seem to think the delusions are all negative, but really I think it's all (all our ideas about reality) a bit of delusion...and I don't think there's good research to back up a claim either way on the overall societal happiness level impacts of delusion. And what there is largely supports the deluded.
Aside from the majority who believe in the "power of prayer" (no, not the psychological power) the vast majority also believe in irrational ideas like "free will", primitive notions of matter and the external world and other simplifications. Moral ideas like innate "rights" are popular ones ... or stances dismissing products or activities as "unnatural" -- like there's some Nature apart from which humans stand that is Good. I once knew a bright physicist, rational in his own field, who thought "dark forces" were at work in society.
Free will is my favorite in north america, I've seen it estimated that over 95% of the population believe in what's philosophically called "libertarian free will". People can't hack the alternative (And don't give me quantum theory...even with the Copenhagen interpretation that makes no sense). But I'm not going there. Been there, done that. People are wacky. To be human is to be wacky.
Leave the west and in China it's "Chi". The same person who'll give a discourse on why westerners are so crazy with their silly god concepts will go on about Chi with all kinds of "evidence" that'll make your eyes pop out by its stupidity.
But again, it's human. Some of us are slightly better than others at recognizing our tendencies to simplify and weave stories. Some of us, for better or worse, hold off a little further...at least in a limited sphere. And that's always the sphere we focus on and by which we judge ourselves more rational than others.
But I have yet to meet the purely rational person. That's just what it is to be human. We *have* to simplify. And we have, to some extent, to fill in the gaps. Its just a matter of how and where you do it, but any way you do it will contain a lot of untruths.
And what I think will bring on TMS is believing three really big fallacies:
- that you have the truth
- that truth is good (or makes people happy)
- that humans are somehow more special among the
animals than we really are
Those are biological (largely in the first case) and cultural (at least in the second) prejudices that we as a culture aren't easily able to shake. And I haven't seen any hard core, real, scientifically produced evidence that these delusions are harmful, in any overall societal fashion. They're just more delusions.
And those, I suspect, are some of your own delusions, and, to some extent most of ours. And we cling to them while scoffing at others. Of course our delusions are superior and less silly.
We have evolved this way...not for the good or the bad of society, but as a biproduct of evolution. It just is. And I don't think it's going to change. I've traveled to lots of countries and cultures and I haven't found the "rational" one. No matter where you go, as soon as you start to relax and enjoy the fact that "At least people here don't believe X..." you find that instead they believe unfounded superstition Y and Z which are equally nutty, if less annoying for their novelty. And they'll couch them to defend the idea, saying "'God' is a silly superstition, but Chi is SCIENCE." Seriously, it's always the same.
People are just animals. We're maybe not fuzzy and cute (well, maybe some alien keeping us as pets will find us cute), but we're primitive animals capable only of the barest levels of rationality. The rest is a game we play until we die.
So I guess my recommendation is to embrace the foibles of humanity. Find them entertaining. It's like dogs chasing their tails. Really, we ARE kind of cute if you look at it the right way. And the alternative is to be continuously annoyed.
Intellectually I've understood all of this for 15 or 20 years. But getting it, piecemeal is not the same as really absorbing it into your psyche...letting this reality become part of who you are. It was only when I understood all this above both intellectually AND emotionally that the irritation and annoyances that fed my TMS began to fade. I used to scoff at literature, finding it a waste of time and literary folk a bit fuzzy in their thinking. And then I realized that literature often is a celebration of humanities foibles. And that these authors have, in fact, come to terms with what it is to be human in a way that most of us have not.
So people still bug me. That I'm pretty sure is just human too. But I don't let it drive me for hours a day. I find myself laughing at how silly we all are. I enjoy the humorous parts of normal psychology and much more often accept people for who they are. But this doesn't mean I accept everything or have adopted a new delusion of "tolerance" as god. Beliefs are not all compatible and the world is, and always will be, at war with itself over competing delusions. But not every battle needs to be fought...and even those that do are not as pure and simple as anyone thinks. You're always just fighting from your own delusion...but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. |
| weatherman |
Posted - 02/04/2009 : 08:34:31
Stanfr reminds me a lot of Carl Sagan, for those old enough to remmeber the "Cosmos" series on PBS. He once brought up the question of whether there was any truth to astrology. His "experiment" was to show two different fluff pieces from the comics section of newspapers (e.g., "Leo, today you should do XXXXXX"). And surprise, they didn't agree - and that was the sum total of his "proof" that it didn't work. What he proved is that the newspaper columns don't work, he proved nothing about astrology. But then, that's what most of the public thinks astrology is.
I have no personal stake in whether people "believe" in it or not, I pretty much gave up study of it about 20 years ago. The world can function just fine without it. My problem is when people accept OR dismiss something out of hand with no firsthand knowledge of the subject they are talking about. I feel the same way about religion and global warmming (pro or con).
Don't we TMS types really love to have the last word?
Weatherman
"Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." |
| winnieboo |
Posted - 02/04/2009 : 06:09:06
A funny aside:
Last summer, I went to a psychic who told me that I needed to balance my chakras (among other things) and she told me that someone I work with was an evil force who was trying to ruin me. When I asked who the evil force was, she said she couldn't grab onto it and told me she'd have to "meditate" about it for 48 hours and get back to me. In the meantime, she told me I needed to pay her more money to meditate. I paid her and NEVER GOT AN ANSWER. In fact, when I called her repeatedly, she was full of excuses and finally, she told me that she was so busy that her mother, who was a "respected count" had meditated for me and that I had another chakra problem and that I needed to send more money to correct it!
I told this long story to my shrink and she said,"Do you know what all of that is?"
I said, "Okay, what?"
And she said..."It's bulls&*t."
It was at that point that I was able to give up my "hobby" of seeking any kinds of answers or truth from psychics, tarot cards and astrology, all of which I employed from time to time as an "entertaining" way of possibly defining myself or relieving my own tension by trying to look into the future. Look, I agree that it can be fun, but to ascribe any truth to it...if it's not dangerous (and/or expensive) it's just plain silly.
|
| stanfr |
Posted - 02/04/2009 : 05:44:17
Hi ALexis, yeah i know it was "just for fun", but that's the usual cop-out given by the media etc when they promote "woo", without realizing the collective harm they are doing to society. IMO, there's really little difference between the dellusion someone has that someone can "see the future" or "talk to the dead", than the delusion that if they kill hundreds of babies they'll end up with loads of virgins in the afterlife. Lunacy is lunacy. I admit that i let this get me more than i should (as you said, a recipe for TMS) but it is mind-boggling to me how someone who is clearly educated (I know many scientists with Phds etc who still suscribe to woo) can so easily accept something so incredibly inherently ridiculous. I actually had an older roomate in college (he was brilliant and spoke 5 languages fluently) who was heavily into astrology, and i so admired him that i became half-convinced he was on to something. But that was when i young and naive. I admit, that should make me more understanding of others beliefs. Astrology is somewhat of a special case however, since unlike other psudo-scientific subjects there not only is there zero evidence that it works, there are also numerous inherent problems with the practice of astrology itself; if anyone begs to differ, Google 'skeptic' and 'astrology' and start reading! |
| weatherman |
Posted - 02/02/2009 : 22:46:36
quote:
Weatherman, if you do some research with an open mind you'll come to the same conclusion
That statement seems illogical at best. How can you possibly know what conclusion I (or anyone else) would reach before a study has happened? I would wager that I spent far more time studying the subject back in the day than you did in making this statement. I have made a living as a scientist for the past 31 years, for what it's worth. Science is not foreign to me.
HellNY obviously gave the subject some study and some thought, and reached an independent conclusion. No problem with that.
Bottom line - nobody should believe much of anything without checking it out firsthand.
Weatherman
"Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." |
| scd1833 |
Posted - 02/02/2009 : 19:21:20
I'm a leo with raging tms
sorry,
Steve
|
| stanfr |
Posted - 01/31/2009 : 07:38:36
Good for you, HellNy! Weatherman, if you do some research with an open mind you'll come to the same conclusion. If you're still convinced astrology works, then test it double blind and if you can succeed, you will become a billionaire fairly quickly.
Resandro, im none of those signs you mentioned, but please do not use your 'poll' as any sort of affirmation. It's basic psychology that people who are able to 'join in the party' by revealing that they match one of your signs are morer likely to respond. It's not fun, it's silly. If you are really interested in getting an informal 'survey', i suggest you register with a back pain or sciatica forum, then poll the members on what their 'signs' are (not revealing why you are asking). |
| HellNY |
Posted - 01/30/2009 : 17:01:52
quote:
Originally posted by weatherman
Not to start a new debate here outside of TMS - but there is WAY more to astrology than sun signs. I seriously studied it many years ago (doing charts and the whole deal), but moved away from it in part because in some ways it was too accurate - especially as far as portending large scale future trends. Frankly, when a tough period is coming I decided one is better off not knowing, as there's often no escaping it anyway. Just live a day at a time. Anyone who's really studied it and has had their butt kicked by a good Saturn transit will probably agree. Again, not advocating that people get into it, as I decided I was probably better off without it. But sun signs are to serious astrology what multiplication tables are to calculus.
Yes I know. I used to study it very very seriously as well. This includes the more detailed components but it was long ago. R read every book I could on the subject plus started writing charts for others. I had a chart made for me that was far, far more than Sun Signs. Which house the moon was it at birth, as well as where each of the planets and what house they were in. Scorpio rising, pluto in the nth house, etc etc This was a long time ago. My own chart was 4-5, two-sided full pages of written text by an astrologer who had done this stuff for 20 years. I believed it to the core. No - "knew" it was real. That later changed when I tried to "prove:" astrology by looking into the studies that would show data linking behavior and or personality to astrological parameters. Believe me, I was not just looking at sun sign. The data was contradictory, inconsistent or simply not significant. There was nothing replicable.
And then I did a study of my own in college, fully approved by the research ethics committee. Data showed nothing again. My academic advisors must have been very patient because Im sure they likely thought that this would be how it turned out.
SO yes, I studied it. A lot. I took it seriously. I came, I saw, and all the evdince showed me it was an empty well.And this turned me from a believer into a nonbeliever.
I have no problem with any theory of personality. BUt there needs to be some objective evidence, other than anecdotal, that it predicts personality or behavior. So far the research shows zip. I recall a long time ago reading studies where subjects were unable to pick their own detailed chart relative to charts that were written for other people. Translated: people were just as likely to believe a fictional chart "was realy accurate about them" as they were the one that was written specifically for them, by professional astrologers.
Thats all I really can say on the subject. If there ever is some scientific evidence that birthdate in relation to celestial bodies predict specific aspects of behavior, Im sure it will come about. So far, no one has been able to demonstrate anything replicably in the literature.
Believe me, I was really bummed and disillusioned when I learned all this. I was truly a "covert" until that point.
|
| weatherman |
Posted - 01/30/2009 : 16:49:01
Not to start a new debate here outside of TMS - but there is WAY more to astrology than sun signs. I seriously studied it many years ago (doing charts and the whole deal), but moved away from it in part because in some ways it was too accurate - especially as far as portending large scale future trends. Frankly, when a tough period is coming I decided one is better off not knowing, as there's often no escaping it anyway. Just live a day at a time. Anyone who's really studied it and has had their butt kicked by a good Saturn transit will probably agree. Again, not advocating that people get into it, as I decided I was probably better off without it. But sun signs are to serious astrology what multiplication tables are to calculus.
Weatherman
"Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." |
| HellNY |
Posted - 01/30/2009 : 08:10:05
When I was in high school, I believed that astrology worked. Not the kind in the papers, but rather the "real" kind that was much more involved, ect.
By my Sophomore year in college, I no longer believed this.
That is because I did a lot of research for a project looking at the relationship between Sun Signs and personality and behavioral characteristics.
Bottom line: aside from what astrologers claim, when direct and objective nmeasures of behavior and /or personality are used, in controlled studies, there are no repeatable findings linking sun sign to personality and behavioral traits.
At most, there has been some evidence of an association between certain personality characteristics and seasonality at birth (winter, summer, etc). These are mmost likely due to personality characteristics of parents as it relates to seasons they are most likely to become pregnant,
In short, I do not believe there is any evidence at all that astrology works. |
|
|
