I am an SS/HPS and I am going to help the world through self-education.

I am an SS/HPS and I am going to help the world.

I wanted to share a personal experience with you. About a year ago, I decided to homeschool my girls following the guidance of The Well-Trained Mind: A guide to a classical education at home. The authors demanded that I first give myself the same classical education. I started reading The History of the World on wikipedia. I kept reading and reading what ever interested me, and it was everything. 7 months later and something came over me. I was no longer able to read. I wasn't even able to watch my tv shows or even pay attention to the people talking directly at me. I couldn't stop the thoughts in my head. I was starting to have sleeping problems and anxiety. I knew that I had to start writing so that the thoughts would stop. When I starting writing, I had a 5 hour long thought storm. The following theory fell out of my head in that one session:

How the mind learns: A theory of knowledge employing philosophical and symbolic logic.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zttc-vzxF_Ckx0i40R7v2FkXUZvjjQOQcCwF80Y_Vkw/edit?hl=en_US

Then shortly afterwards, this fell out:
Self-Psychotherapy: How to override your unconscious
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oWccP4_X31L_pmeou46aXAwTLW9gU0pfFDnjk9jM53Y/edit?hl=en_US

Both of these discoveries have helped me immensely at homeschooling and at work. I've figured out how to teach people how to learn and how to teach.

If you like my work, please join my facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Education-Opportunity-and-Happiness-for-All/282521315123142

Thank you,

Rami S Rustom

totally not up to reading, but i did notice you mentioned 5 senses. There's at least one more. I'm going to see if i can get myself to read it tommorow. Certainly seems interesting and i do agree that you can have full control over your entire mind. Although it's an easy task (for everyone).

Hi Rami and welcome. It just so happens that I have an educational background in clinical counseling and the learning process.

There are different kinds of learning beyond logical and philsophical. For example intuitional learning has little to do with logic yet it is incredibly powerful and accurate. There is emotional and experiencial and creative learning as well. You do deliniate logical, linguistic and philisophical types of learning well, and that can yeild useful tools to aid in teaching as well. But the other kinds of learning work just as effectively and also yeild powerful tools. I used intuitional learning and teaching to get my students to easily learn years of material in a few months.

The link about controlling the unconscious is really about a simple but effective tool. Basically, when you associate something with a sad event, you deliberately remember something good attached to the person and associate the song with the good memory. Like a failed relationship...the song is now painful, but what if you remembered some experience with them that made you laugh instead each time you heard the song? Keep doing that and soon that will be what you associate with it. This is just one part of the unconscious and subconscious; and we should never want to control it all for from it comes so much useful information that we would stifle if we did control it. Dreams, premonitions, intuitive abilities, empathic abilities all stem from there. Great insights and major growth all stem from those.

Hi, Thank you so much for replying. Your post was very helpful.

I disagree with 'intuitional learning has little to do with logic.' Why? Because our unconscious applies the logic just as much as our conscious applies it. All our thoughts (including a thought of logic) originate from the unconscious; they are served to our conscious. Just because the conscious is not aware that a logic was implemented, doesn't mean that it isn't logic. What it means is that the logic has been burned into the unconscious, and the unconscious is now applying it, without the conscious knowing about it.

I think that all those types of learning that you described, are all the same, and that they are just being expressed differently. Maybe my use of the term logic might be wider in scope than the way you are using the term.

Could you tell me more about "I used intuitional learning and teaching to get my students to easily learn years of material in a few months." (or point me in the right direction to go learn it?)

Could you tell me more about, "you deliberately remember something good attached to the person and associate the song with the good memory," (or point me in the right direction to go learn the method?)

Thank you so much for listening.

--Rami S Rustom

Yes, perhaps your use of the term logic is different than what I mean. As an INFJ, my underlying processes are primarily intuitional in nature. It accesses information that my conscious processes don't always have access to. To me, logic is the process of thinking a subject through in an orderly manner, working through information to arrive at a conclusion that makes sense and is applicable most of the time. (I play a game sometimes in chat where I take a statement, apply logic and then take it to a perfectly logical but completely absurd conclusion. http://funhsps.niceboard.org/t2154-nothing-is-sane ) Are you using the term logic to mean any orderly patterned processing? I will agree that logic can be used by the subconscious too. But there are other modes of processing that are most definately not linear, but rather more holographic. You get a "feel" for the right way to proceed. A classic example of that is the creative process.

Intuitional learning and teaching is just about that; doing it by feel; inspired approaches that taylor make the explanations to the person, so it makes sense to them, has relevence to them personally. I worked with multidisabled students and did not use standard methodologies. I just intuitively knew what approaches would yeild the best results. I rarely approached things in a linear build one thing on top of the previous way, but rather started with how everything fit together as a whole.

An example of this involved a client who was an adult, deaf and with no formal language of any kind, being from a country where families hid disabled children away as a disgrace upon the family. He'd never been out of the house, never interacted with anyone. In just 6 weeks of 5 hours a week of tutoring, by tying all concepts together, he ended up with a sign language and written vocabulary of about 500 words, could do basic math, handle money and ride the bus. With a bit more time, we would have been learning cooking, reading a recipe and measuring, learning all the words and math that go with that. This was when I was at graduate school and when I gave a presentation of this client, the professor asked me how long I'd worked with him, a year, two? When I replied 6 weeks, I saw a room of shocked expressions, lol. To teach, I employed the objects, added words, nouns, verbs, math concepts associated with them, all in multiformats, that is pictoral, the actual object, the sign and the written word. He tied them all together easily.

As for assigning a good memory, I was rewording what you had written in a much more concise form. I will use one of my own memories to help clarify. I had a very dear friend who died much too young from cystic fibrosis. I have alot of painful memories of his long slow painful decline into death. But the memories I associate with him, songs and places are attached not to that, but to precious memories of wonderful times we had together. Remembering him is a joy and not painful. I started making that transistion shortly after he died, even while still grieving. I just intuitively knew that was the right thing to do. I had no experience or help with that; no previous learning to guide me.

I disagree about the different types of learning being the same. Basically any input we receive is information we can use, process and apply. This includes experiences, emotions, reactions, empathic, sensory, logical, etc. But how we process, apply and use it is markedly different in the different modes.

WOW this is so exciting. I think I am an INTJ. But I'm not sure. Would you help me figure that out?

I read http://funhsps.niceboard.org/t2154-nothing-is-sane. I don't necessarily apply logic in that way (orderly process). I think I apply it just like you do. But maybe I am misinterpreting. I'd love to continue on this topic. Could you start a new topic about this? I'd rather have a new topic because I imagine that this conversation will be pretty big and should be separated from the rest of this more general conversation. Oh and if you decide to start a new topic, please provide a link here.

I've been learning by feel too. I've found that if I pay attention to my feelings, lets say confusion, curiosity, or sadness, about a certain topic, I am able to focus on it, begin writing about it, and then something happens. I come to a realization seemingly out of thin air; which seems to coincide with the 'creative' learning that you mentioned. What do you think? Maybe this should be a new topic too.

I love what you are saying about 'tying' everything together. That is my method of teaching too. Its all explained in my Theory of Knowledge (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zttc-vzxF_Ckx0i40R7v2FkXUZvjjQOQcCwF80Y_Vkw/edit?hl=en_US) although I may have been very ambiguous about the details so maybe I need to make it less ambiguous.

I do realize that you were just restating what I had already stated in my Self-Psychotherapy article, but I was asking my question in hopes to get a new spin on how to explain it to others; in your words rather than my very analytical way of explaining it. Basically I want more ways of explaining it so that I can improve the article. My intention is to 'tie' it all together just as you describe.

I agree that how we process our experiences, emotions, reactions, empathic, sensory, are different, and that they are different because of the different modes. But at the lowest level, I think they are the same; and I mean in the unconscious mind. But again maybe I'm misinterpreting. Would you be willing to start another topic about this too?

This is so cool

--Rami S Rustom

It's up to you about starting separate threads or keeping it all here; we are not rigid about such things here.

I think we have a language problem in that it is not well designed to explain these topics. I used feel to mean intuition, you used the creative process. I mean with the creative process, creating things out of nothing, paintings, artwork, music, elegent designs to solve a problem. Emotions for me are just information to be plugged into the full internal picture I carry with me always.

Most HSP boards use the terms intuition, logic, thinking and feeling as they are defined by the MBTI. It gives a common language from which to explore these things.

I do have a way of being very succinct and to the point when I talk of complex subjects....and I am very prone to understatements!

(By the way, you are welcome to join us in the chatbox and we can talk there as well, live.)

WOW this is so exciting. I think I am an INTJ. But I'm not sure. Would you help me figure that out?

I do read you as INTJ from how you write, think and focus on things; your underlying processes. Here's the link where you can explore that further: http://funhsps.niceboard.org/t690-personality-types-of-the-mbti

The chat last night really helped clarify what it is you wish to do. Your ideas and methods really may make a huge difference in alot of lives. They will help teach critical thinking and more self awareness. But a couple of things need to happen. First, you need to work on simplifying how it's presented so that everyone can easily understand how to use it, even semiliterates and developmentally disabled. It needs work. Secondly, those who already do apply critical thinking, who are aware of their inner workings won't need to adapt your system as they already have a good one of their own.

I agree completely. Thats why I've been seeking help. I need a bunch of feedback from a lot of people so that it is less ambiguous and more encompassing.

Will you help? Would you read the article and add comments (directly in the document) in the places that you think need clarification? And comments in the places that you think are incorrect?

This is the only way that I will be able to accomplish what you are suggesting.

Actually it needs a rewrite, a fresh approach. It isn't a bad start, but not for most people to wade through. Most are not fully educated or literate and you have to bear that in mind.

Yep. What I wrote was just a skeleton. This is part of the Socratic Method.

Intelligence seems to be the sum of the logic in a mind. Each logical concept can be used in other fields. So the more logic a mind learns, the more situations it can reason through; hence more intelligent. Creativity must be important also. It seems to increase the rate at which intelligence can increase. Creativity seems to be a purely innate construct. Although it can be temporarily heightened with cannabinoids and it has the potential to be controlled if a mind was able to manipulate a form of cognitive dissonance called mind-body dissonance. See "Mind–Body Dissonance: Conflict Between the Senses Expands the Mind’s Horizons" http://spp.sagepub.com/content/2/4/351.

In order to increase intelligence, the mind must learn logic. Philosophical logic and symbolic logic (mathematics). In order to do this, the mind must be able to read and write both alphabet and numbers. But most importantly, the mind must be able to create language as fast as it can produce thoughts. This seems to suggest that each mind has a rate of thinking and a rate of language creation. If the former were greater than the latter, then much thought is retarded. If the opposite were true, then the mind could produce thought at a rate that of its full potential. It seems so simple now. The rate of thinking is in one part of the brain and the rate of language creation is in another. One must develop both. The former is trained by practicing modeling. The latter is trained by reading, writing, and reflection. What is the curriculum? The Classical Education calls for exposure to a very wide array of fields. I call for all fields. A little exposure to everything. What is everything? This is what I've learned:

History, Philosophy, Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Anatomy, Physiology, Psychology, Psychotherapy, Cognitive Neuroscience, Sociology, Economics, Political Science, Education Theory, Education Technology, Computer Science, Linguistics, Theology, and Arabic.

Because the universe is so complex, a mind’s knowledge network must be very large and uniform before its points and vectors begin to converge without the help of teachers or reading. By large I mean a large amount of 2nd order knowledge. By uniform I mean the knowledge must be spread across all the primary fields rather than just a few. As an example, I’ve learned History, Philosophy, Math, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Anatomy, Physiology, Psychology, Psychotherapy, Cognitive Neuroscience, Sociology, Economics, Political Science, Education Theory, Education Technology, Computer Science, Linguistics, Theology, and Arabic (an inflected language as prescribed by the Classical Education). More specifically, I’ve learned much field-specific logic and some very limited field-specific situations and rules. These are the guidelines that I’ve set for my girls. One more guideline I’ll have for them is that they learn Latin word parts. Why? Because 50% of the terminology from the fields that I’ve just described, including all the Western languages, are derived from Latin word parts, thus further decreasing the entropy of the educative process.

One little note i'd like to make is that you talk about the unconcious, but you mean the subconcious.

The unconcious is where the body functions are being controlled. The area where the DNA is used. An area hard to change or control, but not impossible.

tezorian wrote:One little note i'd like to make is that you talk about the unconcious, but you mean the subconcious.

The unconcious is where the body functions are being controlled. The area where the DNA is used. An area hard to change or control, but not impossible.

The use of the term 'unconscious' in the OP's usage is what raised a red flag for me, also.

rombomb wrote:
In order to increase intelligence, the mind must learn logic. Philosophical logic and symbolic logic (mathematics). In order to do this, the mind must be able to read and write both alphabet and numbers. But most importantly, the mind must be able to create language as fast as it can produce thoughts. This seems to suggest that each mind has a rate of thinking and a rate of language creation. If the former were greater than the latter, then much thought is retarded.

What exactly do you mean by "retarded?" If you are implying that uncommunicated thoughts are necessarily inferior to those that can be explained articulately, then I do not agree with this at all. I have many wildly complex thoughts that I find difficult to convey accurately in words, but I still think that many of them are valid.

Nucky wrote:

rombomb wrote:
In order to increase intelligence, the mind must learn logic. Philosophical logic and symbolic logic (mathematics). In order to do this, the mind must be able to read and write both alphabet and numbers. But most importantly, the mind must be able to create language as fast as it can produce thoughts. This seems to suggest that each mind has a rate of thinking and a rate of language creation. If the former were greater than the latter, then much thought is retarded.

What exactly do you mean by "retarded?" If you are implying that uncommunicated thoughts are necessarily inferior to those that can be explained articulately, then I do not agree with this at all. I have many wildly complex thoughts that I find difficult to convey accurately in words, but I still think that many of them are valid.

I wonder if you are able to do something that I am not. Or maybe I'm wrong and I haven't tapped into that sort of intelligence. I'll have to reflect on this much more. Thank you for your insight. It really helps me understand myself... well maybe not right now. I feel confused right now. But eventually I may understand this and it'll be because of your insight. So thank you.

I agree with Nucky; language is not required for complex thought, but it really helps to be able to share it with others. I am quite good at putting complex ideas and thoughts into symbolic forms that others can understand. There are many, of which language is just one. Music, artistic expression, math and energy sharing are others.

rombomb wrote:

Nucky wrote:

rombomb wrote:
In order to increase intelligence, the mind must learn logic. Philosophical logic and symbolic logic (mathematics). In order to do this, the mind must be able to read and write both alphabet and numbers. But most importantly, the mind must be able to create language as fast as it can produce thoughts. This seems to suggest that each mind has a rate of thinking and a rate of language creation. If the former were greater than the latter, then much thought is retarded.

What exactly do you mean by "retarded?" If you are implying that uncommunicated thoughts are necessarily inferior to those that can be explained articulately, then I do not agree with this at all. I have many wildly complex thoughts that I find difficult to convey accurately in words, but I still think that many of them are valid.

I wonder if you are able to do something that I am not. Or maybe I'm wrong and I haven't tapped into that sort of intelligence. I'll have to reflect on this much more. Thank you for your insight. It really helps me understand myself... well maybe not right now. I feel confused right now. But eventually I may understand this and it'll be because of your insight. So thank you.

By 'retarded', I mean 'prevented.' Let me explain by showing you my journal entry that lead to the stuff above:

The 'you' below is my long time friend and Professor of Physics from college.

--07/20/2011---again...

...only hours from the last email. Immediately I realize that this maybe the best way to write my ideas (as though I am having a conversation with you). This is actually what I've been doing in my head for a while now (having a conversation with you). By the way, I have a bunch of brainstormed ideas already written but no time to get around to it yet. I can't control where my mind takes me. Right now I want to discuss the prospect of replicating what has happened to me. I think that so far, my girls are well on the path to doing so. But I want to go through the task of thinking through my entire plan all over again but this time I'll be doing it as Rami' (as in Rami prime). But first, I should explain a bit more about what I'm going through.

All this time that I've been thinking, I was imagining myself having a socratic conversation with you. One in which I postulate a hypothesis, and you and I make attempts to refute it adhering to strict rules such as not employing any of the classic fallacies (as outlined by Aristotle). If refuted, then either person would postulate another hypothesis. The methodology is very systematic so its relatively easy to implement. Many things in the world today are derivatives of the Socratic method, such as the scientific method. While I did study the scientific method in college, and a bit in my earlier years, I don't believe that I really learned the scientific method until I learned the socratic method. I only have one piece of evidence to support this claim. One day you told me about an 8th grade science fair and you shined light upon the students' pathetic attempts at meeting the primary requirement which was to implement The Scientific Method. I did not even understand what the issue was. I remember having trouble in my Anatomy and Physiology class in my sophomore year at Bradley. We had to postulate a hypothesis and we spent probably 2 hours or so and could not even create a sentence that was of the form of a hypothesis. I think that during my school years I learned a lot of scientific facts, but little about the scientific method. Or maybe I'm blowing smoke. This could be my unconscious creating irrational explanations in an attempt to reduce cognitive dissonance in my mind. Since right now I am unable to produce any evidence to the contrary, I'll leave it up to you and others who know me well to provide evidence.

Back to replicating what I'm going through. Before the critical mass, I would imagine myself having a debate and most of the time no words were coming out of my mouth. I now know that this meant that my mind could not produce the language that it wanted to at the rate that it could think it. Now I imagine myself debating using articulate language and it comes out as fast as my mind can produce the thoughts. I'll have to reflect on this more later.

melodiccolor wrote:I agree with Nucky; language is not required for complex thought, but it really helps to be able to share it with others. I am quite good at putting complex ideas and thoughts into symbolic forms that others can understand. There are many, of which language is just one. Music, artistic expression, math and energy sharing are others.

I've underlined what is an important understanding - it's a crucial distinction.

The most dramatic example I can think of is Robert Monroe's escapades out-of-body. He was totally unprepared for the ability to 'THINK' while he was not in his body - after he felt confident he wasn't dying.

Furthermore, RM developed a term called 'rote' which was a method of communication. It was delivered telepathically, as obviously this was in an OOB state. Once the recipient was back in body, it could take the recipient days to pull this 'book' from memory and then process it in the mind to give it meaning.

RBM wrote:

melodiccolor wrote:I agree with Nucky; language is not required for complex thought, but it really helps to be able to share it with others. I am quite good at putting complex ideas and thoughts into symbolic forms that others can understand. There are many, of which language is just one. Music, artistic expression, math and energy sharing are others.

I've underlined what is an important understanding - it's a crucial distinction.

The most dramatic example I can think of is Robert Monroe's escapades out-of-body. He was totally unprepared for the ability to 'THINK' while he was not in his body - after he felt confident he wasn't dying.

Furthermore, RM developed a term called 'rote' which was a method of communication. It was delivered telepathically, as obviously this was in an OOB state. Once the recipient was back in body, it could take the recipient days to pull this 'book' from memory and then process it in the mind to give it meaning.

Can you help me understand this OOB state? I'm asking because when I have my thoughstorms, it takes me a long time to process it and give it meaning. Are these two things related?

melodiccolor wrote:I used intuitional learning and teaching to get my students to easily learn years of material in a few months.

Could you help me understand this? I'd like to learn it.

You can't, it comes from within me. But perhaps I can give you some tools to help you do something similar. Have to think on it.

rombomb wrote:

melodiccolor wrote:I used intuitional learning and teaching to get my students to easily learn years of material in a few months.

Could you help me understand this? I'd like to learn it.

Rombomb, this is your second time, in this short thread to make a mistake about learning methods due to your ignorance. I suggest you would find MUCH value in going to the link MC offered earlier when you made a similar assumption on learning methods. It can help you reach your goals in a more effective manner.

Can you help me understand this OOB state? I'm asking because when I have my thoughstorms, it takes me a long time to process it and give it meaning. Are these two things related?

I certainly would be willing to help. Many others on the particular board are quite well adapted to help, also. Thus my suggestion above.

There are those that are clear enough that can be help you here, without the knowledge gained from that link. I'm not that clear. The OOB state (AKA 'state of consciousness') is also know by other labels, such as automatic writing or even channeling.

By the way what does the 'SS' stand for in the 'I am an SS/HPS' statement ?

RBM wrote:

rombomb wrote:

melodiccolor wrote:I used intuitional learning and teaching to get my students to easily learn years of material in a few months.

Could you help me understand this? I'd like to learn it.

By the way what does the 'SS' stand for in the 'I am an SS/HPS' statement ?

SS means sensation seeking. It means that we are courageous rather than timid. I see it in my 3 year old daughter too. She attempts things with little worry of the negative consequences. It does not mean that we don't calculate before acting, only that we will try rather than not try.

My oldest daughter of almost 5 years, is not like this. She doesn't try what she considers to be something that might have a negative outcome. Of course we are paying attention to this to help her break out of her shell.

I remember that when I read the SS description, it included the term extrovert a lot. But the MBTI test put me at 55% Introvert on the Introvert/Extrovert scale.

Not sure if they are related but it seems like it.

rombomb wrote:
Not sure if they are related but it seems like it.

I'm curious if there's a connection, myself. What was your full MBTI results ?

SS means sensation seeking

Is this definition by virtue of the general meaning of the words or is there something more formal to it ? In other words who would use this phrase to describe someone - a layman or a vocational professional ?

Re:OOB

Here's something to get you started:

Robert Monroe - Vintage Interview on WPIX San Francisco

RBM wrote:I'm curious if there's a connection, myself. What was your full MBTI results ?

SS means sensation seeking

Is this definition by virtue of the general meaning of the words or is there something more formal to it ? In other words who would use this phrase to describe someone - a layman or a vocational professional ?

I posted "The INTP" here http://funhsps.niceboard.org/t2797-the-intp

I took a test at mbticomplete.com and the results were this:

Thinking/Feeling (Dominant)
Decisions: When making decisions, do you prefer to first look at logic and consistency
T/F - 95% T

Intuition/Sensory
Information: Do you prefer to focus on the basic information you take in or do you
N/S - 75% N

Extrovert/Introvert
Favorite world: Do you prefer to focus on the outer world or on your own inner world?
E/I - 55% I

Judging/Perceiving
Structure: In dealing with the outside world, do you prefer to get things decided or do you prefer to stay open to new information and options? This is called Judging (J) or Perceiving (P).
J/P - 55% J

SS means sensation seeking. It means that we are courageous rather than timid. I see it in my 3 year old daughter too. She attempts things with little worry of the negative consequences. It does not mean that we don't calculate before acting, only that we will try rather than not try.

My oldest daughter of almost 5 years, is not like this. She doesn't try what she considers to be something that might have a negative outcome. Of course we are paying attention to this to help her break out of her shell. I remember that when I read the SS description, it included the term extrovert a lot. But the MBTI test put me at 55% Introvert on the Introvert/Extrovert scale.

Not sure if they are related but it seems like it..

Many HSP are naurally cautious, considering all information before acting. It is their natural state and wiring. Trying to change that will cause damage. Allow her to be herself, even if she is LSS by nature, just honor her way; it works too.

INTP, OK, so does the HSP model have an SS designation ?

RBM wrote:INTP, OK, so does the HSP model have an SS designation ?

The stuff that I read about HSP had the SS stuff with it if I remember correctly. But I don't remember where I read it. Sorry.

More information on being HSP and SS types can be found on Elain Aron's site: http://www.hsperson.com/index.html

People are individuals, not all HSP are LSS. But those that are are just fine being that way. I tend toward the low sensation seeking side myself when it comes to physical things like speed and risk.