Thats what alot of people think, but its just other people.. If people accepted that somewhere maybe that i might be right, but still said they believe otherwise.. there would be no argument..
When people say no to me, i make it my business to prove them wrong, if thats not possible or they themselves are using only opinion or (dictionaries) WHICH are NOT proof, then the argument should end like a broken bridge.. JUST how i like it.
So in the end, i dont like arguing.. i like asserting myself and my beliefs, NO MATTER HOW Awkard, or how far it differs from the herd.
Dareb wrote:
So your saying that everyone in the world processes information as slowly as the next one? "Much" faster? Not possible. Human vision has a time resolution of about 1/8 of a second, and images from just before or after get blended together. I'm sure there must be some people for whom that's marginally faster, and others for whom it's marginally slower, but we're talking about extremely subtle differences in the speed of neuron impulses. In the end the diffence would be a very, very small fraction of a second--that's still not enough to catch a single frame of a 24- or 60-fps image. What you are implying is that there is no way that people can be affected. I am telling you that some people are. Lexy said that in a long history of scientific study, not even a little bit of proof has ever emerged that subliminal messages work. Lummox JR | |
Dareb wrote:
if you see something traumatic but cant remember what it was. are you still traumatized? and if not. Phobias develop for many reasons, not all related to trauma. But Lexy's talking about something you don't see, because even though the light does reach your retina, the brain doesn't have nearly enough time to process it. If a bullet passes in front of your face, will you see it? No, you can't; you won't even see a streak go by. But you will hear a whistle, because the air is disturbed in a way that allows the effect to be experienced over a longer period of time. ok.. now your debunked and the visual memory thing is disproved.. now back to why subliminal messages DO work. :D Mentioning the fact that people have phobias doesn't debunk anything at all. Nor is forgetting something you saw the same thing as not really seeing it. Lummox JR | |
Dareb wrote:
So your saying that everyone in the world processes information as slowly as the next one? Yes, yes, that's what I'm saying, which is why those exact words appeared in my post. Oh, wait... what's that? They didn't? Well, deary me... I guess I wasn't saying that after all. ridiculous.. just ridiculous.. There are people in the world that see things much faster. Eyes focus quicker, and the passage of time as seen by others differs with each person. You're right. There's as much difference in mental reflexes as there are in physical ones. Some people are, quite literally, "quicker on the uptake." However, my point is... you (meaning any individual person, chosen at random) will either see an image or not see an image. If you see the image, it has a chance of affecting you. If you don't see the image, it does not. Individuals with faster perceptions are more likely to see a brief image... but if they see it, they see it. They don't process it subliminally. In fact, people with faster perceptions would be less susceptible to "subliminal messages" (if subliminal messages worked), because the images that are too quick for others to process would be just fine for the speed demons. If the idea behind subliminal messages is in fact solid, slower-perceiving people would be affected by subliminal messages all the time, because they're always seeing and hearing things that they don't quite understand! If I said "heymangivemenmoney" too quickly for your conscious mind to understand exactly what I was saying, your subconsciousness would sort it out and process it as a subliminal command, and you'd be strongly inclined to give me money. This is not the case. The idea behind subliminal messages is that even if you can't process a piece of information, since that information is stored in your brain anyway, your brain will piece it together behind the scenes and try to act upon it. This is based on a faulty premise. The brain does not store an exact duplicate of the information it receives... memory is encrypted and compacted, which causes it to lose a certain amount of resolution. This is a good thing, though... if it weren't the case, we would not be able to be subjective/creative in our thoughts. We would remember everything, but learn nothing. People with truly "photographic" memory often suffer from a lack of creativity... they remember perfectly everything they see and hear, but they cannot picture anything they haven't seen or heard, or imagine something being a different context or setting. When you hear a burst of sound that's actually a sped up or backwards voice, your brain doesn't store it as a *.wav... it just remembers "gibberish." In subsequent remembrances of that burst of gibberish, your brain will substitute any similar sounding gibberish, or just the impression of gibberish... and you'll never know the difference, because your brain's memories are the only things you have to rely upon. And laws are there to protect people even if they are a minority. There are very few laws dealing with subliminal advertising. Those laws that do exist are mostly local ordinances, enacted here and there by reactionary "politicians" who also pass laws outlawing witchcraft and the use of psychic powers to affect the outcome of the church raffle. Now, it is possible to subconsciously effect people through advertising... but only through things that they see and hear consciously. You know why so much fast food decor is orange? Hunger pangs. Orange makes you tend to exaggerate how hungry you are. No one knows why... it's just what an endless number of surveys and tests have shown. It's certainly not illegal, though. It's not some deep fast food conspiracy, either. Anyone can go and look this information up. It's no more illegal than making your food look appetizing, or presenting your product in the best possible light. If subliminal advertising, which has not been proven to work, is illegal, then I would certainly expect this well-known and easily proven "manipulation" technique would be banned. | |
LA is debunking a documented and commonly accepted psychological philosophy with many stories to back it up with her own opinion.. i dont see how that is proof
| |
Semantic question: If you show someone an image too quickly for them to percieve, but tell them about the "subliminal message" (or if they were told about it before not-seeing the image), does it still count as a subliminal message? Because you might at least get some placebo effect out of that, then, much the way that those subliminal sleeping-tapes work.
| |
It's not commonly accepted by psychologists... or advertisers, who spend millions of dollars figuring out what actually works, whose livelihoods and reputations depend upon being able to win market share and influence people.
It's commonly accepted by people who watch daytime televison, people who write the scripts for night time television, crackpots, and fringe lunatics. | |
Dareb wrote:
Thats what alot of people think, but its just other people.. If people accepted that somewhere maybe that i might be right, but still said they believe otherwise.. there would be no argument.. Not everything you argue is opinion, though. You've argued matters of fact; when two people argue fact, at least one of them is wrong. You've also argued matters of legal interpretation, which allow broader leeway for right and wrong so two people could both be conditionally right, but that extra wiggle room isn't infinite, and someone can still be wrong. I can accept that you may be right on some things, because I've seen it happen. (For example, you said someone was being cynical recently. He disagreed, but actually I think you used the word correctly. I made a point of saying so.) When people say no to me, i make it my business to prove them wrong, if thats not possible or they themselves are using only opinion or (dictionaries) WHICH are NOT proof, then the argument should end like a broken bridge.. JUST how i like it. Dareb, don't bring up the spelling argument again. You lost that one. A dictionary does in fact represent valid proof that "___ is not a word", as long as the dictionary isn't severely abridged. When a dictionary tells you that one thing isn't a word, but also tells you what the right word is, it's clearly not a case of abridgement. Lummox JR | |
the idea of subliminal messages working is based on emotions or subtle needs or wants.. people can be busy and ignore those subliminal messages. about the simpsons and that other show not even worthy of remembering the name for . The simpsons are by far a better calibre than most sitcoms to date, the urge to watch the simpsons would be greater than the urge to change the channel to watch another sitcom that takes skits from older sitcoms and has other characters play the roll.
Subliminal messages DO work. and theres no proof saying otherwise. And yet for the many years prior to this the evidence prooves it works.. | |
Dareb wrote:
LA is debunking a documented and commonly accepted psychological philosophy with many stories to back it up with her own opinion.. i dont see how that is proof Urban myths are also commonly accepted and have stories to back them up. But they're only stories, because once you investigate, they turn out to be bogus. Lummox JR | |
it doesnt work, mainly because most people are following strict habit or comfort.
Active people are more prone to subliminal advertisement. | |
To everyone on this subthread (mostly Dareb):
Here's a good little article on the subject http://www.arts.uwaterloo.ca/~pmerikle/papers/ SubliminalPerception.html In summary, people can sometimes recognize things they don't consciously process, but usually only if there are a good number of contextual indicators as to what it is. Under no circumstances can someone compel you to do things or believe things subliminally, any more so than they can regularly. The final paragraph from that article I'll repeat here: "A common theme that links all extraordinary claims regarding subliminal perception is that perception in the absence of an awareness of perceiving is somehow more powerful or influential than perception that is accompanied by an awareness of perceiving. This idea is not supported by the results of controlled laboratory investigations of subliminal perception. Rather, the findings from controlled studies indicate that subliminal perception, when it occurs, reflects a person's usual interpretations of stimuli. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that people initiate actions on the basis of subliminal perception. The weight of the evidence indicates that people must be aware of perceiving stimuli before they initiate actions or change their habitual reactions to these stimuli. Thus, although subliminal perception may allow us to make accurate guesses regarding the characteristics of stimuli, subliminal perception cannot lead a person to drink Coca-Cola or to eat Ritz Crackers, and it cannot be used effectively to improve a person's tennis skills or to cure a person's bad habits. " -AbyssDragon | |
they are ALWAYS based on actual events. because even if a person fakes an urban legend they got the main idea from events that could have happened in the past.. they would have just forgotten that what they say was bogus would be based on a previous event.. even so it doesnt mean it didnt happen.
People will generally try not to believe the unbelievable because they are creatures of comfort. I have no set comfort. i have momentary solice. | |
Subliminal messages DO work. and theres no proof saying otherwise. And yet for the many years prior to this the evidence prooves it works.. I'm completely willing to believe this if you can back this up with any studies or evidence showing that it does. Simply repeating it proves nothing (subjectively, I find it weakens your point considerably). Everything I've read so far, which documents itself with actual scientific studies, says that there are tons of proof against it and there is, in fact, no real proof for it (not in the way it's being talked about in this thread). Check out my other message at [link] -AbyssDragon | |
Dareb wrote:
Subliminal messages DO work. and theres no proof saying otherwise. And yet for the many years prior to this the evidence prooves it works.. Anything I've ever read on the subject says the opposite, and Lexy's sources agree. There hasn't ever been a single documented case of subliminal messages being used and having any scientifically significant effect. I think you're just imagining that such proof exists because this is what you've always believed. But imagining the proof into being doesn't make it actually appear; if you can actually find some, your case will have some merit. I have no proof of my own to offer, but I'm confident I could find some if I was interested in trying to; because of the work involved, I'm hoping Lexy decides to do it instead. I have such confidence because I've actually been told about the results of scientific work done in the past, and was aware going into this conversation that true subliminal messages are little more than science fiction. If subliminal messages were at all effective, they would and could be used more often, anywhere the law couldn't step in and many places it could. There'd also be reams of accessible proof on the subject. Lummox JR | |
In summary, people can sometimes recognize things they don't consciously process, but usually only if there are a good number of contextual indicators as to what it is. Under no circumstances can someone compel you to do things or believe things subliminally, any more so than they can regularly. See. thats my whole argument.. the reason being why people cant be compelled to do things they dont want to is because subliminal messages are not more powerful than concious thought. Thats not to say that i cant make you not want Fing li goo | |
well im confident that it does exist.. lesbian assassins main error here is to debunk beliefs based on her own
| |
ridiculous.. just ridiculous.. There are people in the world that see things much faster. Eyes focus quicker, and the passage of time as seen by others differs with each person.
What you are implying is that there is no way that people can be affected. I am telling you that some people are.
And laws are there to protect people even if they are a minority.