I can't wait to start playing with this. The DNC is a big part of the initial inspiration for how I started modeling and reprogramming my brain!
A key difference between one of my models for how our brain works and the DNC: there's a mechanism for loading/unloading neural networks into the DNC. Also, the inputs = signals from the brain + body + mind + environment (physical & mental) = the outputs (though some outputs require iteratively applying the inputs a good bit before manifesting).
I've developed a systematic framework for generating practices to change how my body, mind, and brain work. I haven't figured out a way to explain it in simple terms, but working toward it.
EDIT: Here are some basic thoughts...
Everything we experience flows through our perceptual sets (composites of relevant emotions, beliefs, behavioral strategies, and intentions), which we can intentionally craft over time. Each component in a perceptual set is processed with varying degrees of attention.
So to program your brain, the first step is to find a functional base line perceptual set to work from & learn how to direct/focus your attention on the different aspects of your perception.
To put it even more simply: go practice all the forms of Buddhism. All I seem to be doing at this point is systematically rediscovering stuff they've known for 2500 years and attempting to put a categorical structure onto it.
Sounds like you may have stumbled into the same ideas behind CBT more or less. It makes sense that they'd crop up in different places and times assuming they work well.
I'm certainly no expert on it, but if that's a decent assessment then you may be sitting on some very handy metaphors.
Correct! Some of my practices are specifically known things in CBT. Some of them are specifically known in physical therapy. And some are more related to mindfulness or tantra.
I find them incredibly handy & have been rapidly growing in weird ways since New Year's Eve. I realized I can leverage natural cognitive biases for pattern matching to start classifying each moment of my life as meeting some set of fundamental human needs of mine.
The skill of choosing one's beliefs (ie. shortening the time it takes for a belief to be internalized) is extremely useful and something we don't really teach in society. It's no wonder we're experiencing such divisive times, especially when we've developed all sorts of systems that fail to preserve human connection.
> The skill of choosing one's beliefs (ie. shortening the time it takes for a belief to be internalized) is extremely useful and something we don't really teach in society.
I don't follow... how is this extremely useful? What is an 'internalized' belief, as opposed to what? ...something you just want to believe but don't quite yet?
I think there's two skills here: the skill of choosing beliefs and the skill of internalizing them.
The usefulness of choosing beliefs stems from several applications:
1. Choosing to believe things in order to intentionally set cognitive biases. (eg. believing every moment meets some needs of mine combines with an understanding of fundamental human needs to prime my brain to spot how my needs are being met in the moment...particularly helpful for painful moments, which can meet my need to learn how to better meet my needs)
2. Choosing to believe the opposite of problematic thoughts. (discovered this one by choosing to stop believing an anxious thought that was plaguing me)
3. Choosing to believe I can safely abandon my judgments. (which accidentally changed my food, music, media, and people preferences to be WAY more inclusive)
4. Choosing to believe I can learn to identify as a woman in the future. (accidentally creating a second conscious voice in my head, ie. stumbling on the Buddhist practice of deity visualization)
Internalizing a belief is when the thought processes change based on the belief. Some beliefs are easier to internalize than others. I've got no idea what goes into determining the time required & am also uncertain if it truly is a skill we can learn.
I've heard such internalized beliefs described as "aliefs", indicating that they are, in a way, more fundamental. As an example, if you're walking in a dark forest at night, you might rationally believe that noone is hiding there waiting to murder you, but if you don't alieve that the forest is safe, that doesn't stop you from feeling unsettled.
If very intentionally programming our brains becomes a social norm in the future, which I believe it will, then I've got no problem with this characterization.
A key difference between one of my models for how our brain works and the DNC: there's a mechanism for loading/unloading neural networks into the DNC. Also, the inputs = signals from the brain + body + mind + environment (physical & mental) = the outputs (though some outputs require iteratively applying the inputs a good bit before manifesting).