What actually drew you all to the study of nonverbal communication in the first place?
From what I’ve observed, it seems like people tend to dive into this when they’re essentially blind to what others are actually trying to tell them—though, in my opinion, the deeper issue is a sense of insecurity. It feels like they want to master these "reliable cues" just to find a shred of certainty in a world that feels constantly overwhelming.
But here’s the real catch: even after someone learns to spot those signs, it rarely solves their underlying anxiety. Instead, it just feeds into a certain loop of logic. The thought process usually goes like this—if I can learn these signals, then surely anyone else could have learned them too. And if someone knows the rules, they can easily fake them. On top of the people who have studied the mechanics, you also have those individuals who are just naturally gifted at manipulating words and facial expressions—people for whom deception is as effortless as breathing. You might be able to recognize their manipulative patterns, but you still end up feeling powerless against them, because they know exactly where to strike and they play you like a puppet.
In the end, you’re still left without any real sense of security or self-confidence.
I think you're overanalyzing this just a little too much.
Real liars are dangerous precisely because they make the decision to lie in a split second—it’s instantaneous. Once that choice is made, the moral conflict just vanishes; there isn't any hesitation, no looking down at the floor, and certainly no avoiding eye contact.
There’s also another crucial point to consider. If you’re dealing with a true, seasoned liar, you won't even be able to tell when they are being dishonest versus when they are actually telling the truth. Even if they fail to pull off a total deception, they’ll at least leave you questioning whether they were being sincere or just playing you. If Giglio’s friend usually looks people straight in the eye, but suddenly starts staring at the ground, then I guess he's definitely hiding something unpleasant.
Little gestures like yours from 😉—well, nobody even notices them.
But it doesn't really matter. You're the one in charge. And now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to gossip about you with the philosophy moderators at Yale.
quoting... quoting... nominating... nominating... (not that I've been very involved lately) so: Aristotle (384-322 BC) wrote in his History of Animals that the male embryo develops a human soul at about 40 days and a female embryo develops its soul at about 80 to 90 days. Aristotle's thinking derived from his three-stage theory of life: vegetable, animal, rational. The vegetable stage was reached at conception, the animal stage at "animation," and the rational stage soon after live birth. This theory, along with the 40/80 day view came to be accepted by early Christian thinkers. (See Exodus 21:22-25) I suppose this is all connected to the debate over abortion and those types of issues. In any case, the main point seems to be that Aristotle argues abortion doesn't technically become murder until 40 days after conception—meaning, before that window closes, it could somewhat be justified. As for his claim that male fetuses become "people" sooner than females, it feels like just another layer of the typical sexism prevalent during that era. Philosophers in general didn't seem to have much respect for women—largely because, as Aristotle puts it, they are "colder" than men and more prone to those "cold" ailments caused by an excess of "black bile" (though we also have "yellow bile," which is why I specified black bile). Those "cold" illnesses would include things like hysteria or melancholy.
I’m genuinely glad to see you diving into some high-quality literature.
Though, if I may—try not to get too tangled up in all that existentialism. You might find yourself getting swallowed whole by Nausea. And then, eventually, you'll reach that same conclusion: hell is other people.
It's easy to forget that that logic applies to paradise just as much.
Before you know it, you'll turn into one of those armchair socialists—you know, the type who spends their days puffing on a pipe and peering through spectacles—and at that point, I suppose no one will be able to help you anymore.
I think there’s an internal alarm clock running in our subconscious.
It’s basically automatic—much like what Sandra Wilson68 was getting at regarding things like digestion, heart rate, and breathing.
Comparing sleep to shutting down a computer is really just an analogy, and honestly, it's a flawed one since true perfection in such a comparison isn't really possible.
Maybe if we viewed sleep more like putting a computer into "standby" mode, the concept might be a bit easier to grasp.
So, I suppose there isn't much point in trying to fight against it.
But honestly, it isn't all that bad—because, in reality, people tend to be influenced only by the ideas that actually resonate with them. For instance, a thinker like Heraclitus might not even make an impact on you at all. While maybe Heidegger will. By looking at which philosopher moves you the most, you can actually learn quite a bit about yourself.
But, Olivia Carter25, when we’re awake, our level of awareness—how much we actually notice—is entirely up to us.
And when we're high, well, we don't really have any control over it at all; consciousness just sort of slips away.
When we're awake, certain things just become part of the background noise of life.
It isn't necessarily that we aren't aware of them, per se—it’s more like we've "decided" to push them down into the subconscious. It's similar to how we might choose to tune out the street noise outside our house. If we were actively trying to process every single sound from the street, we'd be listening intently and analyzing everything. But there's no real need for that since we already know exactly what each sound is. That's a car, that's an engine, that's a truck... Our minds have become so habituated that they handle all of this automatically, almost without our involvement.
On the other hand, the moment there's a shift in the pattern of those sounds, our subconscious sends a little flare up to our conscious mind to let us know something isn't quite right. So, if we hear a helicopter, we suddenly become acutely aware of it and head straight to the window to see what it's doing and where it's headed.
So, I suppose while we're awake, we intentionally suppress a massive amount of information into the subconscious just so we can focus on whatever we're currently doing—seeing and hearing only what is absolutely necessary. When we sleep, though, we aren't suppressing anything because we aren't conscious of anything at all (not even our own snoring, which is loud enough to keep the neighbors in the apartment next door awake), so there isn't really anything to suppress. Consciousness just... shuts off. It's a bit like turning off a computer.
