The paradox of introspection

[Melkor]

I've been thinking about this lately... I may have annoyed a few people with this idea already , but ..blah..here goes..


Right...Introspection is the idea of looking into ones self, in order to study ones own thoughts and feelings?
A dictionary definition (Yes, I used word, I'm that lazy)

'the detailed mental examination of your own feelings, thoughts, and motives'


A simple enough concept, most especially for us Intp's, who spend most of our lives doing this apparently...Well..I've been thinking on it lately, yes thats right, thinking of a method of thinking, hardly seems natural, but anyhoo..
And after a few hours...(or was it minutes...sometimes I can't tell which thoughts I'm really thinking and which ones are just watching...)
I came to an conclusion.

Introspection, at least in it's common form, is IMPOSSIBLE.

Consider...

To examine something, you must use your thoughts mostly, and quite possibly your feelings..

Correct?

Then how is it possible to study ones own mind, with ones own mind?

Not unless we consider some sort of metaphorical mirror which somehow allows us to reflect these musings on ourselves.

Even if that were true, could it not be that we are in fact studying mere shadows of our thoughts?

Or is it that current thoughts are allowed to study past thoughts?
or possibly, the mind is composed of layers, and one layer studies another..

Would that not suggest that one section is left out of the analysis?

Not unless they take turns analysing, and if that were so, would it in turn suggest that the sections had different thoughts, if each section requires such speculation?

and does this not mean that each different section will have a different opinion
when it comes to analysing?

Wouldn’t that mean that when you use different parts of the mind you essentially become different people, or at least of different opinions?

Might this not explain how some types hate themselves while others are sublimely egotistical?

Are we as Intps using one particularly cynical 'layer' to analyse a particularly hated 'layer' in correlation with our everyday thoughts and perceptions?

Are we mentally biased concerning certain things?

I don't know...

I'm asking you...

 

[FacetiousPersona]

We are analyzing previous thoughts and motives in retrospect, plus seeking out patterns of commonality in our processing. It might be possible for us to judge thoughts more accurately and predict future ones after having observed patterns of how we think.

No, we shall not ever fully comprehend how we think entirely, but we will begin to have an understanding and be able to base decisions upon this additional knowledge. My goal is to simply extend my 'knowledge' beyond full ignorance to avoid being completely reckless with further thinking.

This is comparable to being incapable of reaching an absolute understanding of reality through objectivity yet. The irony is that our minds hinder us. However, it is possible that certain beliefs of reality are closer to this absolute than others, and this may also apply for introspection. The introspection of our internal world will not be flawless, but it may be close enough to the truth to allow one to have advantages through it, which is similar to us benefiting through science while people believe it to not be fully objective.

Scientists are developing methods to be 'objective' with their research (empirical studies), yet they acknowledge their understanding will never be 100% in all areas. Their aim is maximize their closeness to the truth and enable their 'knowledge' to benefit them to the highest extent. Introspection will never be flawless, which is the same for our thinking on other subjects, but the thinking and introspection may be beneficial to our future actions.

It is amusing to think: "How can we study subjectivity through a scope of subjectity and conclude objectively?" We cannot without a filter for the subjectivity, and the subjective conclusions are typically reached to benefit our subjective minds. Perhaps these subjective conclusions are acceptable when we will be applying them to our subjective world.

 

[loveofreason]

Face is right. We look for patterns in our behaviour.

Yes, introspection is a paradox of sorts. We get good though, at creating perspectives (characters) from which to observe ourselves... at objectifying ourselves piecemeal. Isn't this the purpose of mythology? To provide templates (patterns) for the various characters of the mind and map out the typical interactions between said parts (characters) of the self? To illustrate the classic dramas into which our behaviour, thoughts and feelings can fall?

Even if we can never escape having a prejudiced viewpoint, we can utilise multiple prejudiced viewpoints - a pantheon - in order to temper the whole picture and bring it back to closer to reality.

But then you have to ask "what is reality?" don't you? ...perhaps the road map, the mythic 'histories' provided by un-numbered generations of inner-space explorers, is the closest we get to objective reality when we deal with human psychology.

hmm...self-hatred is a prejudice that distorts our observations. It is certainly possible for one or more parts of the self to victimise other parts...

and then again we can project that antagonist further out and find victimisers in the external world... nobody else is seeing us entirely objectively either. We become characters.

I actually find mirroring to be supremely helpful. The relative objectivity of a mirror or multiple mirrors become vital reference points when one gets really tangled trying to unravel the various stories being played in the mind.

 

[skacraft]

Or you could eat twelve pounds of LSD, ketamine, shrooms, and cough syrup and experience ego death. I've never achieved it myself, but from what I hear, it is completely liberating, and allows you to look into yourself without bias. And then many people become horribly depressed forever.

 

[Agent Intellect]

as people have said, introspection is a subjective analysis of our own past actions, but also, introspection helps us become who we are. when we come to conclusions about who we are, doesn't that create a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts? for instance, i know after i took the test and found out i'm INTP, i began acting more like a "stereotypical" INTP for a while. as we make observations on who we are, we also make those observations into truths.

 

[FacetiousPersona]

as people have said, introspection is a subjective analysis of our own past actions, but also, introspection helps us become who we are. when we come to conclusions about who we are, doesn't that create a self fulfilling prophecy of sorts? for instance, i know after i took the test and found out i'm INTP, i began acting more like a "stereotypical" INTP for a while. as we make observations on who we are, we also make those observations into truths.

Can we also apply this 'self-fulfilling prophecy' to us judging people in the sense that our perceptions may affect them with how they are expressed? We cannot prevent ourselves from judging others, and I think this is perhaps the same with our thoughts regarding ourselves.

 

[echoplex]

Then how is it possible to study ones own mind, with ones own mind?

We attempt to do this with detached reflection. However, the detachment itself is a part of our mind as well, and it is often left unstudied. Perhaps in order to study it, we must temporarily assume a different state of mind and then critically reflect on our detachment. No part of our psyche should go without critique. When we are detached, we reflect on our attachments. Perhaps when we are attached, we should then reflect on our detachment, not assuming that either is superior to the other.

 

[Ermine]

Due to that paradox, I find introspection to be confusing. Perhaps I'm so analytical I take the meaning of introspection to a whole new level and realize that I can't introspect at that level. When I attempt introspection, it has to be out in front of me in writing. It gives me an illusion of objectivity that I can't achieve.

 

[echoplex]

^hmmm, I tend to feel uncomfortable putting my thoughts in writing unless I've dwelled on them for a long time. At first I'm like "this thought is too fresh, it's not ready yet!"

 

[wadlez]

Can we also apply this 'self-fulfilling prophecy' to us judging people in the sense that our perceptions may affect them with how they are expressed? We cannot prevent ourselves from judging others, and I think this is perhaps the same with our thoughts regarding ourselves.

Memory processes can contribute to confirmatory biases in person perception in a variety of ways. Often, individuals selectively recall facts that fit with their schemas and stereotypes. Evidence for such a tendency was found in a study by Cohen. In this experiment, participants watched a videotape of a woman, described as either a waitress or a librarian, who engaged in a variety of activites, including listening to classical music, drinking beer, and watching TV. When asked to recall what the woman did during the filmed sequence, participants tended to remember activities consistent with their stereotypes of waitresses and librarians. For instance, subjects who thought the woman was a waitress tended to recall her beer drinking , whle subjects who thought she was a librarian tended to recall her listening to classical music.
That was a excerpt from one of my psych text books.

Introspection would be subject to the same biases as when we are perceiving the world. So when we reflect on our own behaviour, we might actually be forming a view of our selves and create our identity based on distortions of our previous experience.

 

[Solfege]

The "self-fulfilling prophecy" sounds like the result of cognitive dissonance, which can cause us to alter our actions to fit our beliefs. I'm afraid I do this all the time and end up getting trapped in a vicious cycle: if I change during the process of introspection, then I won't be observing the same person, which means I need to take that change into consideration; but this causes me to act even more unnatural, and that must be taken into consideration as well, etc.... I try not to go too far down that road.

In other words, one problem with introspection is that the subject is always aware that it's being observed. This takes it out of its "natural habitat," if you will.

 

[Ermine]

Memory processes can contribute to confirmatory biases in person perception in a variety of ways. Often, individuals selectively recall facts that fit with their schemas and stereotypes. Evidence for such a tendency was found in a study by Cohen. In this experiment, participants watched a videotape of a woman, described as either a waitress or a librarian, who engaged in a variety of activites, including listening to classical music, drinking beer, and watching TV. When asked to recall what the woman did during the filmed sequence, participants tended to remember activities consistent with their stereotypes of waitresses and librarians. For instance, subjects who thought the woman was a waitress tended to recall her beer drinking , whle subjects who thought she was a librarian tended to recall her listening to classical music.
That was a excerpt from one of my psych text books.

Introspection would be subject to the same biases as when we are perceiving the world. So when we reflect on our own behaviour, we might actually be forming a view of our selves and create our identity based on distortions of our previous experience.

Stereotypes we give ourselves are the hardest to overcome. It makes my introspection so distorted that I can't stand introspection, though it's fair to say that I'm introspecting about introspection right now. I'm my own worst critic, so I never give myself enough credit and see myself through a clouded lens. On top of that, I've discovered the MBTI and can now overanalyze about myself and assign myself a "type". Now I'm making additional half-truth stereotypes about myself, further clouding the lens. I'm making it so hard to see myself for what I really am. Just like those waitresses and librarians, I can only see a half hearted caricature of myself, only what I'm "supposed" to do. It's pathetic how bound I am to stereotypes when I know better.

Here we come full circle. Can it really be adequate introspection when our mental images of ourselves are distorted?

 

[wadlez]

I guess thats it then, Introspection is subject to all the biases normal perception is and has the other problems discussed in this thread.
Overall is introspection benificial or harmfull then?
Hope its not that bad considering im constantly doing it and cant stop

 

[Melkor]

I don't know if you intentionally put your first post as such Ermine, but I think thats a wonderful idea...

Ejecting your mind, or at least an echo of it, into exterior realities, while in an almost subconscious mood, and then studying these things objectively.

By that, I mean simply putting all your energies into a single project, such as Ermine suggestted with writing, or if you aren't that way inclined, through art...

Then you essentially have a simple template of your psychology in front of you!


HOORAY!

Conclusion:

Studying my own writing extensively is a flawless introspection!

 

[Ermine]

^ Well at least it's a bit less flawless than keeping it inside in that you can write, make the art, music, etc, lock it away for a while (I usually wait at least a few months) and then introspect with it.

Even when you're putting your thoughts and feelings in front of you, it's still coming through a clouded lens. But that's mainly why I don't look at my personal writing until after a few months. By then I'm a different person than I was a few months ago and can recognize where the distortion is and try to get rid of it for a more objective view.

 

[Jennywocky]

I actually find mirroring to be supremely helpful. The relative objectivity of a mirror or multiple mirrors become vital reference points when one gets really tangled trying to unravel the various stories being played in the mind.

Yes, basically we create nodes/reference points and cross-triangulate our own perceptions in order to weigh how much we can trust them. I think this is about the best we can hope for if we are trying to assess the very process by which we assess things.

It's not foolproof, but we can weed out a lot of errors in the process despite being imperfect.

In the end, this is why no faculty can be 100% trusted and why we can't take ourselves totally seriously. We just can't have a total handle on what the world actually looks like or our relation to it, we just have to play things by ear and be open and willing to change.

Can we also apply this 'self-fulfilling prophecy' to us judging people in the sense that our perceptions may affect them with how they are expressed? We cannot prevent ourselves from judging others, and I think this is perhaps the same with our thoughts regarding ourselves.

yup. Unavoidable. Again, we can't observe in this particular world without impacting what we are perceiving.

Here we come full circle. Can it really be adequate introspection when our mental images of ourselves are distorted?

The librarian/waitress example [that someone else posted] was a good one.

Still, what other options do we have?
There is nothing better.
So we make do with what we've got -- the introspection process.

It does seem to function very well for a lot of things, it's only when we trust it 100% or don't triangulate it that we get into serious trouble. We can afford to be off on some fine details without screwing up our lives too much, though.