Thought Processes and Its Impact

[serenesam]

Behavioral experts tend to focus on an individual’s “current thinking process” that will then affect potential “future life events and/or situations”. Nevertheless, contemporary times tend to ignore a crucial preceding step of a “preceding life event/circumstances/situations” that will affect “current thinking process” which in turn may affect “future life events and/or situations.” For purposes of clarity and simplification, I will designate “preceding life event/circumstances/situation” as level one, “current thinking process” as level two, and “future life events and/or situations as level three. An important notation is that each level must be satisfied before the next level can be discussed and its occurrence in effect.

Contemporary times tend to ignore a “preceding life event/circumstances/situations” and assume that the “current thinking process” is the “life event/circumstances/situations” which is not always the case. You cannot move from an “is” state to an “ought” state. Thus, you cannot say that the “current thinking process” ought to be the “future life events and/or situations”. Experts are trying to modify the “current thinking process” without any consideration to the “preceding life event/circumstances/situations.” An important note: “Preceding life event/circumstances/situations” is difficult to becoming extinct. It may even override intensive modification of “current thinking process”. Thus, it is inaccurate and outrageous for experts to assume that “future life events and/or situations” is the complete and direct result of “current thinking process.” These “hypocritical” experts talk about “correlation does not equal to causation.” Hence, it is not just the “current thinking process” that may affect the “future life events and/or situations.” It could be that a “preceding life event/circumstances/situations” affecting the “current thinking process”, which then affects the “future life events and/or situations.” The self-fulfilling prophecy is NOT necessarily the foundational basis for the outcome of a specific situation contrary to the assumed notion that it is. Why? Because it implies at starting at level 2 – the “current thinking process” which is simply not always the case. This is not to say that some people won’t start at the “current thinking process”. This theory only offers a possible explanation as to why the current thinking process modification techniques may not work.

 

[MaggieMae]

Nevertheless, contemporary times tend to ignore a crucial preceding step of a “preceding life event/circumstances/situations” that will affect “current thinking process” which in turn may affect “future life events and/or situations.”

Huh? I've never heard a "behaviorial" expert (assuming that's a psychologist/psychiatrist) assume any such thing.