After you hear a good song once or twice, you start to build
up an emotional expectation of how good that song should feel.
This is based on the amount of stimuli, the novelty, of the
experience the first times. The next time you listen to the
song you already have an expectation that the song has to over
come which it usually can’t and so it feels a little less
enjoyable. Also the song is less novel because after the first
couple times, you have come to a conclusion of what the song
is in relation to all the other information you have in you head.
So you stick to that conclusion and consider the song “understood”,
so it is no longer novel.

To prevent these things:

Listen to the song without the emotional expectation. Do this by
listening to it in a relaxed state and focusing on the song
instead of what you expect the song to be.

Listening from different perspectives. I think this might actually
happen naturally once we take our brains of autopilot by focusing
in on the song. See the song actually is new everytime we hear it
because our brains change constantly in relation to the song. You
listen to the song one day focusing on it and it will sound
a certain way. The next day it’s raining, or you get a raise,
if you focus on the song again it will be different in relation
to the song.

Idea is based on my experience using mindfulness meditation and concentrating I had long grown tired of. This song became more and more amazing
and I was struck with the feelings I got the first time I heard it.

However my concentration deviates from the normal idea of

mindfulness meditation slightly because initially I had a song playing through
head phones and I simultaneously concentrated on hearing a second song
just in my head by memory. Focusing on that second song until I was enjoying
it to the exclusion of the song that was physically playing. After this was achieved
I started noticing that the song I had in my head was sounding better than usual so
I took of the head phones and focused even more deeply on the song in my head
and it got even more beautiful.

So try both techniques described if you want and also if you can be lying down andrelaxed. If you can slow your breathing down and relax your muscles that should help
with the focus as well.


I have thought of this too. I think heard or read somewhere that the sexual jealously felt over women had something to do with needing maternal love. Apparently the need of a mother’s love is stronger than the need of a father’s or something I’m not sure. This could also be a reason why you, a women, still feel the same type of jealousy as men, when it comes to women. However, what does a mothers love have to do with sex, I’m not sure. It could be that the women is capable of becoming a mother and therefore having offspring who she would give most of her love to instead of the partner. So if the offspring weren’t even from that partner it would suck for the partner no matter if the partner was a man or a women. The partner would be removed from the equation because the they would be getting no love from the mother, and feeling no love for offspring that aren’t related to them. Anyways these are just some other ideas. I definitely think whatever the reason behind it is, it does seem to manifest as entitlement. I’ve felt this feeling myself and it’s hard to deal with because it’s so powerful. To try to shake it off by telling myself that I can’t own another person and should feel entitled to that, is pretty painful as well. However I think when looked at for what it is it’s more bearable.I think, “well this girl isn’t necessarily going to have kids with this other guy just cause he’s chatting her up”. Also, “would she really even consider that?, that’s what it feels like to me but she isn’t actually considering it, it’s just an instinct.”

However it could be more about some froidian stuff I haven’t even heard of maybe lol. Maybe we all want to have sexual relations with our mothers. Actually we did in a way. For calcium. Also apparently breast feeding can be sexually arousing for women. Also there are orgasmic births but this is taking it to another level.

I am observing now a trend in myself that i seem to be drawn to fields that connect other fields. Languages. Languages connect so many different fields together. Math is the universal language of the physical world. Music is the universal language of emotion some might say. Programming is made up of a slew of languages with new ones being developed constantly. Human language in general like Mandarin. These are all extremely powerful tools and in the hands of a potentiality maybe most powerful. I encourage all MPs to experiment with these fields and let me know of any others with these similarities because I would like to but effort into them as well. btw I came to this understanding by looking at all my goals and choosing goals that I know I would enjoy if I were good at them even though so far I can’t really enjoy them yet.

If someone were to ask me what I’d do if money was no object or if I had all the money I could ever use I would make sure all my needs are met and then save the world. I guess you could say those are my ultimate goals in life. Those are the things that would make me most happy and I don’t see the point of striving for anything less than the ideal. So then the question is how will I get to the point where I have all them money I could ever use or where money is no object. Well one thing that is extremely important in getting there will be other people. I can’t make money if I can’t find work, and I can’t find work(good work)(especially in this economy) without connections. Money only exists as a way to smooth out work related interactions between people who may otherwise try to take advantage of one another. If everyone where best friends, money would be no object. Digressing… now.
In fact at least for me, and I guess many introverts reading articles on how to network, the only thing standing between me and a good job, are connections. Now I could go out and meet people and eventually happen across a few good “connections” and maybe keep in touch, but I think the issue with introverts goes deeper than this. Introverts as I mentioned before have a gift, the gift of information, thoughts, ideas, innovations, that come about when an introvert spends time alone thinking. Think Jesus spending time in the wild. Or Moses. However in today’s society, thoughts, ideas, innovations, research, are supposed to be capitalized on for economic gain. Think “intellectual property”. So everyone takes this idea that they need to be paid for everything they do. Extroverts who have a separate gift of “the gab” or just that social energy that keeps going and going and going, will always be able to say,”work is work and friendships are about the social interaction”. However the social interaction and extrovert can provide is far more powerful than that of an introvert…unless… the introvert is relaying something of value to the recipient through that interaction. So here is the thing, introverts will probably have a lot to say on certain topics but what if by chance they are speaking with someone who doesn’t care about any of what an introvert can think to talk about at the moment. Hmmm, if only the introvert knew something of value they could say the the other, but wait, to go home and think of something based on the others needs, maybe even research something and learn about something new, well that sounds interesting, but it also sounds like work. Like something you should only do if your paid for it. Otherwise your being a sellout? Hmmm. In my situation it took time to think this through but it goes back to what I said at the beginning which was “I would save the world”. So basically if I did have all my needs met I would want to help this person with his needs, for free, so its not selling out cause its something I would like to do at one point. Just only when I have all my needs met. Hmmm, but helping out this individual is completely within my power right now, where as getting a job without connections is not. So should I just sit on my hands or maybe I should adjust my goals?

Maybe a better goal would be to work on having all your needs met and saving the world at the same time.

Or even, saving the world seeing it as the best way to see your needs be met since its the only path that seems fruitful.

So is this selling out?
Does a comedian or a class clown feel good when he/she is the only one laughing at their jokes?
Are men happy to hear that women “fake it”?
Do most people naturally want to help others in need?
Do most people laugh harder when watching a comedy with others or alone?

The answers to these questions are significant because they are an easy way of showing just how much we like others to be happy. Our happiness depends on it .

So by deciding to let the system of money for work rule your thinking to the extent that you would deny helping others for free because “beneath you” is actually denying you one of the things you want the most in life, to help others. As well by extension, if you are an introvert it may be denying you both that and your own needs.

So Steve Pavlina suggested that people try for a month or something either working only for yourself, or only for others, I was naturally inclined to choose only for others but that seemed to be partially out of a sense of guilt. I felt like it was bad to only be out for yourself. Then however for a few reasons, one being the idea of loving yourself completely, I decided I would actually try being only for myself for a few months. My reasoning was that denying myself happiness and only working towards others goals was actually not good for anyone because I wouldn’t be being true to myself and therefore not happy. Unhappy people usually aren’t good for others. Anyways I am ending the experiment into being all for myself, “The Dark side” as some might call it. It just isn’t the right way to go about things, at least not for me.

It showed me that it’s literally a fantasy to be some kind of self made man who simply soiled away at hard work and became rich. I mean I’m sure it’s happened, but its a fantasy for it to be something I could enjoy doing. That kind of man, is either an extrovert who makes everyone around him feel good just by his sociability and can otherwise focus on his work. Or a very sad introvert. In my opinion. This is just my experience thought, and it seems its Steve Pavlina’s also.

Does this mean introverts really are second class citizens? Since unlike extroverts, they are more likely to be in a situation where they have to work for free. I think that questions comes from the frame of mind that people are actually supposed to work for money and not other people. I choose not to believe in that. Not to say I don’t expect to be paid a good salary, just that I choose to help people whether I’m being paid to or not, and I’ll do it because deep down I know it’s where my heart is. Because we are so under the influence of this way of thinking that everything has to be a fair trade I think people need to consciously find their humanity again. Some people, I guess, reach the point where they feel their humanity isn’t serving them and maybe in some situations it won’t be directly or visibly serving them but I believe in the greater scheme of things humanity is one of the greatest strengths a person can have. Therefore I make the conscious decision to chose the light side, the self-less polarity, knowing it’s actually completely self serving at the same time, serving my desire to help others and my desire to help myself. That is what I call Bi-Wining.

Now the nitty gritty.

some information taken from:

Apparently Extroverts somehow are insensitive to dopamine leading them to require a large amount. Enough that the need direct stimulation from their environment to satisfy them. The extreme would be a thrill seeker who like street racing, clubbing and that kinda thing. This needing more dopamine actually is a perfect description of someone with a smaller population of dopamine receptors.hmm.

In contrast an introvert rarely needs external stimuli to satisfy that need to feel good. Instead, thoughts, ideas, concepts, these are the thins that feel good to an introvert. This nuero-pathway uses a different hormone, Acetycholine, as its feel good hormone. In the link above it is said that introverts actually do have more dopamine in their brains and that the receptors are structurally different than in extroverts. If by structurally different they mean there are more then it would all make sense but it could mean something else.

From the book,The Introvert Advantage by Marti Olsen Laney PsD.

“Extroverts need [dopamine’s] sidekick, adrenaline, which is released from the action of the sympathetic nervous systems, to make more dopamine in the brain. So the more active the extrovert is, the more Hap[py] Hits are fired and dopamine is increased. Extroverts feel good when they have places to go and people to see.”

“Introverts, on the other hand, are highly sensitive to dopamine. Too much dopamine and they feel overstimulated. Introverts use an entirely different neurotransmitter, acetylcholine, on their more dominant pathway…”

“Acetylcholine…affects attention and learning (especially perceptual learning), influences the ability to sustain a calm, alert feeling and to utilize long-term memory, and activates voluntary movement. It stimulates a good feeling when thinking and feeling.”
Now here is the thing. A person can up-regulate their dopamine receptor count by simply avoiding over stimulation of that pathway. You know how if you stop doing something your addicted to for long enough, it becomes easy to just stay off of it? that is because of an up regulation of dopamine receptors, meaning an increase in the number of them in the brain. If you eat candy all the time, nothing else tastes as good, but then if you stop eating candy for a long time, everything else eventually starts to taste better. So if the difference between an Extrovert and an Introvert was the number of Dopamine receptors, and if the change from using one “feel good pathway” to another, was activated by having a certain number of dopamine receptors, a person should be able to change from extrovert to introvert  if given the time for up regulation to occur.

My hypothesis is that an extrovert, someone who was accustomed to going clubbing and street racing or just eating a lot of candy, was willing to stop doing anything very stimulating, it’s possible that they would eventually turn into an introvert and become more interested in ideas and concepts ect. They would grow more dopamine receptors to balance their needs in this area and then they would star to become more reflective.



This is a theory on how an extrovert can became and introvert and possibly vise-versa. This transformation is actually a medical thing, it involves the hormone dopamine and its receptors and how they function in the brains of introverts and extroverts.

This first post thought will discuss the actual terms “extrovert” and “introvert” The next will describe how the transformation would work.

The terms extrovert and introvert seem to be misunderstood often so I just want to clarify my definitions of the terms before I go further. My definitions are based on this video by interpersonality on youtube     , and by this book The Introvert Advantage by Marti Olsen Laney, PsD.

So these two examples agree that an introvert is simply someone who is energized by ideas, thoughts, concepts as they gain understanding of them, (maybe things but not quite sure). So if they can convert an environmental stimulus into a thought that is intriguing to them, it makes them feel energized. Extrovert meanwhile are energized directly by the environmental stimulus(usually it would have to be a positive stimulus).

How does this relate to social interaction? : Here is an example. When you complement an extrovert , they will immediately feel energized and show their thanks. When you complement an introvert they will process it internally, analyze it, and if they can relate to the compliment in a way that is energizing to them they will feel energized and probably show their thanks. So with Extroverts they are energized because they were complimented, while introverts are only energized if the complement itself is meaningful to them which would probably depends on a lot of variables.

So as you can see, extrovert/introvert has nothing to do with being social or anti-social, However, because in most communities there are a disproportional amount of people are extroverts, and so introverts are less understood, introverts may become more socially isolated. Also I will add that extroverts gain energy directly from social interaction, giving and receiving, while introverts are energized by themselves and need time to build the energy periodically through thinking and this will take up time leaving gaps between interaction. Not anti-social, but arguably less social.