Mindfulness-based programs show promise in reducing psychological distress

I'm not sure how useful this app is. Scanning the comments down-thread, the people preaching mindfulness seem to struggle to practice it. I thought the whole point was to help a person be self-aware, but I see resentment and rage bubbling up unfiltered.

Thanks, the problem is that the name is very vague so maybe there are copycats or similar sounding options so I wanted to go with the publishers

> Am I the only one who thinks meditation with an app is super hilariously weird?

Yes.

> have my phone tell me what to do next"

The phone is a tool. It doesn't tell me what to do.

> you are unable to mediate without the help of an app, start here, instead of pretending you are meditating just because some app tells you every step along the way.

Mindfulness and Buddhism is traditionally practiced in a teacher-student setting. Are they all pretending to meditate because they have a teacher telling them what to do every step of the way?

Your entire comment reeks of utter mindlessness. Maybe an app would help?

It's not any weirder than any other exercise app. It keeps you on track and reminds you what you're supposed to do. (Which isn't exactly "just sit there." You can do it wrong.)

You can even get an EEG reader for biofeedback meditation like Muse. Works well as long as you stay away from the Deepak Chopra stuff.

Is guided meditation on cassette tape also hilariously weird? Or what about in-person guided meditation?

I've done vipassana retreats where they play audio files from Goenka's instructions. You can do the same with a phone.

I've used analogue timers to determine when to get up from my session. Please explain the difference between an analogue timer and a digital one, for this purpose.

It is strange.

I wouldn't come to a tech site to air the counter-tech opinion and I wouldn't anticipate a fair and balanced response.

Have you downloaded the app? Have you seen how it works and what its options are? Everything you wrote is coming from a place of ignorance.

This is excellent and to the point. Thanks for sharing.

Explain the contradiction of terms, otherwise this reply is worthlessly vague

There are a couple of categories, and let's apply it to Mindfulness according to TFA.

1) People who don't actually know what Mindfulness is, other than secondhand sources, word of mouth, etc.

2) People who've tried Mindfulness, and they know a little more than (1) due to direct experience, and possibly a minister who guided them.

3) People who were born into a family whose members fervently pratices Mindfulness, teach Mindfulness to others, and promote it in public.

Now let's see why people hate Mindfulness or say it's not for them.

(1) may say that it sounds weird or foreign, it can't be efficacious, it's too abstract, because they don't know what it's about.

(2) may say that it was hard to concentrate, they kept getting distracted, the classes were expensive, they traveled too far, they didn't feel it working fast enough, it was boring, too spiritual / not spiritual enough.

(3) perhaps their family life was bad, they were neglected or abused, their family members seemed to care more about Mindfulness than this person, and being that "Family" and "Mindfulness" are inextricably linked in their mind, they must reject Mindfulness because it's tarnished by the behavior of its adherents.

So I'd say, don't attack someone who is acting as an evangelist for something, because perhaps they act in good faith. Particularly in HN, this thread is optional for you and me, and so if you feel like it's proseltyzing, just flag it and move on, don't attack a guy because he believes that Emacs and Lisp are the best apps to install on your Linux machine.

and for completion that buddhist philosphy was taken from hindu scriptures which detail the reasoning for what we call "mindfulness"

> Understanding emptiness

> The other points are valid to me, this one belongs in the realm of metaphysics for me.

Isn't this something both the Buddha and modern science agree on? Matter if comprised of mostly empty space. It's physics, no meta.

The metaphysical view of Buddhism is definitely different from Western view.I think both lack empirical evidence, because both are very hard to prove.

But also emptiness as a meditative state (Samatha) can be experienced. Whether or not you end up believing it's the essence of reality, you can experience it as the essence of your experience through meditation.

Few monotheistic groups claim to have the only truth. E.g. Catholicism highlights facets of truth present in many other spiritual traditions.

There are many books, but in the end this can't be thought in a book. Bodhipath is probably a good place, they also have lots of online things to read: https://bodhipath.org/.

It's more focused on the compassion part. The mystical is something which is easy to find online, but hard to find someone with the experience.

But there are different schools, more focused on study, mediation etc. Some are more formal, others informal.

1) Words of My Perfect Teacher: A Complete Translation of a Classic Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism by Patrul Rinpoche translated by Padmakara Translation Group.

2) Essential Mind Training: Tibetan Wisdom for Daily Life translated by Thupten Jinpa.

This is Western attitude right down to the implication that you have some sort of insight that invalidates what the parent is saying.

A society of people acting as isolated islands because they all think that they’re out to get eachother is how society crumbles.

You can put others first with boundaries. You can put others first and remain vigilant. The “look after yourself first”. It’s all a false dichotomy, and the basis for an attitude that especially on this website tends to just be privileged tech workers justifying their own ambivalence toward one ethical issue or another.

This is an overly paranoid response to someone suggesting to have compassion for others as a form of self-care. The idea is that worrying exessively about yourself can be harmful in itself, not "allow yourself to be exploited".

This is a somewhat cynical attitude that assumes compassion must come conjoined with suspension of good judgement. I'm a naturally analytical and anxious individual who has, as of late, found a measure of stress relief by directing some of my mental energy toward the wellbeing of others. Beyond basic necessities and financial security, obsessing over your own wellbeing/financials can be its own torture. Sometimes, something as simple as feeding a stray dog or buying someone meds can relieve stress. Interestingly, writing checks or transferring funds online, does not have the same effect.

This is overly dualistic. (that's a word Buddhism likes to use to mean "wrong")

Another way to think of it is to consider them and you as a single thing (a mandala) and improve that.

And of course Buddhists are not necessarily going to see being victimized as bad anyway. What's that to a monk?

Buddhism is meant to tailor teachings in accordance with sentient beings' cravings and faculty so there's no right or wrong methods. You can mediate, count breath, contemplate about emptiness or chant the pure land sutras. It doesn't matter as long as there's practice under proper guidance.

The first step in looking after yourself is getting to know your own mind.

Not necessarily. You can be compasionate to a narcicist manipulator while being perfectly aware that he is trying to manipulate you and not playing hus game. Being compasionate does not means doing everything someone asks for, but trying to understand where they come from, see their actions as their (likely unskillfull) attempt at avoiding discomfort/suffering (dukkha), and orient your actions based on that understanding.

> There is a systematic effort to plagiarize from Indian traditions and then claim them to be rediscoveries of the West

That's just inverting Tibetan Buddhism; if you wanted anyone to believe in something you invented there, you had to claim it was old and from India.

Old and from Tibet was okay sometimes, but only if you claimed your ancestor's spirits dictated it to you or pointed you to the ancient rock it was buried under. (these are called air and earth termas)

The other practices also have an effect on your body and mind, you just don't bother verifying it for yourself because you want an external authority to do it for you first.

You don't need to buy into the esoteric teachings, or even the core belief of reincarnation. But you don't have to reject them either. Just inform yourself on the basics and keep them in mind. "If this bit was true, what would the world be like? How would my actions impact the world? How would they impact my future self?"

In the end the whole point is reducing suffering, and the longer you wait for someone else to verify one claim or another, the longer you're going to be bound to your habitual suffering.

The irony here is that hardcore Buddhism does debate the benefits of breathing. Nirvana is not something to be shunned. Not necessarily lusted for either. The correct attitude is ... up for debate.

This is such a silly notion, what does countering have to do with any of this? Life is not an internet argument.

>that oriental stuff

Really?

Walking or exercise also have that effect, similar to mindfulness, if that's your goal.

Therapy in itself has limited scientific backing (specific types for specific diagnosis often do). But it feels rational.

However the main point is: Buddhism, and all religions, focus on why you do what you do.

The Western Way is confusing, partially career & material, bit of humanism, etc. Now that's fine. You can figure it out in this system and some people do. But there is no clear road. There is freedom in that, but it comes with a huge amount of anxiousness & confusion.

The western reason for doing things: focusing on getting external circumstances in order (friends, career, house, family) will cause a huge amount of anxiety. Buddhism, and perhaps also Christianity, give non-personal teachings to elevate your focus to a point where it's less about what you do & who you are.

You don't have to believe me and can wait for science to figure this out. But seeing the rise of anxiety, depression & pill usage, I don't have much confidence in the current understanding of the Western world in mental health.

He gave details but you provided no rebuttal of his rebuttal. I would agree with him in the sense that just neutral observation often fixes the problem, but often can be a form of spiritually bypassing your problems. For example, if we're anxious from a lack of income, but all we do is neutrally observe, that's not solving the root problem.

Meta studies study individual papers which in turn are essentially asking people if they feel happier if they do X. Anecdotally.

This particular one does a lot of math which no one has the patience to verify. It just sounds smart, like the papers on nature.com that advertise probiotics.

If you trick yourself into being happy while being exploited by the system it may indeed work (that's why rulers liked Christianity as a tool for pacifying the masses). But you are not solving the underlying issues.

>How could the mechanics of a forum be set up to achieve this?

Well, the way you achieve a forum where nobody talks out of your ass is by making a forum without a submit button.

However I agree, it's absurd the level of quackery that takes over HN in these circumstances, as if one SV weirdo's magic mushroom trip invalidates decades of genuine research on what makes people stressed and the ways to mitigate that stress.

Nope, apparently we are just all following the wrong religion!

> User counters 13000 word meta study by simply stating the opposite without giving any arguments, sources or studies.

Well, it's quite true that sometimes instead of developing stress resilience you should simply get rid of the source of the stress.

> How could the mechanics of a forum be set up to achieve this?

I’ve seen the best results with niche email lists that actively moderate the discussion quality. But the results are mixed and I eventually decided that it’s a lost cause. People who don’t bring anything to the table tend to have more time on their hands to post nonsense.

> User counters 13000 word meta study by simply stating the opposite without giving any arguments, sources or studies.

I am giving my opinion on a random forum, not writing a study about mindfulness. I didn't even say anything controversial, a glance at the wikipedia page would list a bunch of criticism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness#Concerns_and_criti...

> Is there a forum like Hacker News, but with no "talking out of your ass"? > How could the mechanics of a forum be set up to achieve this?

For example, you could try not to be an asshole and not to "talk out of your ass". Be a change you want to see.

Btw, in your case, a mindfulness practice could actually help. Instead of pretending to be an angry internet gestapo, you can try some basic breathing practices for a few minutes.

>How could the mechanics of a forum be set up to achieve this?

Asking people to post their work and downvoting/flagging/banning them if they refuse.

Coping skills are great, but there is definitely a danger of psychological professionals assuming that changes are not possible and they should just train people to cope. I've literally had a psychologist apologise for spending several months doing that to me, because he didn't realize that I had the resources, and let's be blunt - money - to make greater changes to my life than he expected.

I'm curios how much time per day do you dedicate to your contemplative practice?

You might like this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/McMindfulness-Ronald-Purser/dp/1912...

The mind is the brain and the body. Stress is generated by the mind when contacting external objects, or when reliving past trauma.

There is no such thing as an external source of stress. You can't measure how much stress an object or situation is objectively emitting, because it is a response generated by the mind itself.

As such it can only be examined by the mind itself, and with that it can be mastered.

A ton of people don't go to the gym or sleep enough because they feel they don't have enough time. I'm just so confused by the question. It's well documented that parents are sleep deprived and it's a common "joke" that in college you can only pick 2 out of 3 : good grades, a social life or sleep. There's actually no upper limit to how long you can spend just on your studies.