I had been reading a lot of the posts and something that has been popping up as one of the crucial things to improving vision is the mental side of things.
There are people that say that to get back good vision you have to reject bad vision because having perfect eyesight is something that most people should have, something that you should be able to do without effort like hearing or smelling or walking and that is it a part of you, something that shouldn't be considered so highly of and so spectacularly as.
Yet there are the others that say that to start on your path to good vision you have to accept bad vision and the bluriness of the world as you see it now to get over the fact that us myopes have "bad" vision which allows us to progress into the way of seeing correctly and that if you never accept it you cannot move on.
They both seem to make sense but what I want to know is: which ONE is actually true?
Is there such thing as it depending on who you are etc. and how you think about vision or is there one wrong and the other correct?
I think, these are not really 2 different options, but 2 steps in the same process.
First you have to give up the habit of struggeling against the blurry vision in the wrong way by straining your eyes - that it accept the blurr as it is and keep the eyes relaxed.
Then you start to practice the right way of seeing - always reminding yourself to keep your eyes relaxed, looking at small points and shifting from one detail to another...to make this gradually your new habit of seeing and replace the old, wrong one to overcome the blurr.
Before being exposed to Bates, I went along with all the other drones believing that my poor vision was my lot in life. After exposure to Bates, I rejected the notion that poor vision is the way it 'should be.'
You are going to have to accept the fact that you are going to need learn to tolerate and handle a certain amount of blurr before things get better. There's no easy way around it. But that's not the same as accepting that it's the way things 'should' be.
I agree with Nini and arocarty. I was highly myopic most of my life, and if I'd never accepted that I saw things in a blurry way and wanted to change that, I would have never addressed my addiction (no, I don't think that's too extreme of a description) to strong lenses. I also started to change my self-definition, moving the myopic habit further and further away from the center of who I am. I now say I used to have a nearsighted way of coping with stress, not I *am* nearsighted, or even that I am a little bit nearsighted. This feels truer, but it took a while to get here. I always wonder about the people with strong prescriptions who get their eyes suddenly "corrected" by Lasik, and how they adapt to this big change. Looking back, I understand why it had to take so long for me -- I needed to let go of that protection I believed I needed in a gradual manner.
I submit that there are two kinds of blur for most nearpoint fixated people:
1) Retinal blur - inner blur - mental/self-hypnotic related
2) Corneal blur - outer blur - physical/stress related
And unfortunately they are usually different for each retina and each cornea. Therefore there are actually (at least) five kinds or levels of blur rejection required - 2 corneal, 2 retinal and 1 mental. It seems impossible. But I believe and it is my experience that once any one of the five is overcome, as long as we keep doing whatever it was that helped us overcome it, overcoming the others will follow.