Earl Popp's Archive

I really enjoyed all the cognitive value association experiments we explored in class some weeks ago. If used properly, its like mind control. The way Juice was paired with Hitler forever planted a notion of suspicion in my mind, and Danielle is all the more angelic because of her compassionate match. So, really, how much control do we have over our impressions and thoughts? Some common idioms come to mind: you are what you eat, home is where the heart is, and a quote from Mr. Vonnegut: “Be careful what you pretend to be because you are what you pretend to be.” The idea has been around awhile, and psychology is now bringing evidence to support the concept of subconscious influence on conscious perceptions. For instance, for all you Bible lovers out there, in 2 Corinthians 10:5 Paul suggests we “take captive every thought” and subjugate it to Christ so that we can recognize philosophies contrary to the “knowledge of God.” Also, in Proverbs 4:23, the author commands the student to “guard your heart” as “everything you do flows from it.” Though I often hear this verse from peers in regard to romantic encounters, the context fails to uphold such an appropriation of wisdom. It seems the scripture is explaining the path to a wise lifestyle and contains suggestions for preserving righteousness. Anyway, all of this was going through my mind in class that day (I know, its a lot. what can I say?), and I happened to recall a commercialized idea that applies the concepts presented by the research. It’s easy to find online. If you search “Mind Movies” into Google you’ll find a host of products or suggestions for self enhancing subconscious training through repetition of positive statements about dreams or goals. Cool, right? Well, still during this class period, my incredible mind postulated innumerable possibilities for the enhancement of learning through the tailoring of specific non-conscious stimuli in the learning environment. I’m tired of reading motivational posters. That takes conscious effort. How about we modify the language of instructional pamphlets, train teachers to use positive value enforcing language, and extend recess for all ages (I know, its hard to fathom how that last one relates, but trust me, I spent a whole class period delving into the mysteries of the mind)? I regret that I am unable to list all the incredible possibilities here, as I failed to translate my time-sensitive ideas to a medium before the end of class. But, we all know that a collection of minds supersedes any lone individual, and paired with the priming on the unconscious, I foresee amazing reforms. Basically. I found the possibilities to be exciting.

If any of you share the same ambitious spirit of adventure I do, then you must have marveled at the power and possibility of classical conditioning. Ever since that high school psychology course (college intro for some) learning about Ivan Pavlov and some slobbering dogs, I’ve often wondered to what extent classical conditioning could be exploited. Unfortunately, I’ve found it most often, and on a personal level, manifests itself in the form of phobias. I’ll admit it here and now, I get squeamish around needles. That’s not to say I won’t get a shot; I just have to inform everyone around of the 20 minute post-shot-turning-green-while-lying-on-the-floor phase, so they don’t think I’m dying of an allergic reaction or something. Now, I’ve read my textbooks on CC and I know that I could easily initiate some desensitization training to induce extinction. In fact, if I were more motivated I’m sure I would have done so already, but I would like to thank Mr. Pavlov for laying down the rules that I’ll use to rid me of my conditioned stimulus, someday. What I’m curious about is what is the potential for classical conditioning?

For instance, I’ve heard of biofeedback, and I specifically would like to know more about the possibility of regulating adrenaline for relaxation or excitement. Anyone have any leads? If I weren’t so preoccupied with avoiding needles, I’d do more digging on my own. Besides, last time I solicited for some right brain information, you guys came through. Thanks.

Dr. Jill Taylor’s talk struck a chord in my inmost being. I cannot hold my peace on the issue; her conversation reminded me of teachings on meditation and its wellness promoting benefits. Her description of transcending the boundaries of her body and becoming one with the energy around her reminds me of accounts of Buddhist meditations and sounds familiar to some of the goals stated by Sufis. Also, within Christian meditative practice, wellness and a feeling of connection with the everything that is God is a possible side effect of enduring practice.

So I have to speculate: is the right brain’s functioning enhanced through meditative practice, and, as a result, the experience of God?

Also, can the right brain be trained, promoting the benefits of right brain dominance as described by Dr. Taylor? I know of a book entitled: “Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain” by Betty Edwards that is an instructional book for drawing, using techniques that seem to be right brain specific.

I am very interested in the functionality of the right brain area and what the possible benefits could be of further research. Perhaps I’m catching optimistic whiffs of the convergence of science and religion. One can hope, right?

Hey guys! So, I enjoyed delving into biological and evolutionary psychology on Friday, especially the watching of the ted.com video. It reminded me of a Discovery Channel special on human mating trends, more specifically: kissing. I did some web browsing and found some interesting theories that I’ve pasted links to at the end of my post. Basically, in some circles scientists postulate kissing evolved from an exchange of food from mother to babe or as a means to detect suitable pheremones for potential mates. Cool, right? I also enjoyed the comment made in class (sorry can’t remember who said it) pointing out how much of these “theories” for the origin of behaviors is conjecture or guessing. I believe the comment was in response to the video on smiling and its disarming effects. Healthy skepticism keeps a theory in check; I mean, isn’t the research processes a lot of guess and check? Informed guessing with experimental checks, but still…

Brace yourself for speculative thinking:

http://laurafreberg.com/blog/?p=187

http://www.helium.com/items/839279-why-we-kiss-the-science-of-kissing

Firstly, if you were hoping this is about the television show Lost, allow me to dash those preconceptions promptly. Its not. Suffice to say, I like my title (the show is pretty cool too), and if you choose to judge (my title), you likewise choose to risk the guilt of err. So cut it out. Besides, I mention a television show later which far exceeds Lost in its entertainability. All this considered, allow me now to begin: In class, our talks of determinism and rationalism reminds me of one of my favorite tales:

A long time ago, during my travels in mid Asia, I stumbled upon a secluded temple. Venturing further within, a lone guru confronted me. He spoke slowly, deliberately of vagueness that I was fraught with vexation for a time until now. The guru, whom I shall refer to now as The Wimon, elaborated on the meaninglessness of life: he spoke of the heavenly bodies, how they rotate and spin, continually on a path of where they were always meant to go. He emphasized how all we can do is watch as such an astronomical event transpires. Next, he directed my attention within. He asked of me the knowledge of the composition of my skin. My reply referred to matter and atoms; the proton, neutron, and electron. My puzzled expression ushered an enlightening response from The Wimon: he pointed out how the electrons spun on their paths around the nucleus, how we could, in theory, alter their current condition, but they would eventually return to a set pattern. I was still unable to grasp what it was that he was trying to communicate, so he simply told me: the macrocosm is the microcosm. Within us, our atoms and composition, are thousands of universes in and of themselves similar to the ones we can see through a telescope. I furrowed my brow at such a claim. He continued, claiming that each one of us pursues a meaningless and pointless existence, that we are tossed by whims that arise from our circumstances only to realize later that none of it bore lasting relevance to what we are. Yet we are also of the utmost importance, that each precious moment of life we have must be optimized in its time.

Now, I must admit, it was much more impressive in person. I do a horrible job recounting the tale. In fact, I may have dreamt the whole thing. The point being that I walked away (or woke up) with a sense that we are all on set pathways, it is our perspective or attitude that shapes our experience of life. Nothing around us is real or relevant except our notion or perspective we choose to take in regard to it. That is our free will. Could life have progressed in any other way? Quantum Leap, a television show from the late 80s, may suggest so, but The Wimon hinted at a deeper truth: a pattern that is fixed and followed by all creation, and is evident within our everyday selves. So are we purely creatures of training and behavior, driven to action by previous learning? Or are we spirits riding a pendulum swing that is reflected in our daily walks? Perhaps our behavior is the sum of our experiences, and who we are is a reflection of that. I still don’t know anything. How frustrating.

Thoughts?

If I may, I shall immerse myself within discourse on Plato’s cave allegory as so many others before me. Simply put, Plato wishes for us to reach within ourselves to find the strength to ascend from the fragmented shadows of a hollow reality. In so doing, when we muster the strength to unchain the shackles and choose to explore enlightenment, Plato warns of no return—not physically, but of consciousness. To descend back within the cave would be burdensome on the enlightened mind, and to share this new knowledge with others would risk retribution of a potentially fatal degree.

I hope that brief summary shall suffice; now I will affect ingress into my opinions. Firstly, I desire so much to claim that the enlightenment of which Plato speaks is nigh unattainable to all but a few men. Most of us, in my opinion, may chance upon the strength to be freed of our chains, but fear the final ascent to true enlightenment, satiated by more defined shadows and dull rocks lying close to escape: If I may be so bold as to draw upon scripture, in Mark 10 Jesus encounters a young rich guy, and politely informs the man to abandon all his riches then return to follow Jesus as a disciple in order to achieve treasures in heaven. The man leaves, devastated. He did not want to relinquish his accumulated wealth. The wealth and possessions were a shade of the treasures of heaven, of which Jesus was trying to help the guy acquire. In the cave, the prisoners sit, enthralled with the shades upon the wall. Their disillusionment remains a reality until they muster the strength to be free. Where does this strength arise from?  Within Christianity, Jesus explains in Matthew 7:7 that we may ask and receive, seek and find, etc. I interpret this, in terms of The Cave, to be an invitation to cry out to a divinity for the strength to be free. Plato, though, would argue that the strength is inborn. At first it appears there may be some contention between the two camps of thought, but allow me to build some bridges. In scripture, the early scripture (Genesis), God created man in his image. Now, I reject this to mean a physical image, but rather one of progressive thought. What this means to me, is that God imparted humanity with the ability for creative thought. For Christians, the “body is a temple for the Holy Spirit,” the trinity spirit of God that aids his followers (1 Corinthians 6:19). So, if we are made in God’s image and filled with His Spirit, then we need only look within ourselves to have the strength ascend, right? Thus we have the discipline of solitude.

Now that relation has been drawn between The Cave and Christianity, at least in my own mind, I will, in conclusion, throw Romans 3:23 (“all have sinned and fallen short…”) out to justify the inability of man to attain the true enlightenment of which Plato writes. Then again, the scripture may be referring to an event rather than a condition. A conversation for another time perhaps.