InfiniteNow Posted December 12, 2007 Report Posted December 12, 2007 I'm more of a left brain thinker. Am I wrong in my assumption you tend toward right brain?I use all parts of my brain, and as described to you in your other thread about this very subject, one cannot use brain lateralization and traits indicative of hemispherical dominance to classify one's entire sociopolitical or religious outlook. The traits refer to spatial ability and recognition. Your desire to cast everyone into one of these two buckets (left/right brain) is orders of magnitude too simple to have any validity in the world in which we live. It's like you're trying to figure out who likes hamburgers based on what color socks they wear. It's complete nonsense. :( Quote
questor Posted December 12, 2007 Author Report Posted December 12, 2007 You just made this statement:''Your desire to cast everyone into one of these two buckets (left/right brain) is orders of magnitude too simple to have any validity in the world in which we live.''.This statement, made even though you must have seen the numerous times I have discussed crossover in my discussion leads me to believe you are a right brainer, in that you have failed to pay attention or comprehend what you have seen with your own eyes. I'm not trying to insult you, merely to point out the obvious. There are many famous and popular right brainers.One could speak to this thought difference another way if you object to L/R brain thinking. People who exhibit the qualities of organization, rationality, mathematical aptitude, timeliness and good character will make better leaders than those who are frequently late, mentally lazy, lack organization, lack personal discipline, do not understand business principles and do not fully comprehend cause and effect.I'm sure you must have seen both these types of people. Quote
InfiniteNow Posted December 12, 2007 Report Posted December 12, 2007 One could speak to this thought difference another way if you object to L/R brain thinking. People who exhibit the qualities of organization, rationality, mathematical aptitude, timeliness and good character will make better leaders than those who are frequently late, mentally lazy, lack organization, lack personal discipline, do not understand business principles and do not fully comprehend cause and effect.I don't object to L/R brain thinking. I am simply saying that the qualities you've listed above do not map to one hemisphere or the other. When you list the qualities themselves, I agree that the first set are more appropriate for quality leadership than the second set. I'm just saying that calling any of these qualities "right" or "left" brain specific is not accurate. It's more than just that there is "crossover" as you call it. It's that those qualities are not attached to a specific hemisphere at all. There are some lateralization effects, but these effects do not map to the characteristics as you seem to think they do. Quote
questor Posted December 12, 2007 Author Report Posted December 12, 2007 In order for you to know whether or not my theory is correct, a researcher would have to go into the brain with a detector to determine from which side of the brain the biochemical activity that gives rise to a specific thought emanates. To my knowledge, this specific research has not been done. Therefore, I don't think you can say from research I am wrong.I know that electrodes have been used to elicit certain reactions specific to different areas of the brain. I also heard of a case of an accident that exposed almost a whole hemisphere of raw brain tissue on a male. This gave rise to quite a bit of macro information on brain function. Thoughts are not macro events, they occur at some particulate level as yet not known. An opinion can be viewed as a macro event in which many thoughts are considered and digested to produce an opinion. I would assume that we can agree that many people think in a liberal context and many others in a conservative context, this is why we have two major political parties. We also, as I have mentioned have the crossover group that is liberal on some issues and conservative on others. If we put all the avowed conservatives in one box and examined their biochemical activity when asked to consider some controversial political issues and a separate box for liberals, do you think all these people would have the same electrochemical activity from the same sites? Quote
InfiniteNow Posted December 13, 2007 Report Posted December 13, 2007 In order for you to know whether or not my theory is correct, a researcher would have to go into the brain with a detector to determine from which side of the brain the biochemical activity that gives rise to a specific thought emanates. No. You here are beginning with a premise then seeking to prove it. That is not how science works. You instead begin with a question then seek to answer it. The question, in this case, would be "Do certain thoughts or personality characteristics emmenate from just one side of the brain?" From all of the research I've read and the courses I've taken, I am highly confident that the answer is no. To my knowledge, this specific research has not been done. Therefore, I don't think you can say from research I am wrong.Appeal to ignorance. Just because you do not know how does not mean it's not possible. There have been a multitude of MRI and PET studies showing cortical activation when certain specific thoughts are aroused. You know what? Both sides are always involved, as are various regions front and back. I know that electrodes have been used to elicit certain reactions specific to different areas of the brain. I also heard of a case of an accident that exposed almost a whole hemisphere of raw brain tissue on a male. This gave rise to quite a bit of macro information on brain function. Thoughts are not macro events, they occur at some particulate level as yet not known. You've made a lot of assertions there. Care to support any of them with citation? An opinion can be viewed as a macro event in which many thoughts are considered and digested to produce an opinion. I would assume that we can agree that many people think in a liberal context and many others in a conservative context, this is why we have two major political parties. To the first point, I try not to bucket people using such a broad brush with so little resolution. To the second point, you are raising a non-sequitur, as the reason we have two major political parties has little (if anything whatsoever) to do with traits of hemispheric dominance. We also, as I have mentioned have the crossover group that is liberal on some issues and conservative on others. If we put all the avowed conservatives in one box and examined their biochemical activity when asked to consider some controversial political issues and a separate box for liberals, do you think all these people would have the same electrochemical activity from the same sites?Your subjective label of "conservative" or "liberal" has nothing to do with the object of that label's neurochemistry and neurophysiology. You could classify thousands of people as liberal, and still find no overalp in their electrochemical activity upon testing. Stop making assertions then seeking ways to prove them correct. Ask questions, then seek ways to answer them. Please. Quote
questor Posted December 13, 2007 Author Report Posted December 13, 2007 Infy, your brain obviously works quite differently from mine. You are operating from your reading of certain literature and I am operating from certain literature plus a knowledge of some biochemistry and personal observation. You have reached certain conclusions through your own neural network and I through mine. There are patterns of thought by large groups of people who seem to think alike, and reach similar conclusions. I have said I don't know what causes this, but there must be a similarity in the method of thought production in order for millions to have the same perception on a given subject, and the wiring must be different when other millions reach opposite conclusions on the same data. Since you are uncomfortable with this concept or have never noticed it yourself, we really don't have a basis of discussion. Why don't you watch the political debates or look at the websites Daily Kos (liberal) and Redstate.com (conservative) to see if you can discern this dichotomy of thought. After you do this for a few days, get back to me and we will discuss your perceptions. You may consider a few current subjects of debate such as taxes, education, illegal immigration, religion, morality, etc. Quote
Turtle Posted December 13, 2007 Report Posted December 13, 2007 In order for you to know whether or not my theory is correct, a researcher would have to go into the brain with a detector to determine from which side of the brain the biochemical activity that gives rise to a specific thought emanates. To my knowledge, this specific research has not been done. Therefore, I don't think you can say from research I am wrong. Without regard for your theory, real-time brain imaging technology is expanding. Far from left-right, black-white, the workings of the brain remain principally gray. Here's some reading from our own little Hypography, and there's plenty more if you search the site. The optimum state of a human is an efficient one. :) :) http://hypography.com/forums/theology-forum/9410-biotheology.html http://hypography.com/forums/medical-science/3543-fun-brain-science-experiments-exercises.html?highlight=Fun+Brain http://hypography.com/forums/medical-science-news/9751-imaging-pinpoints-brain-regions-see-future.html?highlight=Fun+Brain Quote
InfiniteNow Posted December 13, 2007 Report Posted December 13, 2007 There are patterns of thought by large groups of people who seem to think alike, and reach similar conclusions. I have said I don't know what causes this, but there must be a similarity in the method of thought production in order for millions to have the same perception on a given subject, and the wiring must be different when other millions reach opposite conclusions on the same data. I guess the issue is this. How can you, in one sentence say that you "don't know what causes this," then... in the VERY next sentence suggest that "there must be a similarity in the method of thought production in order for millions to have the same perception on a given subject, and the wring must be different when other millions reach opposite conclusions on the same data?" You're contradicting yourself, and your statements are not internally consistent, let alone supported with evidence. Quote
Mike C Posted December 13, 2007 Report Posted December 13, 2007 Mike, i'm looking in vain to see what qualities you think make a good citizen or person. I know by some of your other pots you are not pleased with the way things are. Can you tell how you would make it better? I posted an article entitled 'My Brand of Socialism'. In it, I promote just 3 important needs of our citizens. They are: Guaranteed jobs for all. NO UNemployment. Then, Universal Healthcare for all citizens that includes the 'alternative healthcare practitioners' as well. These Naturopathic doctors cure the sick like it was a miracle. They use GODS medicines like vitamins, minerals, herbs and other natural remidies. Drugs do not work that well. Lastly, guaranteed pensions for all workers and other resposible citizens such as management and etc. Other lesser things of importance can be added later. The only way this type of government could be elected is to rid ouir electoral system (US), is to get rid of the corruption that those corporate and wealthy influence dollars have on the politicians This can only be done with the 'Public (government) Financing of our Elections' Mike C Quote
questor Posted December 13, 2007 Author Report Posted December 13, 2007 Mike, I didn't ask for what material benefits man NEEDS, I asked what personal traits man should HAVE in order to become the best he can be. This is either a supremely difficult question to answer or people are not interested in the subject. I haven't had good response. Quote
questor Posted December 13, 2007 Author Report Posted December 13, 2007 Turtle, if you are there, your links lend support to my pre-theory. I prefer to deal with the medical side rather than the religious side. I'm sure at some point research into the biochemical basis of thought will prove my suppositions correct or incorrect. Scientists now can only deal with macro structures or dead tissue. This approach does not reveal enough information about biochemical reactions in thought or disease. Quote
Turtle Posted December 13, 2007 Report Posted December 13, 2007 Turtle, if you are there, your links lend support to my pre-theory. I prefer to deal with the medical side rather than the religious side. I'm sure at some point research into the biochemical basis of thought will prove my suppositions correct or incorrect. Scientists now can only deal with macro structures or dead tissue. This approach does not reveal enough information about biochemical reactions in thought or disease. I'm still here. :D The thing is, there is no 'real' divison between the medical and the religious...or the political, or the moral, or the emotional, sexual, logical, and so on, human characteristics ad nauseum. It is all in our heads/minds/brains. As for not revealing enough, well, it's simply a matter of time. Since you, and I , and we, as individuals have a finite amount of the stuff, then our optimum state is to use it efficiently. :) :) Quote
questor Posted December 13, 2007 Author Report Posted December 13, 2007 It is odd to me that this thread was posted to get a consensus on the traits that people think the optimum man, a model citizen, a person you look up to and admire would possess, but no one seems to understand the question or perhaps no one has an opinion or cares about these things. I think a lack of consensus is the reason our country is fracturing, no one can agree on issues which affect our lives, no one can even agree upon the most valued human traits. Quote
Turtle Posted December 13, 2007 Report Posted December 13, 2007 It is odd to me that this thread was posted to get a consensus on the traits that people think the optimum man, a model citizen, a person you look up to and admire would possess, but no one seems to understand the question or perhaps no one has an opinion or cares about these things. I think a lack of consensus is the reason our country is fracturing, no one can agree on issues which affect our lives, no one can even agree upon the most valued human traits. Joseph Campbell would agree with you to some degree I think on the 'model' idea. In his series with Bill Moyers on myth, he made a good argument that 'modern' society has not found the replacement heroes for those of old that have died under the axe of logic and hammer of time. Curriouser still is why Logic has not well caught on as the hero. :) It is hard to make predictions, especially when they deal with the future, and just as hard to construct objective models of subjective parts. :D :) Quote
Mike C Posted December 14, 2007 Report Posted December 14, 2007 Mike, I didn't ask for what material benefits man NEEDS, I asked what personal traits man should HAVE in order to become the best he can be. This is either a supremely difficult question to answer or people are not interested in the subject. I haven't had good response. The Olympic games, Body Building competitions and our educational systems are cuurrently in use. This way, different people have their way of rising to the top. Of course, you can include the 'dollar stuffers' also as competing to see who excels here. Then another similar competition is the 'hot dog' stuffers. Are you aware of this? Mike C Quote
questor Posted December 14, 2007 Author Report Posted December 14, 2007 Mike, I have not heard of ''hot dog stuffers''. are they pysically attractive?why don't you list 6 human traits ( qualities ) that you most admire? Quote
Mike C Posted December 15, 2007 Report Posted December 15, 2007 Mike, I have not heard of ''hot dog stuffers''. are they pysically attractive?why don't you list 6 human traits ( qualities ) that you most admire? The 'hotdog stuffers' are a competition here3 in the US to see who can eat (stuff) the most hotdogs in a given time period. My ideal qualities in a human are: reverence for Nature and its occupants, honesty, obedience to current laws, respect for the woman, sharing the wealth and being 'self' supporting. Mike C Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.