but you are not here trusting something instinctual. Since you are creating an environment and building on anticipation and percpetion. You are not really acting on an instinct in the terms with which this conversation is about. however , when your eye blinks to block that stray speck of dirt, or your hand moves to swat that balled up wad of paper thrown by your colleague then you are into reactive thinking.Gut feelings and instinctual ( emotional intelligence ) is hard to measure in a lab experiment which is why the article is important.
This reminds me what some person said about the matrix and star wars films.Neo is a hacker, but resolves his problems with instincts and gut feelings, Jedi are supposed to build their own light saber but their are told to "trust the force".In the end, being smart ain't cool, mostly because most people can't be smart enough to hack their way around. So even Hollywood geeks save the day on gut feelings partially or alone.Telling people to be smart is insulting for 90% so it's better to tell them to trust their instincts, that is a relaxing thought for most people, because it gives them the illusion that they don't need to think, something they hate to do.My guess, these guys are telling people what they want to hear.
"In the end, being smart ain't cool, mostly because most people can't be smart enough to hack their way around."In most movies, mystical mysterious powers triumph over reason and intelligence. As a response to this, Army of Darkness, of all things, was specifically written with a storyline that promotes science over mysticism. Ghostbusters is also one of the few movies that does this as well.
The main example they give is that they could detect people's decision to wiggle their finger a half second before they were aware of it. This is a very questionable claim: does it not imply that it takes at least a half second to make a decision to wiggle your finger? If this were so, video games wouldn't work, some games require timings much less than half a second. Nah, I don't buy it.
I just heard a good joke on the radio... George Bush is like a turtle on a post, you know he didn't get there by himself, he can't really get anything done while he's up there, and you just want to help him down.:o)
I read the journal article, and the methodology is sound, in case anyone was wondering. They did find solid support for the claims they made. However, the ezine article left out their reasoning for the theory behind this. The idea is that the conscious mind is very precise, but is limited in how many factors it can consider at once. So if you have price, color, and 10 other factors to consider, you are going to pick a few to think about and disregard the rest. The unconscious mind is less precise, and more likely to make bad easy decisions, but can process large amounts of information at once. However, you can't necessarily set rules for yourself in your unconscious mind. For example, if you are searching for a car you might want to set a maximum amount of money you want to spend when thinking about the available cars. But your unconscious mind is likely to ignore that maximum and decide on the car you like best overall, even if it happens to be out of your budget.The finger wiggling thing was another experiment done quite awhile ago.
butlershouseAug 26, 2006
but you are not here trusting something instinctual. Since you are creating an environment and building on anticipation and percpetion. You are not really acting on an instinct in the terms with which this conversation is about. however , when your eye blinks to block that stray speck of dirt, or your hand moves to swat that balled up wad of paper thrown by your colleague then you are into reactive thinking.Gut feelings and instinctual ( emotional intelligence ) is hard to measure in a lab experiment which is why the article is important.
requiem18thAug 26, 2006
This reminds me what some person said about the matrix and star wars films.Neo is a hacker, but resolves his problems with instincts and gut feelings, Jedi are supposed to build their own light saber but their are told to "trust the force".In the end, being smart ain't cool, mostly because most people can't be smart enough to hack their way around. So even Hollywood geeks save the day on gut feelings partially or alone.Telling people to be smart is insulting for 90% so it's better to tell them to trust their instincts, that is a relaxing thought for most people, because it gives them the illusion that they don't need to think, something they hate to do.My guess, these guys are telling people what they want to hear.
disposablerobAug 26, 2006
"In the end, being smart ain't cool, mostly because most people can't be smart enough to hack their way around."In most movies, mystical mysterious powers triumph over reason and intelligence. As a response to this, Army of Darkness, of all things, was specifically written with a storyline that promotes science over mysticism. Ghostbusters is also one of the few movies that does this as well.
starmanjonesAug 26, 2006
humm... i think this is what bush has been saying. so obviously there is more than gut involved.
osmanthusAug 26, 2006
The main example they give is that they could detect people's decision to wiggle their finger a half second before they were aware of it. This is a very questionable claim: does it not imply that it takes at least a half second to make a decision to wiggle your finger? If this were so, video games wouldn't work, some games require timings much less than half a second. Nah, I don't buy it.
mkayattaAug 27, 2006
hence the article clearly states that mathematics is best left with the conscious mind...
russrybaAug 27, 2006
I just heard a good joke on the radio... George Bush is like a turtle on a post, you know he didn't get there by himself, he can't really get anything done while he's up there, and you just want to help him down.:o)
crazywolfAug 31, 2006
I read the journal article, and the methodology is sound, in case anyone was wondering. They did find solid support for the claims they made. However, the ezine article left out their reasoning for the theory behind this. The idea is that the conscious mind is very precise, but is limited in how many factors it can consider at once. So if you have price, color, and 10 other factors to consider, you are going to pick a few to think about and disregard the rest. The unconscious mind is less precise, and more likely to make bad easy decisions, but can process large amounts of information at once. However, you can't necessarily set rules for yourself in your unconscious mind. For example, if you are searching for a car you might want to set a maximum amount of money you want to spend when thinking about the available cars. But your unconscious mind is likely to ignore that maximum and decide on the car you like best overall, even if it happens to be out of your budget.The finger wiggling thing was another experiment done quite awhile ago.