[Futurework] =?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_=5BFuturework=5D_Re:_=5BFuturework=5D_=5BFuturework=5D?= =?iso-8859-1?Q?_FW:_=22Spiritualit=E4t_macht_fr_ei=22_=3F?=

[Selma Singer]

I have a question that may or may not have some kind of answer but it seems to me very closely related to this discussion. I think it is a question that Ray could probably answer better than anyone else because he is so closely involved in the arts.   It is my impression, both from my own experience and from what I have heard and read about people in the arts and in other fields such as sports and science, etc. that it is true of the very finest  artists that when s/he has been thoroughly trained in the technicalities of her/his art, the next step is to master those technicalities so thoroughly that they no longer are the focus of that artists performance because then and only then the focus can become the artistic components of the art, i.e., the musicality, the dramatic impact perhaps in the theatre which goes beyond the words, the passion in a painting, the sense in a basketbal game of being part of the team to the point that the team acts a unit, etc.   So the learning of the technical elements of, e.g., an instrument, or the voice, would you say, involve linear thinking and, of course, if one cannot do this one cannot do anything else; the real art is then something that is not possible within the realm of the linear because it demands much more, althoug, again, it is not possible to produce that much more unless the linear has first taken place.   Selma   As these thoughts have come to me it occurs now to me that this can be extended to-who knows how many areas of life.   S.         ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ray Evans Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1:03 PM Subject: [Futurework] Re: [Futurework] [Futurework] FW: "Spiritualität macht fr ei" ? > In voice we call that focus and Martin Buber called it speaking the Primary > Word.   However that doesn't address the complexity of multiple skills or > the way that the consciousness prevaricates to the rest of the brain ala > Freud and others.   Mechanics does not equal consciousness. > > REH > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Keith Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:52 AM > Subject: Re: [Futurework] [Futurework] FW: "Spiritualität macht fr ei" ? > > > > Pete, > > > > Your description below is correct -- in as far as it goes. > > > > However, the brain becomes very linear indeed when all the processed > > material from the rear cortex (whether from separated halves or not) is > > gathered by the frontal lobes and ordered in strictly linear fashion > > preparatory for action. Were this not so we could not carry out any > skilful > > physical action in the right sequence, nor derive logical conclusions, nor > > make plans for the future, nor be able to utter a sentence with a > > meaningful syntax no matter how large our vocabulary. > > > > Benjamin Libet, acknowledged to be the world's leading researcher into the > > consciousness of perception and action, has shown very clearly that > > consciousness arises only at the point when the action potentials of the > > motor neurons are at their maxima and are then released in strict sequence > > as action is initiated or words spoken. > > > > All the preparatory work for the sensation of consciousness is indeed > > carried out in parallel as you say, but the full realisation of > > consciousness is strictly a linear affair. > > > > Keith Hudson > > > > At 17:23 18/09/2003 -0700, you wrote: > > >Actually, pyschology demonstrates that this notion is an illusion. > > >I'll just sketch a couple of examples, which are probably familiar. > > >The truth is revealed by instances of physical brain function > > >disruption, which can be generated by strokes, or by radical > > >surgical intervention. The surgical instance is most impressive, > > >as in this case, the majority of the brain is fully severed into > > >left and right halves to stop massive epileptic attacks. As a > > >result, the patients become, at the intellectual, interpretive > > >level, two distinct entities which do not share any information, > > >despite the fact that because the lower brain is still (must > > >still be, for the patient to survive) intact, the patient percieves > > >themselves as a single unitary entity. Probing the behaviour of > > >such patients teases out the way the brain conspires to fool itself > > >that it is behaving rationally. As you are probably familiar, > > >when the patient's hands are placed in two boxes so they cannot > > >be seen, which contain two different objects, then the patient > > >is interrogated as to the content of the box which he can feel, > > >if the answer is to be spoken, the response will relate to one > > >box, but if it is to be written down, it will relate to the > > >other box, as speech is on one side of the brain, and writing > > >is on the other, and which ever side is to provide the answer > > >conveys only that which it knows (the sense data from each > > >hand goes only to one side of the brain). But if you try to > > >point out the discrepancies in the reponses, the patient is > > >found to have a surprising resistance to acknowledging the > > >disparity. It can be demonstrated that each side of the brain > > >uses every trick it can come up with to sneak access to the > > >knowledge of the other half, meanwhile denying that there is > > >any separation, flatly refusing to believe that two autonomous > > >"thought engines" are operating, even when the evidence is > > >indisputable. Why should this be? Because in reality this sort > > >of deceit is going on all the time in normal healthy individuals, > > >it is just that with considerable communication between the > > >hemispheres, the illusion is much more seamless and easy to > > >conceal. > > > > > >The other sort of damage which reveals the same deviousness > > >occurs with stroke victims. Again, I'm sure you have encountered > > >the stories. When a part of the visual cortex is damaged, a > > >patient will draw pictures with one side of all the objects > > >missing, but won't realize that it is gone. Or will be unable > > >to acquire some piece of sensory information, but will aggressively > > >"eavesdrop" on themselves to acquire the information by > > >other means, while refusing to acknowledge that they are > > >doing so. The important point being that in these cases, > > >while their errors are glaringly obvious to all other observers, > > >they are utterly invisible to themselves. > > > > > >These anecdotes, which I have only briefly indicated, point > > >to the systemic misdirection the mind uses to maintain > > >an illusion of a unitary self, whose behaviour is rational > > >and consistent. In fact, the reality is that loads and > > >loads of little semi-autonomous pieces of the brain are > > >always churning away, sensing, filtering, interpreting, > > >providing bits of information, and most importantly coming > > >to conclusions, outside of the purview of conscious > > >attention, which flits from "module" to "module", pulling > > >in bits of resultant items to sew together to provide an > > >apparent seamless, linear stream of awareness, with an > > >apparent logical, rational narrative justification to > > >hold it all together. But knowing what we now know about > > >how this mechanism works, it should be clear that this > > >narrative is essentially propaganda, a convenient myth to > > >keep the individual from collapsing into an existential > > >chaos of fractured identity. In truth, the brain works > > >massively in parallel, and is not linear at all. > > > > > >       -Pete Vincent > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Futurework mailing list > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > > Keith Hudson, 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath, England, > > <www.evolutionary-economics.org> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Futurework mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework