Consciousness Archives - Page 11 of 23

How Many of these Myths Do You Believe?

March 12, 2015 by Joycelyn Campbell 4 Comments

These six beliefs are so pervasive they seem to be embedded in our culture. Most of them are meant to be motivational, but because they aren’t true, belief in these myths can have unintended consequences that harm rather than help. Ultimately, we need less external motivation and more straightforward education about how the brain and the mind actually work. Then we’ll be able to generate our own motivation—from inside.

Myth #1: We always have a choice.

The reality is that we rarely have a choice. The majority of our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are the result of automatic brain processes. We operate on autopilot most of the time because that’s how our brain is wired. Contrary to popular belief, there’s not much we can do about that. But that’s neither an excuse nor a reason to give up. What we can do is reprogram some of our automatic behavior so it reflects what’s important to us and what we really want.

Myth #2: Anything is possible.

Sure there are lots of things we have the ability to change. But the reality is that we all have limits and constraints; we all face obstacles; and randomness plays a much greater role in our lives than we’d like to admit. No matter how many hours I put into practicing the violin, for example, if I have no musical talent (and I don’t), I will not be the next Jascha Heifetz or Joshua Bell. However, the more I practice the violin, the better a violinist I will become because although I may not be good, I can always get better.

Myth #3: To live a satisfying life, we need to identify our life purpose or passion.

The reality is that no matter how hard we search, we won’t find our life purpose because we don’t have one. In fact searching for a particular life purpose seems to lead more people to a state of paralyzing anxiety than it does to a sense of satisfaction or fulfillment. Giving up on the life-purpose myth can open the door to living with passion—which means identifying what we really want and then creating a big, juicy, satisfying life on our own terms.

Myth #4: It takes will power to achieve anything significant.

The reality is that will power is an unreliable resource that is easily exhausted. Will power and self-control are unequal to the task of changing habits or behavior or achieving big goals. We don’t need—and can’t get—more will power. What we do need is perseverance. Perseverance is what keeps us steadily moving toward the desired outcome regardless of setbacks or obstacles, adjusting course as we go. I call perseverance magic because it is.

Myth #5: If we focus our attention on the result we want, we’re more likely to get it.

The research has been in on this one for quite a while. The reality is that focusing on the end result (or outcome) of something we want actually decreases the likelihood we will get it. On the other hand, focusing our attention on the process—the individual steps or actions we need to take—increases the likelihood we’ll be successful.

Myth #6: We should always trust our gut.

The reality is that our gut instinct—otherwise known as intuition—is situation-specific and therefore fallible. Our unconscious (System 1) regularly makes suggestions to the conscious part of our brain (System 2). That’s what intuition is. If we know a lot about something or have a lot of experience in a particular area, we can probably rely on those suggestions. But intuition is not magic. In areas where we have no knowledge, skill, or experience, relying on intuition is a mistake. When intuition isn’t based on anything, it’s no better than a wild guess.

Letting go of these myths is one giant step toward creating a more deeply satisfying and meaningful life.

Is There a Real You?

December 16, 2014 by Joycelyn Campbell 2 Comments

The answer may seem obvious; of course there’s a real you. But journalist and philosopher Julian Baggini, who studies the complexities of personal identity, offers a counterintuitive answer to the question. Baggini is the editor-in-chief of the Philosophers’ Magazine.

There are lots of different processes in the brain, all of which operate, in a way, quite independently. But it’s because of the way that they relate that we get this sense of self. I call it the ego trick. It’s not that we don’t exist, it’s just that the trick is to make us feel that inside of us is something more unified than is really there.

If you think of yourself as being, in a way, not a thing as such, but a kind of a process, something that is changing, then I think that’s quite liberating. Because we actually have the capacity to channel the direction of our development for ourselves to a certain degree. Now we’ve got to be careful here, right? If you watch the X-Factor too much, you might buy into this idea that we can all be whatever we want to be. That’s not true. There are limits to what we can achieve. There are limits to what we can make of ourselves. But nevertheless, we do have this capacity to, in a sense, shape ourselves. The true self, as it were then, is not something that is just there for you to discover, you don’t sort of look into your soul and find your true self, What you are partly doing, at least, is actually creating your true self.

To the extent you have a true self, it’s something that you in part discover, but in part create. And that, I think, is a liberating and exciting prospect.

Watch and listen to Baggini’s TED talk.

Intuition: Knowing without Knowing How We Know

November 12, 2014 by Joycelyn Campbell 4 Comments

Intuition goes by many names: hunch, gut feeling, instinct, inkling, inner voice. Malcolm Gladwell refers to it as “rapid cognition.” Cognitive psychologist John Bargh calls it “automatic processing.”

No matter how we label it, what intuition is is the ability to “know” something without knowing how we know it.

One thing intuition is not is magical or mysterious or superior in some way to rational, logical thinking. It’s just different. The world is not divided into people who are intuitive and people who are not. We all rely on intuition every day.

Intuition is the result of the associative thinking that takes place in the unconscious (System 1). The unconscious sees patterns and connects dots our conscious brain (System 2) isn’t even aware of. It operates quickly and it’s always on. That’s because, by the way, it’s what keeps us alive. And keeping us alive is what our brain is designed to do. System 1 makes rapid-fire assessments and communicates them to System 2. When we become consciously aware of one of those assessments, we call it intuition. We could also call it jumping to conclusions.

Jumping to conclusions on the basis of limited evidence is important to an understanding of intuitive thinking. System 1 is radically insensitive to both the quality and quantity of the information that gives rise to impressions and intuitions. —Daniel Kahneman

System 1 reacts exactly the same way (jumps to conclusions) whether we have a clue or not. So sometimes its assessments are accurate and sometimes they’re not. Intuition is good for making short-term predictions when it’s based on training, experience, and practice. But even when the training, experience, and practice are in place, intuition is not good for making long-term predictions or forecasts. There are just too many unknown variables for it to account for.

There are a number of potential problems related to relying on intuition. One is that System 1 processing is highly context-dependent. That means that whatever is going on at the time—the weather, our state of mind, the time of day, the last thing we ate—can influence our thoughts. So an intuitive assessment reached under one set of temporary circumstances could be entirely different from the one reached under a different set of circumstances.

Another problem is that good intuition in one area of our lives where we have expertise doesn’t carry over to other areas where we don’t have comparable expertise.

A third and bigger problem with intuition is the strong feeling of confidence it often engenders, whether or not that confidence is warranted, because that sense of confidence is all too easy to confuse with clarity.

What You Can Do:

Don’t automatically assume your intuitive guesses are accurate across the board. Just because you feel confident about something doesn’t mean you’re right. If you are skilled or knowledgeable in an area, your intuition is more likely to be accurate—at least when it comes to short-term predictions. But if you have no particular skill or knowledge, your intuition isn’t any better than a wild guess.

As Kahneman says, “Do not simply trust intuitive judgment—your own or that of others—but do not dismiss it, either.”

Additional Reading: How Important Is Your Need to Be Right? and Do You Confuse Clarity with Certainty?

Ode to the Brain!

October 12, 2014 by Joycelyn Campbell Leave a Comment

Oh, the amazing brain. This Symphony of Science video is included in the playlist in an edutopia article (Five-Minute Film Festival: Learning and the Brain). It’s under four minutes. So just go for it and hit play. The article is also worth reading and all the other videos in the playlist are similarly short and awesome.

Ode to the Brain! is the handiwork of “John D. Boswell (melodysheep), creator of the web series Symphony of Science and a host of other unique musical remixes and projects.” The music can be downloaded here.

Searching for Clarity? Try Writing.

October 9, 2014 by Joycelyn Campbell 5 Comments

writing

Writing is a great tool to use when you want to gain clarity about an issue you’re dealing with or are troubled by. This is not news. The catch is that in order to get the best results you need to be clear from the outset about what you want from your writing. You could just fill page after page in a notebook (something I did for quite a few years until I chucked the entire lot), but after you’re finished you may not be any clearer than you were to begin with. You might even be more confused.

Simply writing about a troubling issue can provide benefits, such as helping you feel better, but it isn’t the best way to get clarity.

There are two approaches to writing for clarity—flow writing and deliberate writing—that involve different ways of using the brain. The problem with simply writing about something is that it tends to muddle these two approaches, which means not getting the full benefit of either.

Flow Writing: Making Use of Associative Thinking

The unconscious (System 1) excels in associative thinking. It detects patterns and connects dots quicker than the conscious part of our brain (System 2) can. It’s a fast processor that sometimes sacrifices accuracy for speed. But it also has access to lots of information the conscious brain isn’t aware of.

Flow writing, which is also called free writing, is non-linear, non-rational, and non-logical. There’s no structure to flow writing. You just put your pen to paper and write quickly, letting the words “flow” without censoring or editing them. You don’t stop to think about what you’re writing. The best way to free your mind for flow writing is to set a page limit or use a timer. Flow writing is a good choice if you’re not entirely sure what the problem is. If you have a lot of thoughts swirling around inside your head, you can get them down on paper and take a look at them. But even with flow writing, you’ll get better results if you begin with a specific question to prime your unconscious to focus on the issue or situation at hand.

Deliberate Writing: Making Use of Logical, Linear Thinking

The conscious part of the brain is rational, logical, and linear. It operates at a much slower—more deliberate—speed than the unconscious. A good way to engage conscious thinking to gain clarity about something is to respond to a series of questions or prompts. While flow-writing casts a wide net in search of answers or information, deliberate writing narrows the search.

This 8 Step Problem-Solving exercise is an example of using deliberate thinking to gain clarity. You proceed through the sequence of questions or statements with the intention of reaching some type of resolution about the problem.

Integrated Writing: Making Use of Both Kinds of Thinking

There are times when either flow writing or deliberate writing alone will be sufficient. But integrating them can be much more powerful in terms of results. Integrated writing is synergistic rather than additive, which means the whole (the result) is greater than the sum of the parts you used to arrive at it. A few examples of integrated writing include:

10 minutes of flow writing (System 1 associative thinking) followed by writing the answers to a series of questions (System 2 logical, linear thinking). You can create your own set of questions or use the ones in the 8 Step Problem-Solving exercise.

Write Your Way Out of the Story. For instructions scroll to Antidote #3 in this post on rumination.

Go Deeper: This is a 4-part exercise that’s best to do in one sitting. Begin by writing a question at the top of a blank page and then flow write in response to it for 8-12 minutes. Next, reread what you wrote (engaging System 2), select a sentence or phrase, and write it at the top of another blank page. Flow write in response to this sentence or phrase for 8-12 minutes. Finally, reread both pieces (System 2), find a question—either one you asked in your writing or one that occurs to you after reading—write it at the top of a blank page, and flow write in response to it for 8-12 minutes. Then reread all three pieces and write a one-paragraph summary (System 2).

No matter which type of writing you decide to use, having an intention—being clear about what you’re doing and what you want to get out of your writing—is probably the most important element.