Comments on: Einstein Saw Reality’s Persistence – You?

By: 10 Tone Tips to Live Like Einstein – Brain Leaders and Learners

10 Tone Tips to Live Like Einstein – Brain Leaders and Learners — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:22:28 +0000

[...] stay with life-changing solutions until they altered his own life too. Researchers added that his genius came through persistence in overriding mental ruts and optimizing opportunities to offer solutions. Where will your tone [...]

By: Ode to Power of Practice – Brain Leaders and Learners

Ode to Power of Practice – Brain Leaders and Learners — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 16:56:21 +0000

[...] from IQ tests. Do you agree? Einstein claimed he was no more intelligent than others – but he stayed with problems longer. [...]

By: michael cardus

michael cardus — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:01:02 +0000

The perceptions we have of reality and the brain connection to beware of that person who was aggresive or did us wrong has strong roots in evolutionary biology. We must remember that our evolution took place (brain and body) on open plains in hunting and gathering early agarian societies. Our brains are set to percieve large objects in a large world our perception of reality is based upon what we evolved for surivival. Illusionary perception is from the thought that we all percieve what we percieve differently, I wonder how what we view is in common to othes. We all have this ability to re-connect our brains to percieve that same object in many different ways. My opinion of what causes this perception shift is our reltationship with the object. For example the "man is out to get me" his perception could be, "you are out to get me, the world is out to get me, I am hungry" what the reciprical perception is and must be is that this person is minimally due respect. Once we start to view people as autonomous entities that are the same as me, our brains will percieve persons in that way. although we are still stuck with what our perception of personhood is? michael carduss last blog post..CommentLuv needs updating on this site. Please download the latest version and install it on your site. This message will apear during the first 10 minutes of each hour. This remote script will cease returning posts in 7 days

By: rummuser

rummuser — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:31:00 +0000

How I wish that “our brains didn’t keep so persistent with unhelpful attitudes and beliefs…”!

At least mine seems to have a brain of its own!
———————————————————————————–

Incidentally, how does one contact you? It would be of help if you could put in a ‘contact’ box. Why I wish to contact you is to send you this separately, but since I am unable to, I paste it below.

“Unspoken assumptions and implied
information are important to both the
perception of
a trick and its subsequent reconstruction.
Magician James Randi (”the Amaz!ng Randi”) notes
that spectators are more easily lulled into
accepting suggestions and unspoken
information than
direct assertions. Hence, in the reconstruction
the spectator may remember implied suggestions
as if they were direct proof.

“Psychologists Petter Johansson and Lars
Hall, both at Lund University in Sweden, and
their colleagues have applied this and other
magic techniques in developing a completely
novel
way of addressing neuroscientific questions.
They presented picture pairs of female faces to
naive experimental subjects and asked the
subjects to choose which face in each pair they
found more attractive. On some trials the
subjects were also asked to describe the
reasons for
their choice. Unknown to the subjects, the
investigators occasionally used a
sleight-of-hand
technique, learned from a professional magician
named Peter Rosengren, to switch one face for
the other-after the subjects made their choice.

Thus, for the pairs that were secretly
manipulated, the result of the subject’s
choice became
the
opposite of his or her initial intention.
Intriguingly, the subjects noticed the switch in
only 26 percent of all the manipulated pairs.
But
even more surprising, when the subjects were
asked to state the reasons for their choice in a
manipulated trial, they confabulated to
justify the
outcome-an outcome that was the opposite of
their actual choice! Johansson and his
colleagues
call the phenomenon “choice blindness.” By
tacitly but strongly suggesting the subjects had
already made a choice, the investigators were
able
to study how people justify their choices–even
choices they do not actually make.

Susana Martinez-Conde and Stephen L. Macknik,
“The Magic and the Brain,” Scientific
American,
December 2008, pp. 77-78.

rummusers last blog post..Down Memory Lane.

By: eweber

eweber — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:21:37 +0000

Thanks Joanna, it’s so fun to think of an opposite angle of topics and it surprised me to see how the brain uses persistent in ways that we’d rather not follow. It’s the wonder of a good day, when folks like you nudge us to rethink common assumptions about a wonderful word such as persistence.