(ROZDZIAL 8—Polish)
Life is tough and it is a whole lot tougher if you are stupid.
John Wayne SOURCE OF THE DIFFERENCE Without ―thought‖, we are but a prolific species. What and who we are comes from the brain. Also, it should be clear, the differences we discussed in Chapter 1, 2, and 3 are dramatic. The Leftist does not react and think like a Conservative on a gazillion issues. Again the focus here is political.
Leftist and Conservatives may both like the same single malt scotch, but it is likely only the Conservative enjoys a good cigar. Not that a Leftist might not like the cigar, but he cannot be perceived as fouling the air with one. Sushi is good, bad air is not. The differences can be identified in several areas of study, but here we are focused on the different views on government. After all, that is the reason for the terms Leftists and Conservative. The words divide politics into different approaches. The word Leftist signifies a more polarized concept than the meaning of Conservative. By that I mean, a Conservative is more flexible and moveable than is a Leftist.
Simply put, the Leftists have a group political approach and the Conservative has a solo one. Most are born different thinkers in these aspects. Once in a while, social interactions during life may affect the approach, but way down inside the difference is like the Grand Canyon. Deep and wide.
The Leftist brain is wired differently than a Conservative one. Of course, you can reverse this and it is still true. The Conservative brain is wired differently than a Leftist one. The why and wherefore part, is the interesting study of this book.
You should not be surprised that the study of the brain is less well understood than the workings of a computer. In a computer, we can create memory boards and figure out how to make them small and compact and can even give them simple logic. We have not and will not be able to give emotion, common sense, or intuitiveness, to a computer. If they talk to us they, like a parrot, simply repeat what is programmed for repetition. In fact, most studies of brain function… why it does what it does… are still in the dark ages. You can spend a lifetime getting mired down in words and categories and studies of all types.
I have no doubt that many who fancies themselves wise persons of the mental world will criticize this work as superficial and unfounded in science. To them I respond: ―Your ignorance is astounding when you consider how little is yet known of what makes up the brain functions.‖ Give lowly me a chance. I am a scientist without portfolio. So was Einstein and Socrates. Hopefully, we stand on the same platform. Of course I am at the other end.
Keep in mind I have lived a long life studying this phenomena, and more particularly I have lived the last 20 years up and close to it as is humanly possible. I doubt anyone can exceed my experience and my study.
Scientist‘s with normal Portfolio, know the brain lobes (Frontal, Parietal, Temporal, Occipital, and Cerebellum) and the hemispheres of the brain. (The hemisphere concept deals with the fact that the right side of the brain provides signals for the left side of the body and vice versa. We tend to use one more than the other.) These same scientists have also, more or less, decided that certain signals to our body and brain have a lobe they like more than any other.
For Example: Frontal Lobe: Source of Conscious thought. Generally, the largest lobe.
Parietal Lobe: Integrates our senses, and has something to do with visual-spatial (space) awareness.
Occipital Lobe: Most of our sight signals are processed here.
(It is at the back of the head) Temporal Lobe: Handles the sense of smell and sound and processing complex vision. This lobe is under the Frontal and Parietal lobes and goes across the brain to both sides.
Each of the lobes feeds and is fed by the other lobes, by matter called the corpus callosum. Think of it as the hard drive which makes all the software work. Each of the lobes is kind of software that is hard wired in.
Scientists can test you to decide if you are left or right brained, from the hemisphere approach, but the main point is that Cognitive Science is in its beginnings---not its endings.
Cognitive Science is the interdisciplinary research of mind and intelligence; embracing philosophy, psychology, artificial intelligence, neuroscience, linguistics and anthropology. Just putting those words together is mind boggling. Included is the study of formal and informal logic, rules, concepts, analogies, images, connectionism and actual and theoretical neuroscience.
It goes on and on.
You can spend a lifetime trying to understand the various aspects of human behavior via the brain. We all spend most of our lives working to survive amid a maelstrom of acts and reacts. Some folks spend their lifetime putting the various bits and pieces in categories and giving them names. It does not mean they have a better answer because they know the bits and pieces. It simply means that is their specialty. In the final analysis, you may have just as good an idea of why one ticks as they do. In my many years of examining ―experts‖, I learned that most of them use smoke and mirrors to tell their tale.
In fact, we all do in one way or another. The point is, do not give to science the Holy Grail. Do not put the science of the mind on any kind of pedestal. There is much to do.
We know so little.
One very good example is Common Sense. Are there grants to study just it? If there are, I have not found them. In fact, you can find a great deal of rhetoric of what common sense is or is not. For some reason, I always remember the lyrics to Cy Coleman‘s song
―Witchcraft‖ which glorifies common sense.
―…I‘ve got no defense for it, the heat is too intense for it. What good would common sense do for it. Cause its Witchcraft, Wicked Witchcraft..‖
I do not mean to imply that what causes the difference between a Leftist and a Conservative is witchcraft, but it has crossed my mind. Especially so when I become exasperated trying to get one to use logic. But then an old Warlock like me understands the occult, I think. You remember the above song recording by Frank Sinatra. It was and is special. Ole blue eyes and I met each other once. Shared an adult beverage too.
Imagine that. Maybe that is why I recall the song so well.
The definitions of common sense are varied and abound. Let me add mine because it makes, dare I say, more common sense to me.
The first word of ―Common Sense‖, ―common‖
Means the collection of observations and experiences (data). These are acquired.
The second word, ―Sense‖, means the mental agility to work with the data and draw conclusions (intuitions) from it.
If your common sense works well, you make few mistakes in life. If it does not, you will make many more, because your logic or ability to use the data is flawed. As Mr.
Wayne observed, being stupid, makes life all the more difficult.
We have discussed intelligence and being stupid before, but let me dwell here for a moment to better understand. To not be stupid, means you have a good balance of Intelligence (I.Q) and Common Sense.
Scientists, one and all, can bore you to death with their testing and knowledge of I.Q. Ask any member of the Menses International Society (Club of those of high intelligent quotients) what intelligence is and they will say they have it. I will say they do not necessarily have it. A high I.Q. alone, does not make intelligence. You have known many very bright people who cannot tie their shoes, let alone play ball. Why is that? They have a defective common sense. It is the latter which makes it easy to tie a shoe and to field and throw a ball. Oh yes, muscle ability is a requisite, but much of it is common data used for the particular activity. The data is acquired out of practice and teaching. It is the good sense (mental agility) to use that data effectively which levels out life. A good I.Q.
and good common sense makes up good intelligence.
Do any research on common sense, and you will be amazed at how scientists, for the most part, accept it, but do not attempt to analyze it. Philosophers pontificate on it, but do not analyze it. Albert Einstein said, “The only real valuable thing is intuition” . Intuition is another way to look at common sense, all though it includes pre- programmed reactions, like moving the head back and forth to find the mothers nipple the first time.
We humans are born with few instincts (sometimes called intuitions).
Yes the infant moves its head to find food, but it will easily give up the natural nipple for a rubber one, once the source data is processed. Another way is to think of intuition as a combination of ―common data‖ and the mental agility ―sense‖ working on the data to guide us. I believe intuition is better described simply as our common sense. Ok, maybe the head movement casts a different shadow.
This ability to make sense of the data no doubt is found in the Frontal Lobe. This is where we develop Conscious thought. Most would agree the interaction with the other lobes makes exact location of ―Common Sense‖ beyond our reach today. There are some recent studies out of England which say x-rays can detect autism, but what kind is still to be discovered, if at all. Most would also agree that all portions of the brain can have wiring problems which manifest themselves in all manner of ways. Psychologists and Psychiatrists spend their careers in trying to find cures and explanations for these wiring problems.
Much work needs to be done. Of all the sciences, this is the one most neglected. It should be given top billing.
Scientists and Physicians and Surgeons who work the field pretty much agree the frontal lobe is the probable source. I accept that and then add…. It, like all the lobes, can have short circuits, and badly tuned distributors. At a factory, turning out hard drives and software, they test and discover the bad ones and discard or reprocess them. With humans, it is not done. If there is faulty development, it stays there until you die. You may be able to compensate some, but you do not cure it.
It is easier to study brain damage than mal development and much has been done to locate the problem and understand what to do with it. For example, if a person suffers a brain injury (could be a stroke) personality changes are expected. Even here, I have not found studies of what happens to common sense. It may be mentioned, but it is not the subject nor does anyone I found dwell on Common Sense as a vital part to complete the package of intelligence and wisdom. This is the shame of the specialist.
Before we leave the quest of the source we need to think about a few other issues that are relevant to our understanding of the brain. One is that if a scientist today suggests, as I do, that a Leftist is wired wrong, they are nearly burned at the stake.
In fact, I would not be surprised if they come and burn a big W on my lawn. If a scientist suggests that one race seems to have, or may have, more cognitive ability than another, the Leftists throw eggs at them and scream at them and effectively damage their career. I think of the Stanford Professor, Mr. William B.
Shockley. Now, he was no average scientist. He was given the Nobel Prize, along with two others, for inventing the transistor, and with his company, helped to create Silicon Valley. During World War II, he was very instrumental in the development of radar. His study on what would happen if we invaded in Japan, gave the statistics to the White House which caused them to decide to use the Atomic Bomb. Not a dummy. When he left the world of electronics he took up a chair at Stanford University, (One of my alma Maters) as a professor of Engineering and Applied Science. One of his focuses was
―Intelligence‖ in the field of Eugenics. He wanted to understand the level of intelligence of humans in the far future and whether or not race would have anything to do with it.
His conclusions of lower IQ and its effects by the Black race is what set the mad dogs of liberalism on their heads. They, the defenders of equality are the same imbeciles who think it is ok to take money from some give it to others (graduated tax). It does not jive, if you‘re hip. I do not know if Shockley was right or wrong, but I do know we need all kinds of inquiry into the function of our brains and it should be welcomed as a teaching tool, not as a hot potato. Today, scientists in this effort are cowed and are afraid to come out. A very bad situation.
Another example of liberalism intolerance for anything which might point to their disability is ―The Bell Curve‖. I am not an expert here, but have watched with some interest the Leftist dither and mad cow disease symptoms because of it. The Bell Curve, published in the middle 1990‘s was the product of one Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray. They too touched on race and intelligence. For that taboo, they have roundly been stoned by the ever tolerant Leftists. Their primary concern was not race, but to explain, using public and private statistics, the gaps in intelligence in various parts of the United States. Now it is impossible to do this without finding race as an influence one way or another. They identified an intelligence gap and that is demonstrated by the Bell Curve. They warned about a decrease of intelligence if something was not done. Oh yes the Leftists cannot be bothered with such worries when they are consumed with Global Warming, and that ugly disgusting stuff…Oil.
What I hope you understand is that the scientific world is crippled by the left as the former tries to understand I.Q. and Common sense. Scientists are frightened to venture into the dark unknown recesses of brain inquiry for fear of being half buried and stoned to death. What I hope you also understand, it is not Conservatives who want to do this.
Conservatives want and hope for enlightenment.