Sign In Sign-Up

Welcome!

Close

Would you like to make this site your homepage? It's fast and easy...

Yes, Please make this my home page!

No Thanks

  Don't show this to me again.

Close

H. Arild Nygaard
March 30, 2000
 
 

CHILDREN OF THE NILE

A Paper on the evolution of man based
on Division of Labour in the Human Brain
 
 
 

In the folklore of the Middle East, the story is told  about a man named Nasrudin, who
was searchingfor something on the ground. A friend came by and asked: "What have
you lost, Nasrudin?" "My key," said Nasrudin.  So, the friend went down on his knees, too,
and they both looked for it. After a time, the friend asked: "Where exactly did you drop it?"
 "In my house," answered Nasrudin."Then why are you looking here, Nasrudin?" "There is
more light here than inside my own house."

This "light" little story  is old and worn, yet it has some timeless, mysterious appeal,
one which has much to do with the articles that follow. But let me leave the story
momentarily while I pose some questions also simple yet mysterious that have
always puzzled me.

Why are some people so smart and so dull at the same time, so capable of mastering
certain mental activities and so incapable of mastering others? Why is it that some
of the most creative thinkers cannot comprehend a balance sheet, and that some
accountants have no sense of product design?
-Henry Mintzberg

Digression to "New Economy" here!

Left and Right Brains or Hemispheres of the Mind
By: Harold (Arild) Nygaard, 30March,2000

It is well known that the left and right brains have somewhat divided roles in the behavior of Normal people.

The Left Hemisphere/Brain is the logical and linear brain...associated with menial tasks such as arithmatic, adding, and other Linear logical exercises, including debugging computers and writing low level computer code.

The Right Hemisphere, on the other hand is the "Hyde", as RL Stephenson wrote, and is preoccupied with imagination, creativity, planning, music, dance, arts and frivolous things such as chasing the opposite sex down Dark Alleys.

In the Modern Western Society, MOST individuals are in fact LEFT BRAIN DOMINANT...well trained and indoctrinated....Left Brain People make good accountants as well as specialized engineers, dentists. and teachers.  It is estimated that as high as 90
percent of college or university graduates are Left Brain Dominant, which allows them to pass the exams and go out to make a normal, educated living.

Right brain people...few wrt Left....make good artists, musicians, writers and in general dream of a world full of ideas....these
lonely people don't truly understand BARRIERS, and have difficulty working within rules, and sometimes, LAWS.

There are 2 interesting exercises in this paper:  The first is a quick look how peoples' facial appearance varies from the left to right Brains...In this exercise this author has taken one photo of himself,
 

and in the first set, made a persons face mirrored left face (Right Brain) as well as mirrored right face (left Brain)..and compared it to the normal face.  In the second set, because hair style is so distracting, all three images were given the same hair styles, allowing the reader to observe facial rather than hair differences..although hair style is a very big part of Left/Right Brain Function..
 

It must be noted that in this example the ear and nose features are slightly distorted due to the face NOT positioned directly and evenly in front of the camera...so discount the ears and nose, if you can.

The Center Image, or NORMAL, has the left face mirrored over the right face, Right Image,

while the Left Image has both Right Faces, or the Left Brain.

Same as Above but this time All images have the same Hair Style
 
 

A simple glance at the 3 images of either of the 2 sets shows characteristics that appear to be RIGHT BRAIN DOMINANT...as the Right Images and "Normal" photos are almost identical....

This person, one may conclude, is a Right Brained Dominant individual...he prefers to play, compete, party, use his imagination, and is a very good and creative planner...in addition he has many other creative skills as well as hobbies. So we start with a parlor game.

One asks..Can I take a test to see if I am Left Or Right Brain Dominant....besides looking in the mirror..This is the second exercise.
 

Yes, there are simple tests if answered honestly that can point to a PREFERENCE of Left or Right Brain behavior.

This test is based on 4 modes of preferential thinking and behavior..it breaks people into 4 preferred styles:

1. the Thinker
2. the Intuitor
3. the Feeler
4. the Senser

How this was derived is another question and can readily be understood if the reader gets into papers by Mintzberg, Sperry or Drake.   It was all developed by Carl Jung in 1920, but not translated until 1974, the Intuitor, thinker, feeler and sensor in "Psychological Types".

Intuitors: Intuitors are individuals who look forward to the future with a global perspective. They  are good with concepts and often are able to relate diverse thoughts and ideas into meaningful wholes. Most  Intuitors display good innovative ability and skill at looking at "the big picture." Most planners are Intuitors.

Thinkers: Thinkers are characterized by a desire to relate to their environment by thinking things through. As a result, Thinkers usually develop good analytical skills. Since facts and data are the tools with which one thinks, most Thinkers focus on being precise and systematic in their approach to problems. Many accountants are Thinkers. While the Intuitor's time orientation is the future, the Thinker typically focuses on the entire spectrum. Thinkers want to know about the factors that lead up to a particular situation (historical background), what is happening now, and what the outcome will be.

Feelers: Feelers prefer to deal with situations according to their "feeling" perceptions; that is, they frequently respond with "gut reactions." Feelers are highly sociable and use empathy and understanding in their solutions to problems. Most of them are perceptive of others' needs and are able to discern what lies beneath the surface. Their time orientation is essentially toward the past. Many sales persons are Feelers.

Sensers: The Senser's time orientation is immediate, the here and now. As a result, most Sensers respond to things they can touch, see, and feel things of an immediate nature.  They tend to be action oriented and are often valued for their ability to get things done. Sensers are often found in production and high-pressure job situations.

These are the four Dominant behavioral styles...and we all have a bit of each..the interesting results occur when we find a strong association with one style versus another...and each style is as good as the other.  The trick is to understand what your preferences are vs some one you may be communicating with and to ensure the discussion is 2-way.   Carl Jung is worth mentioning again in this context. He came up with the notion of the SHADOW vs the PERSONA...so, HOW we answer this little test may be a reflection of how we WANT to be perceived, vs the Shadow, with is what we really may be.......so keep it in mind.

For example, another well known style is the PAC model (Parent-Adult-Child) where role playing between different levels AMONG PEERS can lead to poor, if any real communications.

The Test....
or
Analysis of Communication Style

Indicate below the order in which you feel each ending best describes you. In the space provided fill in the appropriate number (1, 2, 3, or 4), using 1 for the ending that best fits you, 2 for the next one that fits you, 3 for the next, and 4 for the ending that is least appropriate for you.

1. 1 am likely to impress others as.....

 a. practical and to the point................................................................................. a.______

 b. emotional and somewhat stimulating.................................................................b.______

 c. astute and logical.............................................................................................c.______

 d. intellectually oriented and somewhat complex....................................................d.______
 
 
 
 
 

2. When I work on a project, I.......

 a. want it to be stimulating and involve lively interaction
 with others........................................................................................................a.______

 b. concentrate to make sure it is systematically or logicaly
 developed.........................................................................................................b.______

 c. want to be sure it has a tangible "pay-out" that will justify
  my spending time and energy on it.....................................................................c.______

 d. am most concerned about whether it "breaks ground"
 or advances knowledge......................................................................................d.______
 
 

3. When I think about a job problem, I usually....

 a. think about concepts and relationships between events......................................a.______

 b. analyze what proceded it and what I plan next.................................................b.______

 c. remain open and responsive to my feelings about the matter.............................c.______

 d. concentrate on reality, on things as they are right now.....................................d.______
 

4. When confronted by others with a different point of view, I can usually make progress
by.....

 a. getting at least one or two specific commitments on which
 we can build later............................................................................................a.______

 b. trying to place myself in the "others' shoes."..................................................b.______

 c. keeping my composure and helping others to see things
 simply and logically.........................................................................................c.______

 d. relying on my basic ability to conceptual-ize and pull
 ideas together..................................................................................................d.______
 
 

5. In communicating with others, I may.......

 a. express unintended boredom with talk that is too detailed................................a.______

 b. convey impatience with those who express ideas that they
 have obviously not thought through carefully....................................................b.______

 c. show Iittle interest in thoughts and ideas that exhibit little
 or no originality.............................................................................................c.______

 d. tend to ignore those who talk about long-range implications
 and direct my attention to what needs to be done right now................................d.______
 
 
 
 
 

Analysis of Answers:

To obtain an approximate indication of your primary
communication style, enter below the number (1, 2, 3, or 4)
you wrote next to each ending:
 
 
 

Table of Results	Intuitor	Thinker	Feeler	Senser
Question 1	d.______	c.______	b.______	a.______
Question 2	d.______	b.______	a.______	c.______
Question 3	a.______	b.______	c.______	d.______
Question 4	d.______	c.______	b.______	a.______
Question 5	c.______	b.______	a.______	d.______
Totals	______	______	______	______

 

Now total each column. The column that has the smallest sum indicates your favored communication style; the column with the largest total is your least used style.
 

This article will be continued in our next issue. At that time we will discuss ways in which other styles can be diagnosed and how people can meaningfully tailor their presentations or communications in the style of those with whom they converse.

Your Personal Findings:

Here is the solution to the test...Having read the questions very carefully and answered them..

Go back to the results of the Test....add up the Total for Intuitor(I) and Feeler(F).... I+F=_______..This is the Right Brain Factor...R.
 

Add up the Total for Thinker(T) and Senser(S)....
T+S=_______..This is the Left Brain Factor....L.

If R/L is < 1, then You have a Right Brain Predominence...if not..You are like most folks and are Left Brain Dominant..

It has been argued that if you add up I+T, and F+S, if I+T is "somewhat" less than F+S, this person is less affected by his emotions during normal communications, as at work, home or play.

Have a Great Day!

Part II
 

The following section is a little parable from "Zen and the Art of MotorCycle Maintenance"

It Goes as Follows:

There was a passage  he had read and repeated to himself so many times it survives intact.

It begins:

"In the temple of science are many mansions and various indeed
are they that dwell therein and the motives that have led them there.

Many take to science out of a joyful sense of superior intellectual power;
science is their own special sport to which they look for vivid experience
and the satisfaction of ambition;

Many others are to be found in the temple who have offered the products
of their brains on this altar for purely utilitarian purposes.

Were an angel of the Lord to come and drive all the people belonging to
these two categories out of the temple, it would be noticeably emptier,
but there would still be some men of both present and past times left inside....

If the types we have just expelled were the only types there were, the temple
would never have existed any more than one can have a wood consisting
of nothing but creepers.

Those who have found favor with the angel . . . are somewhat odd,
uncommunicative, solitary fellows, really less like each other than the hosts of the rejected.

What has brought them to the temple. . . no single answer will cover:
escape from everyday life, with its painful crudity and hopeless dreariness,
from the fetters of one's own shifting desires. A finely tempered nature
longs to escape from his noisy cramped surroundings into the silence of the
high mountains where the eye ranges freely through the still pure air and fondly
traces out the restful contours apparently built for eternity."
 
 

The passage is from a 1918 speech by a young
German scientist named Albert Einstein.
 

The state of mind which enables a man to do work of this kind is akin to that of the religious worshipper or lover. The daily effort comes from no deliberate intention or program, but straight from the heart.

If Phaedrus had entered science for ambitious or utilitarian purposes it might never have occurred to him to ask questions about the nature of a scientific hypothesis as an entity in itself. But he did ask them, and was unsatisfied with the answers.

The formation of hypotheses is the most mysterious of all the categories of scientific  method. Where they come from, no one knows. A person is sitting somewhere  minding his own business, and suddenly-FLASH!-he understands something he didn't understand before. Until it's tested  the hypothesis isn't truth. For the tests aren't its source. Its source is somewhere else.

Einstein had said:

"Man tries to make for himself in the fashion that suits him best a simplified and intelligible Picture of the world. He then tries to some extent to substitute this cosmos of his for the world of experience, and thus to overcome it.... He makes this cosmos  and its construction the Pivot of his emotional life in order to find in this way the peace and serenity which he cannot  find in the narrow whirlpool of personal experience.... The supreme task . . . is to arrive at those universal elementary laws from which the cosmos can be, built up by pure deduction. There is no logical path to these laws; only intuition, resting on sympathetic understanding of experience, can reach them".

Intuition? Sympathy? Strange words for the origin of scientific knowledge.

A lesser scientist than Einstein might have said, "But scientific  knowledge  comes from nature. Nature provides the hypotheses".  But Einstein understood that nature does not. Nature provides only experimental data.

A lesser mind might then have said, "Well then, MAN provides the hypotheses."  But Einstein denied this too.
"Nobody," he said, "who has really gone into the matter will deny that in practice the world of phenomena uniquely determines the theoretical bridge between phenomena and their theoretical principles."

End of Zen....

The following Picture is a well established expanation of the human neural network and the five senses...It is a model, created by Roger Sperry that we should all be aware of as it explains a great deal about the way we see and hear things..
 
 

So the Right Brain is the Creative, Artistic Brain interconnected with the logical, linear Left Brain via the Corpus Collosum...a massive nerve bundle, which interestingly enough was severed by medical doctors during the '50s and '60s in an attempt to stop the violent symptoms of the epileptic attack.

So there is the first model of the Horizontal Brain...the Left and Right Hemispheres, interconnected with the Corpus Collosum...

Another Model, also based on the physical structure of the brain is the Vertical Model..

Consisting of 3 sections.

The Highest Level is the Neo-cortex....this we say separates us from the rest of the beasts.  Then there is the Lymbic System; this we share behavioural patterns with the rest of the mammals.  And last there is the R-Complex...R is for Reptilian...the root of our most primitive and rudimentary mental functions...

I think the partitions we learnt in school are very analogous...the Cerebrum, the Cerebellum and the Medulla Oblongata..

Half a Brain..You think I only use half my brain!!  Well, modern science lets us all know we only use about 5 percent of our brains..the rest is generally unused and sub-consious.

There are a few interesting examples of  people sufferring major brain damage or from heriditory reasons...very little brain mass.

The first modern case was the rail road worker in the 19th century who had a 7 foot (2 meter) rail lever...7 feet by 2 inches of steel..pointed at both ends, used to pry rails onto the rail ties..sprung through his mouth up through the right side of his head.  To the other workers surprise, he seemed quite normal except for the steel rod through his head..

A very common case was the German U Boat Commander..who explained 30 years after the incident, how shrapnel from exploding shells blasted right through his head..he seemed quite articulate...as the left hemisphere is the root of our speach centers, his right brain must have been badly damaged.

Then there are the lobotomies...not were just the corpus collosum severed, the entire one half of the brain was removed and replaced with saline fluid.  And then there is the very modern case of the 20 year old female pianist, who just didn't seam to be all there...this was in the UK, and after x-rays, the doctors found that her cerebrum in both hemispheres was not there...a closer look showed that her cerebrum consisted of the "peal" of an orange.  The rind was all she used...everything else was never there.

So it appears that we use very little of our higher brain functions, and in our culture, we don't really use the right hemisphere.  This is not the same as with some Asian cultures.

The Japanese, for example have a language  allocated to each hemisphere.  Kanji and Katakanga...one is very visually symbolic, the other more absract, like our Indo-Europeon languages...English, French, German, Norsk, etc..so if a Japanese has a stroke in one hemisphere, he does not loose his writing skills..he has one left.  Other cultures have only a right brained language as we will get to...the Hopi Indians, the Zuni, and Trovian Islanders, and to a large degree,  the North American Aboriginal peoples.  These people lack our Western Logical emfatuation with technology, and this shows in our Left Brain dominant schooling sytems.

Carl Sagan, in his book, The Dragons of Eden, had a few concerns about this topic.

From the Dragons of Eden...

"The array of possible courses of computer interactive learning is limited only by the ingenuity of the programmers, and that is a well that runs very deep.

Since our society is so profoundly influenced by science and technology, which the bulk of our citizens understand poorly or not at all, the widespread availability in both schools and homes of inexpensive interactive computer facilities could just possibly play an important role in the continuance of our civilization.

The only objection I have ever heard to the widespread use of pocket calculators and small computers is that, if introduced to children too early, they preempt the learning of arithmetic, trigonometry and other mathematical tasks that the machine is able to perform faster and more accurately than the student. This debate has occurred before.

In Plato's "Phaedrus", the same Socratic dialogue I referred to earlier for its metaphor of chariot, charioteer and two horses, there is a lovely myth about the god Thoth, the Egyptian equivalent of Prometheus. In the tongue of ancient Egypt, the phrase that designates written language means literally "The Speech of the Gods." Thoth is discussing his invention of writing with Thamus (also called Ammon), a god-king who rebukes him in these words:

"This discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth; they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be
tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without its reality."

I am sure there is some truth to Thamus' complaint. In our modern world, illiterates have a different sense of direction, a different sense of self-reliance, and a different sense of reality. But before the invention of writing, human knowledge was restricted to what one person or a small group could remember.  Occasionally, as with the Vedas and the two great epic poems of Homer, a substantial body of information could be pre-served.  But there were, so far as we know, few Homers. After the invention of writing, it was possible to collect, integrate and utilize the accumulated wisdom of all times and peoples; humans were no longer restricted to what they and their immediate acquaintances could remember.

Literacy gives us access to the greatest and most influential minds in history:
Socrates, say, or Newton have had audiences vastly larger than the total number of people either met in his whole lifetime. The repeated rendering of an oral tradition over many generations  inevitably leads to errors in transmission and the gradual loss of the original content, a degradation of information that occurs far more slowly with the successive reprinting of written accounts.

Books are readily stored. We can read them at our own pace without disturbing others. We can go back to the hard parts, or delight once again in the particularly enjoyable parts. They are mass-produced at relatively low cost. And reading itself is an amazing activity: You glance at a thin, flat object made from a tree, as you are doing at this moment, and the voice of the author begins to speak inside your head. (Hello!)

The improvement in human knowledge and survival potential following the invention of writing was immense. (There was also an improvement in self-reliance: It is possible to learn at least the rudiments of an art or a science from a book and not be dependent on the lucky accident that there is a nearby master craftsman to whom we may apprentice ourselves. )

When all is said and done, the invention of writing must be reckoned not only as a brilliant innovation but as a surpassing good for humanity. And assuming that we survive long enough to use their inventions wisely, I believe the same will be said of the modern Thoths and Prometheuses who are today devising computers and programs at the edge of machine intelligence. The next major structural development in human intelligence is likely to be a partnership between intelligent humans and intelligent machines."

Let's to go back to Thamus' Complaint to ellaborate and clarify several points already discussed in Zen and the Art.....Thamus worries that the people will be forgetful, yes, as well as not "remember of themselves".  The distinction made here is between Memory and Mind and we will return to this topic again.

In 1977, "Behaviour", in Time Magazine had a small inoccuous article you will all find interesting, as well as an amusing Parlour Game.  This reminds me when we all were laying in the sun with split ping pong balls over our eyes.  All one saw was flat white light.  There are 2 types of effects from this "sensory deprivation"..the first and most interesting is that of Consious hallucinations created by the Wake Brain.  In the wake state, the brain wants continuous visual stimulation, or it will go in a restful, relaxed or sleep state.  The other effect is that the brain will generate visual scenery on its own, in that waken state..these are hallucinations, more for fun, but to some desturbing...since these normally only occur in the dream state.

More of this later, but first,"The Eyes Have It"
 

A New Index of Personality (1977)

"John Dean is a one. A famous opera singer is a five. Manhattan Psychiatrist Herbert Spiegel, who invented the eye- roll scale in the first place, is in the mid-dle, between a two and a three.

To Spiegel, 63, a clinical professor at Columbia University's College of Physi-cians and Surgeons, measuring the eye roll is no mere cocktail-party game but "a pivotal clinical sign" of how susceptible a person is to being hypnotized. Even more surprising, he says it is also a rough index of some basic personality traits, including suggestibility and gullibility.

Spiegel's test:

Hold the head level and roll the eyes upward as far as possible.  Then, as the eyelids are lowered slowly have someone check the amount of white space that shows under the corneas. The greater the white space, the greater the capacity to be hypnotized.

Spiegel developed his curious theory in the early '60s, after noting that a woman filmed during a trancelike seizure showed an unusual ability to roll her eyes up and down, while an unhypnotizable male patient showed no eye roll at all. Since then, in his clinical work, he has tested the theory on some 5,000 adults.

His finding: the eye-roll scale accurately predicts hypnotizability 75% of the time.

Why the correlation? According to Spiegel, "Hypnosis is a capacity for attentive, receptive concentration that is inherent in a person.  Whatever it is in the brain that governs this capacity governs the degree of eye roll".

Spiegel has also found that eye roll is connected to personality. The low scorers ("zeros" and "ones") tend to stress thinking over feeling and are wary, critical folk who love to control people and implement plans. The highly hypnotizable "fours" and "fives" generally feel rather than think.

Though they can be very creative, they uncritically accept ideas, trends and leaders, and are strikingly childlike and gullible; in short, wide-eyed.

Spiegel knows that his theory will not be easily accepted. "I couldn't believe it at first myself," says the psychiatrist, who was trained as a neo-Freudian. "Now I've made a 180 degree turnaround. Today I believe that the major determination of who we are as people is pretty much decided when the sperm meets the egg."

In the mid 1970's, I was talking on many occasions with my immediate supervisor, "Fred" we'll call him.  In all these cases I was discussing Plans, concepts, and Ideas that required a fair amount of concentration, to say the least.  Well, Fred had a strange disorder;  every time these discussions would start, Fred's eyes would start to roll up...
and his head would fall back.  I kept on talking...you are getting sleepy....until I saw little sense in further discussion, as Fred was totally OUT like a light.  I think he was actually being hypnotized, put into another state that he reserves for sleep and dreams, as he never fell out of his chair.

The Bible for top corporations has long been Steiner's, TOP MANAGEMENT PLANNING.
 
 

The following is right out of the book.
 
 

Steiner, George A. Top Management Planning, MacMillan publishing co.
inc. New York, 1969, chapter 13, pp. 352 - 363.

3.0 SYNECTIC RELEVANCE

Few if any of the techniques discussed here are used as the sole method for making an important decision in planning. Furthermore, as the planning process proceeds, the combination of techniques to push an issue to decision will change.  The manager and his staff have a problem in deciding what the combination should be. This is of great importance not only because, in application, different techniques carry varying price tags, but also because the relevance of a technique changes among issues and over time. There is, therefore, a problem of synectic relevance.

Synectics is a neologism of a Greek term meaning the fitting together of different and apparently irrelevant elements. (Gordon, 1961 and Alexander,1965.) In the context the term is used here it refers to the combination of people and different techniques, including quantitative and nonquantitative, the mathematical, the hunches, the insights, and the guesses, to advance the decision-making process in planning. But, as noted above, it is essential in fitting these pieces together to make sure that only the techniques relevant to the problem and, indeed, only the relevant parts of each applicable technique are used. This technique is synectic relevance.

Unfortunately, it is not possible today to describe much better than has been done here the way in which this technique should be used. In this light it may be premature and inaccurate to speak of a science of business decision-making as some writers have done. "It is unphilosophical," said John Stuart Mill more than a century ago, "to construct a science out of a few of the agencies by which the phenomena are determined, and to leave the rest to the routine of practice or the sagacity of conjecture. We ought either not to pretend to scientific forms or we ought to study all the determining agencies equally, and endeavor, as far as can be done, to include all of them within the pale of the science; else we shall infallibly bestow a disproportionate attention upon those which our theory takes into account, while we misestimate the rest and probably underrate their  importance."

3.1 CREATIVITY

Among all the elements entering into planning and the making of plans there is not likely to be any argument about the fact that creativity is the most important.  Yet, surprisingly enough, very little has been done to examine what this means. Indeed, very few management textbooks even contain the word creativity in the index of subjects discussed, and those that do dispense with the subject in few words. Research on the subject has been growing in recent years but is still at a comparatively low scale of effort. Creativity, because of its great value in planning, should receive more than passing notice in any discussion of major techniques for better planning.

DEFINITION OF TERMS . Definitions in the literature on creativity reflect the focus of many different points of view. Our point of view, of course, is managerial and, therefore, is concerned with the relationship of creativity to the business of business. One simple definition of creativity from this point of view is "the ability to develop and implement new and better solutions." (Gary A. Steiner, 1966)  This definition includes the ability to go beyond the conventional patterns of thought and mold new and original thoughts into a plan of action. Notice two elements in this definition: the idea, and its implementation.
Ideas in themselves are not productively creative in business if not incorporated in a planned course of action. This is to say, creativity, in the sense of getting a new idea, is not enough in modern business. Most businesses have more ideas floating around than they can handle. The road from a valuable idea to final commercialization and profit is long and hazardous, and creativity can and must flourish throughout the entire journey.

In this sense, hunch or intuition are not the same as creativity, although they can stimulate and are often a part of the creative process. A hunch is a strong, intuitive impression that something will or can happen. It is a common sense form of predictability. Intuition is the power of knowing, or the knowledge obtained, without going through a process of formal reasoning or recourse to conscious inference. It is reason in a hurry. It is innate, instinctive knowledge.  Highly creative individuals in all fields have been found to be overwhelmingly intuitive. (Rowan, 1962).

Intuition is not quite the same thing as considered judgment or insight. Considered judgment differs from intuitive judgment in that the logic behind the opinion or conclusion is made explicit. An insight is a faculty for seeng into the inner character of a phenomenon, or apprehending the true nature of a thing, or discerning the underlying truth, by a penetrating mental vision, discernment, or intuitive understanding. All these, of course, are part of the creative process.

Innovation and invention are two other words closely associated with creativity. Indeed, they are words which describe part of the creative process. Invention is usually thought of as conceiving, devising, or originating something.  Innovation is considered to be more the process by which an invention or idea is translated into a plan of action. In the words of a government panel on  invention and innovation, "invention and innovation encompass the totality of processes by which new ideas are conceived, nurtured, developed and finally introduced into the economy as new products and processes; or into an organization to change its internal and external relationships; or into a society to provide for its social needs and to adapt itself to the world or the world to itself." (Department of Commerce, 1967)

In business, innovation is more often the outgrowth of recognition and adaptation than of a really new invention. Masaru Ibuka, president of Japan's highly successful Sony Corp., takes pride "in finding unnoticed utility value in others' inventions, seasoning them with original ideas of our own and making them into marketable products."

"The creative act in innovation," says Corson, "does not so much involve conceiving something that has no counterpart or antecedent but recognizing the possibility that a new process or concept can be applied to a particular situation."  (Corson, 1962) Once there is a recognition, the innovative process may involve "selling" the idea within a company and, when that is accomplished, it includes also all the managerial tasks needed to satisfy a market at a profit. This is the essence of entrepreneurship.

Peter Drucker (1965) emphasizes in his definition of entrepreneurship the finding and utilizing of opportunity. It is opportunity-focused rather than  problem-focused. An entrepreneur looks upon change as an opportunity, and the acceptance of  "the leadership of change" is the unique task of the entrepreneur. "The entrepreneur," Drucker says, "is the systematic risk-maker and risk-taker.  And he discharges this function by looking for and finding opportunity."

Creativity, then, may involve either technical or nontechnical matters. It is more to the latter that the connotations of innovation and entrepreneurship apply. It is quite possible for a company to be highly innovative and not inventive. It may have a strong marketing and engineering department that is able to take inventions made elsewhere, improve upon them, adapt them to a particular market, and by this combination make a profit. Du Pont has achieved high recognition as a company that invents things. Yet one study of new products introduced by that company between 1920 and 1949 showed that two-thirds were based on inventions made elsewhere. (Mueller, 1962.)

IMPORTANCE OF CREATIVITY . Creativity in the sense presented above is the prime requisite for success in business. Gardner (1962) says the only way to keep an organization alive is to let creative people bring change.  The organization that does everything by rule, that stifles creativity, is inflexible and on the road to oblivion.

We have already discussed the high importance of being creative and imaginative in the planning process. To reiterate, developing strategies for an enterprise  is a creative process of the greatest importance to a company. Their implementation provides a framework for creative activity which will produce products and services that have sufficient competitive edges to be profitable. Many firms have found that stimulating the creative instincts of their employees to cut costs, raise quality, and meet schedules, has been highly productive in increasing profits.  The innovative and entrepreneurial elements of creativity are the very essence of the vitality of the private enterprise system. The sharpening of intuitive judgment and insights in the men who manage corporations is a powerful companion to this quality. As Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, "A moment's insight is some times worth a lifetime of experience." It is difficult to exaggerate  the importance of creativity, and all that is implied in the concept, to the competitive excellence of a company and its ability to achieve the role which society sets for it as well as the aims it sets for itself.
 

THE CREATIVE INDIVIDUAL. At a research  seminar held at the Uni-versity of Chicago, the seminar director, Gary Steiner (1965,1966), found agreement among  a number of scholars and top managers about many of the intellectual and personality characteristics of the creative person.
 
 

They were as follows:
 
 

"Although measures of general  intelligence fail to predict creativity, highs typically outscore lows in tests of the following mental abilities:

"Conceptual Fluence. The ability to generate a large number of ideas rapidly: List tools beginning with the letter t; novel uses for a brick; possible consequences of a situation; categories into which the names of a thousand great men can be sorted, to name just a few of the tasks that have actually been used.

("Highs" and "lows" refer to high-creative and low-creative persons. These are relative, not absolute, designations, since in most of the samples studied even the "lows" would qualify as highly creative as compared with the population at large.)

"Conceptual Flexibility. The ability to shift gears, to discard one frame of reference  for another; the tendency to change approaches spontaneously.

"Originality. The ability and/or tendency to give unusual, atypical (therefore more probably new) answers to questions, responses to situations, interpretations of events.

"Preference for Complexity. Highs often exhibit a preference for the complex, and to them intriguing, as against the simple and easily understood.

"Several closely related personality characteristics distinguish highs and lows in a number of studics:

"Independence of Judgment. Highs are more apt to stick to their guns when they find themselves in disagreement with others. In a situation where an artificially induced group consensus contradicts the evidence of their own senses, lows more often yield in their expressed judgment. The same is true when the issue at stake is not a factual one, but involves voicing an opinion on an aesthetic, social, or political matter.

"Deviance. Highs see themselves as more different from their peers and, in fact, they appear to be more different in any number of significant as well as trivial characteristics. At the extreme, highs sometimes feel lonely and apart, with a sense of mission that isolates them, in their own minds, from average men with average concerns.

"Attitudes toward Authority. A related distinction with far-reaching implications for organizations has to do with the way authority is viewed. The difference between highs and lows is a matter of degree, but to make the point we describe the extremes.

"Lows are more apt to view authority as final and absolute; to offer  unquestioning obedience, allegiance, or belief (as the case may be), with respect approaching deference;  to accept present authority as 'given' and more or less permanent. Highs are more likely to think of authority as conventional or arbitrary,  contingent on continued and demonstrable superiority; to accept dependence on authority as a matter of expedience, rather than personal allegiance or moral obligation; to view present authority as temporary.

"Attitudes toward subordinates are related in the appropriate direction: those who pay unquestioned allegiance tend to expect it, and vice versa.

"Similarly, and in general, highs are more apt to separate source from content in their evaluation of communications, to judge and reach conclusions on the basis of the information itself. Lows are more prone to accept or reject, believe or disbelieve messages on the basis of their attitudes toward the sender.

"'Impulse Acceptance.' Highs are more willing to entertain and express personal whims and impulses; lows stick closer to 'realistic,' expected behavior. Highs pay more heed to inner voices, while lows suppress them in favor of external demands.

"So, for example, highs may introduce humor into situations where it is not called for and bring a better sense of humor to situations where it is. And, in general, highs exhibit a richer and more diverse 'fantasy life' on any number of clinical tests.

"Does the more creative man have more inner impulses or fewer inhibitions, or both, and to what degree? The answer is unknown, but there is at least one intriguing finding that suggests a strange combination of two normally opposing traits.

"In the genius and near-genius, a widely used personality test shows 'schizoid' tendencies (bizzarre, unusual, unrealistic thoughts and urges), coupled with great 'ego strength' (ability to control, channel, and manipulate reality effectively).  This line of inquiry begins to speak the cliche that the dividing line between madman and genius is a fine one. According to this finding, the line is fine, but firm.

"In sum, highly creative people are more likely than others to view authority as conventional rather than absolute; to make fewer black-and-white distinctions; to have a less dogmatic and more relativistic view of life; to show more independence of judgment and less conventionality and conformity, both intellectual and social; to be more willing to entertain, and sometimes express, their own 'irrational' impulses; to place a greater value on humor and in fact to have a better sense of humor; in short, to be somewhat freer and less rigidly?but not less effectively?controlled."

In his research seminar, Steiner found three characteristics of much interest to management that distinguish the creative problem solvers, the highs, as compared with the lows. First, they are more concerned with and responsive to the basic problem to be solved. They are more task-oriented, work harder and longer, and place higher value on "job interest" than on rewards such as salary and status. Second, they view themselves more as members of a profession than of a business firm. They tend more to seek acceptance from the larger professional community and rise within it, to feel freer to move around from company to company, and to be more cosmopolitan in orientation and aspiration. Highs change jobs to pursue their interests and do not change interests to pursue a job.  Third, highs spend more time in the initial phases of problem formulation. Lows are more likely to want to "get on with it."

These are tendencies. On the average, the highs exhibit more of these characteristics than do the lows. But, as Steiner points out, "that is far from saying that all highs have more of each than all lows." There are not very good measuring instruments to choose such people. If many of them are to be employed, some testing devices may increase the odds in favor of choosing the more creative person. But if few persons are to be chosen, and it is important that they all be highly creative (managers, as well as staff experts and scientists), it is doubtful that present testing methods will raise the odds above the currently used procedure of personal appraisal and judgment. Odds are probably raised by appraisal by a highly creative person. This is the application of the rule, "It takes one to know one."

THE CREATIVE PROCESS . A number of investigators have attempted to define the steps in the creative process. The results look much like the problem-solving steps set forth in Chapter 2. There are different sequences but generally they suggest the following: preparation; examining the problem, receiving ideas, and gathering data; accumulating hypotheses and alternatives; letting up, inviting illumination while thinking about other things; synthesis, that is, putting the pieces together, formulating the idea or ideas with clarity; and verification, or judging and testing the ideas by experiments, research, and other means.

A more descriptive sequence is that of Rokeach: "The creative process is that sequence of thinking leading to ideas or products which, sooner or later, will be regarded as novel and worthwhile because (a) it is an activity characterized by the capacity to distinguish, cognitively, information from source and to evaluate them separately on their own merits which, in turn (b) frees the person to be receptive to, acquire, integrate, and transform new beliefs into new belief systems which violate previously held beliefs and belief systems, (c) all such activity being driven and guided from beginning to end by tension states arising from significant questions put to oneself, significance being cognized as that which has implications or consequences for the ideas, products, feelings, and welfare of other human beings."

While these steps are useful they are more conceptual than operational. The creative process is rarely completed on a clearly delineated step-by-step procedure! It is more often characterized by long delays, quiescence, and then large, unpredictable leaps. The extreme example, of course, is the sudden great insight while shaving in the morning. This process is different from that which characterizes most problem-solving steps in modern businesses, such as those presented in Chapter 2, but both processes can and do operate simultaneously.

THE CREATIVE ORGANIZATION. Steiner has directly related the characteristics of creative individuals with those of creative organizations. The result is shown in Table 3-1. This compilation has many weaknesses and limitations, not the least of which is that it is not complete and the implications of each characteristic vary much depending upon many factors. Nevertheless, it is useful in pointing up some broad distinguishing characteristics of what a creative organization may look like.
 

WHAT SHOULD MANAGEMENT DO TO INCREASE CREATIVITY? If creativity is so important, and if it is possible to identify the elements of a creative organization, what should management do about it? As it turns out, this is not an easy question to answer. Part of the reason lies in the fact that a vast amount of research needs to be done about creativity in organizations before answers can be given with conviction. Furthermore, there are different requirements for creativity in organizations, and they involve different approaches and mixes with more conventional organization theory. There are, however, a few major steps, suggested by research and experience, which management should take to enhance creativity:

1. Top management should make sure that creativity exists at its own level. There is no substitute for a day-to-day example. Furthermore, to stimulate creativity in an organization requires the sort of attitude, posture, and decision that can be found only in a creative management.

2. A carefully designed planning program is essential. Such a program provides channels of communications that stimulate the flow of ideas, reduce communications blockages, and organize idea evaluation systems. A planning system can and should force creativity and innovation not only by its ability to sort out the right problem for analysis but by clarifying the points where creativity has the maximum payoff. Management can expect and, in a sense, command creativity and designate where in the planning process it should be directed.

3. Management in many ways can give encouragement to and stimulate creativity. A philosophy that stresses creativity, takes measures to encourage it, and expects it, is likely to get it. But, in return, many things need be done. If creativity has priority, the awards system should be geared  to, and commensurate  with, that priority. Those whose creativity is prized must not, as a result of their professional competence, be "penalized" by "promotion" into channels of advancement where their special expertise, and perhaps their type of creativity, might be lost. Rather, advancement and status should be provided within the area of creativity. The necessary accouterments of creativity must be provided and accepted, such as libraries, stimulation of outside contacts,  proper research assistance, some privacy, a certain amount of freedom, a receptivity to new and seemingly strange ideas, and a certain amount of permissive  management. There should be a willingness to organize in a flexible fashion and to make the organization opportunity-oriented. This means, for example, a willingness to abolish needless communications, to eliminate bottlenecks of inaction, or to change personalities to fit better the identification and exploitation of opportunities.

4. Developing methods to recruit creative managers and staff is a priority managerial  responsibility.

5. Top management should try to stimulate creativity through experimentation with such devices as the ad hoc team to resolve a problem, "brain storming," off-site conferences, hiring consultants for temporary idea stimulation, "opportunity meetings," and comparable techniques suitable to the occasion and the company.

6. Ways must be found to create a climate for the survival of potentially useful ideas. It is a paradox in industry that most companies have a plethora of ideas and yet there is continuous frustration about the fragility of good ideas. This paradox is largely explainable by the fact that, while there are plenty of ideas, the apparatus to get a proper hearing for them does not always exist. In a letter written in 1957 the late John Williams of RAND expressed another associated problem this way: "As a matter of fact, a new idea is an extremely perishable thing. Its author is likely to be, for a term, its sole supporter, after which it may have none. The normal reaction of most of us to a new idea is either to ignore it, or instantly to seek its defects. Since most new ideas are spurious including those produced by competent researchers working within their professional specialties, any critic can establish a wonderful batting average by just rejecting every new idea.  While I have no statistics on the subject, it is my impression that successful ideas often have this history: "they are advanced at least once unsuccessfully, and they finally bear fruit when the intellectual climate is so favorable that they are advanced a new practically simultaneously by several independent discoverers."

The climate in an organization must be made favorable to giving new ideas a fair and proper hearing without creating the necessity for the originator or its advocate to spend an unconscionable amount of time "selling" it. A certain amount of this is essential, but in some companies one such major effort is about all the energy a man can muster in his lifetime.

Here again, a planning system can be an invaluable instrument in fostering this climate. But much more is involved-organization, information systems, managerial attitudes, and the nature of people. While a climate and organization may be made more favorable to receiving and analyzing ideas, management can also reduce the infanticide of new ideas by training creative people to "sell" their ideas.
 

CONFLICT BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND PRODUCTIVITY. The requirements of an organization to maximize creativity will inevitably collide with organizational patterns needed to maximize productivity in current operations  in the sense of optimizing output per unit of input. Examination of the characteristics of a creative organization listed in Table 3-1 will reveal many potential points of conflict with the more traditional structure and rewards system of business organizations. For example, the apparent undisciplined disorder, casual inactivity, and individual independence which can foster creativity is very different from the discipline and control associated with the more routine business functioning of a mass production line. For any organization a desirable balance must be struck between the two. Where this balance lies is a matter for top management to decide. It is not a question easily answered, and once answered it continuously arises for answer again and again.

As organizations evolve, a different dilemma is faced, as stated by John Gardner (1962) in the following passage: "The new organization is loose in procedure, unclear in organizational lines, variable in policies. It is willing to experiment with a variety of ways to solve its problems. It is flexible and open to the lessons of current experience. It is not bowed by the weight of tradition. As it matures it develops settled policies and habitual modes of solving problems. In doing so it becomes more efficient, but also less flexible, less willing to look freshly at each day's experience. Its increasingly fixed routines and practices are congealed  in an elaborate body of written rules. In the final stage of  organizational senility there is a rule or precedent for everything."

LIMITATIONS OF CREATIVITY AS  A PLANNING TECHNIQUE.  A major limitation of creativity stems from its cost. The greater the creativity sought, and the greater the departure from present practice, the greater is the investment likely to be and the less the chance of a payoff. Financing creativity creates a decision problem comparable to but more difficult to solve than for most capital expenditures. One of the important reasons for the difficulty in coming to really convincing conclusions is the fact that too little is known about how creativity is really found at minimum cost, what reduces uncertainty about payoff, and how a creative organization best relates to traditional organizations.  The state of knowledge about such issues does not match their importance. It should be added that the importance of creativity in an organization differs among its parts. It certainly has the highest weight at top management levels, particularly in doing strategic planning. Its significance varies among functional groups, depending upon the function and nature of the company. It is, of course, extremely valuable in the research and development areas of an advanced  technology-oriented company. It is of high consequence in the marketing areas in a highly market-oriented company. It may be less important in some other functional departments. The problem for top management, of course, is to determine where it is important, and how important it is, and to nurture and interlace it with other parts of an enterprise so that the net effect is to enhance company vitality and profitability.......................................

Hi!....So we learn that MANAGEMENT is interested in creativity, original thinking, new idea, and opportunities.  The key word is INTERESTED...and that is where it ends.  In all the companies organizations or political structures I have communicated with, I have yet to see actual evidence of creative thinking applied to the real world.....Best Case......When a good idea or paper was given to manement, the IDEA or notion, was adopted in mind...sometimes the manager wiped out my name and put his on it, got promoted and moved on.
Worst case..One of my tasks in my work had been to manage all aspects of numerous reasearch items and projects in an associated R&D company. At year end the R&D company had to project a budget for the next year based on proposed research...But here was the problem! As researchers, the company was well staffed with intelligent and qualified engineers and PHDs..but no one could come up with the items for research!

So, many times over the years while I was doing research (1971 to 1998) I would spend workshops, usually from one to two days with the LAB staff  (It was an ongoing practice of mine in the "Planning Department" I was working in.) and writing out ideas, notions, opprtunities, issues, strategies, and so on as proposed R&D...for this work I was given very high compliments...said one old friend of mine in the R&D company, during one of these green light sessions, "You know Harry, They should pay you to come up with all these ideas"...At this point we go back to Thamus' Complaint about regarding the distinction between "Mind and Memory", as well as Steiner and Creativity.

Perhaps I suggest, We by nature do not like new things or new ideas as it teases parts of our mind we already created constructs within.  These new ideas, should, be put into the older constructs and where there is discontinuity, either linear or hollistic, as in a painting, the contructs need to be redefined.  I found this a valuable conscious process many years ago...while I was sitting back thinking about "Thinking".  It also became evident in structured companies or organizations, that there is no mechanism to "redefine the constructs".

The Organizational constructs are simple collective agreements of the constructs of the individuals who "work or manage" within the organization.  The more people, the lower the common denominator, or constructs....This applies very well to our social structures as well.  Combined with Division of labour, linear analytical thinking, and focused thinking we soon end up as a society "making laws for things we can do as well as for things we must not do", and we continue to write these laws down in larger and larger "books"..so we all obey the written word......as it is written, it shall be done.

Having said this, now try to understand the difficulties aboriginal people face within our CULTURE.  GOD, we are single minded and proud to be so, as anything different can not find a construct, or Paradim as it is called.

There are two very good books that study these issues, and are worth buying.  The first, and most entertaining is Adam Smith's "Powers of Mind", Random House, 1975.  The other is James Burke and Robert Ornstein's (my two favourite Entertainers),"The Axemakers Gift", Grosset/Putman, 1995.  I think Grosset is the "Canadiana" subsidized publisher for Putman books in Canada.  I'm not sure who was subsidized to print Encyclopeodia Britannica in Canada, but it was awful; Poor paper, page cutting and awful print quality; not even close to the originals printed in the USA.

Canada's Constructs make sense only to those who live and work in Ottawa.

James Burke is a great , almost notorious, Educator as well as entertainer.  His book and television series on "Connections" was the most startlingly and surprisingly entertaining TV series and book I had ever come upon.  His axiom for the Connections series comes from the British pursuit and analysis of "Happenings".

Ornstein is very well known for his work on the Left and Right Brain.

Happenings, an example being car accidents, can be looked at and understood given linear as well as simultaneous cause and effect occurrences.   "Look, the kid wouldn't have burned his hand if you had turned the burner off on the stove, you idiot!"  The other example is the mini-baby boom, 9 months after the 9th of November, 1965, in the US North East States, mainly New York, caused by a relay error at the Niagara "Sir Adam Beck" power station.

Happenings, are nothing less than isolated (There really aren't any!) incidents in our larger constructs that affect a lot of people, or get a lot of peoples' attention.  I think it is fair to suggest that "everything is related to everything else!"  The only problem is normal human beings can not spend a life time LEARNING about all the linkages.  They are too busy working, playing, and living descent lives.  Unless your mind is unhappy with Gestalt's finding...about irritating thoughts or memories, you wouldn't normally be interested....your brain wouldn't be  automatically coming to attention....like a mental erection, telling you to "think a little more"...it just doesn't happen.

Why?  That's what this paper is all about. I suggest an easy exercise. Think of an unpleasent incident that affected you. Write it down on the center of a large piece of paper (our flat world skills), and circle it.  Now, in a circle around it put down as many different "things" that you can think of that seem to be related in your best guess to this incident.......some seem independent of each other, some are related cause and effect things...it will be interesting what you find.

What would be really interesting is if all the "links" in our lives were in the visible light spectrum...talk about cobwebs....from the micro to the macro.  Then you would see.  And "Robinhood" is your distant cousin, right!

A Quick Overview of the two Brains...by D. Devenyi..1982
University of British Columbia.
 

"Many years from now, this century might be best known for splitting two of the most mysterious units of the universe: the atom and the human brain. By splitting the atom, man realized an incredible new source of natural energy. By splitting the human brain, he might have done no less.

If future historians attempt to pick a date for this "split brain" concept, October 9, 1981, might loom large. It was on that day that the Nobel Committee in Stockholm announced that Dr Roger Sperry has been awarded, together with two other researchers, the Nobel Prize.

It was well known for many years that the two brain hemispheres controlled different halves of our body. If you lift your left arm, it is the right hemisphere that gives the orders. Our whole left body side is controlled by the right hemisphere, and, conversely. Since the majority of people are right-handed, it seemed logical to conclude that the left hemisphere, the busiest one, was actually better developed.  It was thought to be the dominant one. The right hemisphere, having little capacity for higher mental function, was considered minor.

This belittling of the right hemisphere, while glorifying the left was an incredible oversight of history. Philosophers, artists, seers, have long suspected that life is a duality: art and science; left and right; yin and yang, and so on. It was always assumed that this duality came from different people. Artists were involved in art, and scientists in science, and the two had little to do with each other. At times, in fact, they were in direct opposition. Only some 20 years ago, C P Snow still despaired over this antagonistic position of what he called "the two cultures".

Then came Dr. Sperry. Like everyone else, he did not think much of the right hemisphere. All he knew was that the two hemispheres, even if not equally important, had very good connections. Millions of nerve fibres assured an absolute certainty that there was communication.

If one hemisphere was not so important, why was there such an excess of nerve fibres to assure communication? He started to operate on laboratory animals, to cut these "telephone wires" between the two brain halves. What would an animal lose if he lost this internal communication? Not much. The "single-minded" rats have been able to learn and do things much the same as before.

Next Dr Sperry studied epileptics, in whose brains the "seizure" occurs on one side. If you cut the communication, the other side of the brain might not know about the seizure and could carry on as if nothing had happened. Dr Sperry and his colleagues now started to operate on epileptics and to cure them from their misery. Sure enough, the lack of communication, in many cases, helped the undamaged brain to carry on.

But something happened. The human being, possessing a more highly developed brain than the animals, did lose some capacities. And, even more interestingly, depending on which half was damaged, the loss was very different. Clearly, the two halves of the human brain performed different functions.

This lateralization, or distribution of functions in the brain, turned out to be one of the key factors raising man above the animals.

The two brains process different information in different ways. Verbal processes, logic, science, mathematics, time orientation, and step-by-step procedures are processed in the left. Art, space orientation, music, images, intuition, instincts and simultaneous perceptions are processed in the right side.

The last 10-15 years has seen a tremendous rush of research seeking to discover more and more about this duality of our brain. One experimenter measured the brain's activity when reading technical texts. He found the left brain to be active and the right idle. However, reading poetry or fine literature which challenges the imagination, the right hemisphere is "turned on" also. If you see a friend, his name comes from your left hemisphere, but his image was stored in your right hemisphere. You have to put both together to recognize him.

I started teaching creative photography at The University of British Columbia in 1968. In those days, I had to give my word of honour to my students, who came from all walks of life, that they could learn to be better photographers. Many would doubt this, saying, "I have no talent for pictures."

Today, all I have to do is to explain that this talent is there, built into the right hemisphere. Until now, he might not have been lucky enough in his life to develop it. Indeed our ordinary daily lives give little encouragement for the development of the creative right hemisphere. In reality our life is still dominated by the left hemisphere, even though now we know that the potential for a more balanced development is clearly there.

A whole new movement is sweeping the country to re-adjust the dominan/minor concept which, even today, is so typical. There is a desire for a 50/50 development of the two hemispheres.

Much will have to change to achieve this. But only by realizing this can each human being live up to his or her full potential. One of the major changes that will have to come is in the educational system.

This is what Dr Sperry wrote:

"Our educational systems are geared almost totally to the development of the left hemisphere missing what may be tremendous untapped potentials of the right hemisphere. Our educational system and modern society generally discriminate against one whole half of the brain. "

The educational establishment has already started to accept this. There is an international organization called The Visual Literacy Group which consists mostly of teachers and visual artists. They will have their conference in Vancouver, BC, during the fall of 1982.

People say that "necessity is the mother of invention". I would like to change that to be more correct: "Abstract thinking is the mother of all invention."

Recently, I met the greatest living Hungarian poet, Gyogy Faludy. I asked him about his creative process. How are poems born? "I see a picture first, and the poem flows after," he said.

Then he went on to describe an evening he spent with Einstein, Leo Szilard and some other scientists. A student asked Einstein how he discovered the theory of relativity. One of Einstein's assistants quickly replied, "of course, the Professor has solved the mathematical equations." Einstein interrupted, "Oh, no! It was the idea that came first. Then I did the calculations."

In all kinds of creative work, the idea comes first.

When I looked up the origin of the word "idea", I found an incredible proof of the wisdom built into our language. The word "idea" comes from the old Greek "[idea]" and means "to see" or "to behold".

The creative process in its primary archetype form is always visual.

I have tried to collect words that relate to our five senses.  For the eye, I found close to 300 expressions such as insight, point of view, eyewitnesses, etc, whereas I could find no more than a dozen for any of the four other senses.

In a sense, we are witnessing the beginnings of what I would like to call a "new humanism" movement. The humanism of the Renaissance helped to introduce the new concept of the individual. At that time, the importance of every human life was a revolutionary concept. Now, we are becoming aware that, hidden in the brain, this individual has potentials he has hardly used yet. Every person has the potential, and hopefully the right to satisfy his "growth needs", as Abraham Maslow suggested.

This "new humanism" is the shift of the masses from being a consumer of art to becoming a creator of art as well.

This is a momentous turn in history. Until now, the mere survival process occupied the time and energy of most people. Little time and energy was left for greater potentials to be developed. In fact, many thinkers were of the opinion that the masses did not have such a potential. Dr Roger Sperry's discovery forever changed that.

In 1974, I visited Dr Sperry at the California Institute of Technology. At one point in our discussion, we expressed concern at the generally undeveloped state of the visual right hemisphere. I suggested that perhaps photography, an obviously visual process, might be the stimulus that could prove to be effective in the task of developing it. Dr Sperry agreed that the potential is there.

Much has happened since to prove this hypothesis.  Today, photography is part of the educational system in many schools. It is the major event in psychotherapy as it opens up a new avenue to the inner world of the patient. It is a tool that permits people in all walks of life to develop their creative self. By not requiring the drafting skill of a painter to manufacture an image, photography, with every push of the button, releases the creative energy of the person.  Photography is the democratization of creativity.

Mankind started out on this journey with visual superiority. Being able to see colour (unlike other animals) our ape-like ancestors had a clear advantage. Drawing images in the caves led to abstract thinking and to the concept of writing. Images have always played a crucial role in the development of mankind. It is estimated that 90% of what we know comes to us through our eyes.

The visual creative process raised mankind above the ape-like being. Artists and scientists, in their separate creative activities, have brought us to a level where what was done for mankind can now be done for each individual to help him realize his higher potential.

The Nobel Prize was also won by two other researchers, Drs Hubel and Wiesel of Harvard. Their research discovered the mechanism through which the eyes transfer the image from the retina to the brain.

This triple recognition of the visual process, of the new potential each and everyone of us carry, must be a milestone in human history. Clearly, the "eyes" have it. We will never be the same again".

So, blame it on your ancestors for being born.  Educators have been enlightened but continue to do the "Best They Can..." Denes Devenyi has put together a good summary in 1982...However, by 1992, Corporations restructured to work within "well defined processes".....the death of Creativity.

Within the next few years, (wrt the telecommunications industry, computer communications industry as well as the multitude of entrepreneurs are investing in Creative opportunities unfolding in the large and growing area of e-Commerce.....we do things in cycles...) there will be a major slowdown until the Western Economy can be rationalized. Investors beware...the constructs or Paradim need to be socialized....to settle in.
 

If it isn't clear yet, all these different segments are starting to fill up a set of arguments, or theories for practical use and enlightenment. In the next session we will go back to the mid '70s and see how Transcendental Meditation (TM) fits into these models of the Brain.

This paper will then digress into Left Brain Right Brain and the Educational Systems. But first, TM~1975.

TM simply stands for Transcendental Meditation. It is a practice that is as human and natural as it is scientifically justified. The practice is closely related to the mental and physical health of human beings.   TM is not a religious practice.

Before we discuss meditation proper, I would like to review some discoveries in brain research, quite apart from TM.

One of the higher achievements of the cooperation between the medical scientists and engineers is a machine called the Electroencephalograph or EEG. This is a device that will measure, in microvolts, through electrodes placed on the human skull the electric brain activities. Researchers have made numerous measurements of different subjects in widely different conditions and found that certain typical conditions of awareness can be associated with typical brain waves.

From these observations four modes of brain waves emerged. These patterns come and go depending on the internal or external stimuli one is exposed to.

The four known states of the human brain and their related frequencies are:
 
 

Delta brain waves: These are the slowest the "laziest." They range between 0 to 4 Hertz (numbers of cycles per second). They are present in the state of dreamless, deep sleep. Sometimes irregular.

Theta brain waves: 4-8 cycles per second. Characterise the dreamy phases of sleep and transitional period such as drowsiness. Interestingly they are also present when the subject is involved in creativity. (Some of the most creative inventions and insights in the history of mankind were actually first developed or found while the inventor was asleep and had an intensive dream. The language shows this possibility when we say about someone's invention: something he "dreamed up.")

Alpha brain waves: This is part of our alert and awake condition. High voltage rythmic waves. The range varies with the different authors. Most frequently it is put to be between 8 to 13 cycles per second. (Some others restrict it to 9 to 12 or 8 to 12.) They represent an alert, relaxed mental state. Lack of inner tension is characteristic of alpha waves.

Beta brain waves: Again these are present in a wakening condition, but low voltage rythmic waves. They are the fastest waves from 13 to 26 cycles per second and even more in special cases, such as schizophrenia and some other mental disorders. Beta waves characterise mental concentration, orientation, agitation, tension, anxiety. It is a very typical day to day condition resulting from the normal stresses and stimulations of everyday life. It is highly aware, highly responsive state. The brain is in a high gear. The brain is adapting to the conditions, concentrates itself, solves problems, operates under tension and in hurried condition. Increasing frequency could also be a sign of accumulation of the stress leading to problems of the brain and possibly of the body.

It is a pulsating flow that surges through the brain cells, billions of tiny electrical pulses, as they do their complex chores. When awake, the electrical voltage is normally low, irregular, changing quickly. This is normally the fastest Beta wave condition. The frequency therefore is high, the amplitude is low. Under stressful or excited conditions both tend to get higher.

In normal persons, under normal conditions the four states alternate and coexist in a continuous flow and also different sections of the brain can have different frequencies at the same time?all depending on the internal and external stimuli.

Should conditions become specific, then one of these wave conditions becomes dominent for the period of influence.  This adjustment and selection of the brain wave response is natural self regulated and specific for each individual?in response to or give stimulus. If you sleep you tend to have Delta waves in dominance, if you get in stressful conditions the Beta waves will dominate.

There are methods to regulate the brain activities and to induce the most interesting and beneficial of all of these conditions: the alpha wave.  This is TM and stimulates production of the alpha state of consciousness. This state is characterized by a peculiar state of wakefulness, in which the person is totally aware of the environment yet at the same time he is in deep rest, relaxed yet extremely sensitive, alert, a state without the pain and disturbing stresses. Everyone experiences this state from time to time but until now it was a haphazard, unplanned and delicate state over which individuals had little control. It came and went unexpected at best, unnoticed at worst. Alpha waves then are clearly the indicators of a very special, highly desirable and pleasant condition. To achieve such a desirable condition ways have to be found to assure and boost the presence of alpha waves as well as to increase their amplitude.

Our concern here is meditation to achieve the alpha conditions.

Measurements on yogis, zen practitioners etc., have shown that they can triple the intensity of alpha waves in their brain. But often such techniques take a long time, esoteric practices and present problems to an average  western man living a full life in the western sense. In addition zen monks show strong alpha waves in all lobes of the brain, but others normally develop it only in one lobe.

What then is TM?

TM is a natural process merely allowing the central nervous system to do what it in fact wants to do: to get into a stressfree or reduced stress condition, towards a deep rest. This is a normal, natural process and everyone of us is in fact doing it at one time or another. The presence of that state is characteristically demonstrated with the extended presence and high amplitude of alpha waves.
 

The meditator sits for 20 minutes with closed eyes. He has a "mantra", for example, banana, he will repeat in his mind, not with sound. One is always totally aware of the environment. Every little noise, etc., will be perceived by the meditator, because he is in fact wide awake. But the generation of alpha waves, deep relaxation and other related physiological changes are still occurring.Besides the higher generation of alpha waves, a number of other clear measurements of a desirable, stress-free physiological and psychological condition being achieved or promoted through TM.

Here are some of the measurements as described in the Scientific American (February 1972 issue):

Oxygen Consumption and the Metabolic rate: There is about 16% reduction during meditation of oxygen intake. This indicates a state of rest. The burning process slows down. The cells require less energy as it is an effortless state. The demands on the system slow down allowing it to rest.

Breath Rate: The breath per minute ratio goes down since you do not need so much air in a restful state (when excited or anxious we breathe heavily and frequently.

Heart Workload: As much as 30% reduction in cardiac output is achieved during Transcendental Meditation. Obviously less wear and tear for the heart (if we are anxious the heart rate goes up.)

Lactate in Blood (Poison): Many studies have shown that a sign of fatigue, exhaustion, tenseness, anxiety, neurosis is the high level of lactate. During meditation there is a marked drop in this level. In addition tests show that even after the 20 minutes, the lactate level will remain low for some time slowing down the stress build up during the daily wear and tear. High blood pressure and anxiety attacks could thus be reduced.

Change in Brain Wave Pattern: During Transcendental Meditation there is an increase of 8-9 cycles per second pulses in both hemispheres of our brain in the frontal areas. In addition, from time to time, slower, theta waves appear to (5-7 cycles per second). These waves are clearly emerging and are synchronized with the alpha waves. As described earlier, theta waves are related to creativity. Thus in some individuals in some cases an increase in creative ability can be identified.

Improved Synchronity of Brain waves and Consistance of Amplitudes: In a normal wakeful condition the brain waves are not always synchronized, nor constant amplitude, not orderly and are generally mixed and highly unstable and volatile.  This distinguished wakeful period could be described as "profound wakefulness" "pure awareness." These descriptions try to suggest that in these periods one is more aware of both the internal and extertense landscape, when we can penetrate below the surface of things, when we gain an insight into the process rather than merely the end results. We discussed (March 1975) the different functions and operation of the two hemispheres of the human brain. TM has been proven to bring synchronity between the two hemis-pheres hereby leading to a better integration of the functioning.

According to medical research 50 per cent and even as much as 80% of all illnesses are psychosomatic. This being so it is a fair expectation that stress and tension reduced, many of these ailments will be reduced or eliminated.

Creativity, clear thinking, quick understanding have also been observed as an effect. (Artists. musicians and athletes are normally high alpha people.)

In meditation one becomes much more aware of one's body. You automatically pay more attention to what is happening, where are the stresses accumulating etc. By feeling the buildup you could try to eliminate the cause, you can prevent the breakdown or the buildup of stress.

The Illinois House of Representatives passed a resolution in May 1972 recommending it. Famous people like Buckminster Fuller, Joe Namath, Actor Clint Eastwood are regularly stopping for 20 minutes, twice a day, in a quiet place to meditate.

Stress is one of our major problems.TM is one of the major solutions.

Now, before getting into Inductive vs Deductive Reasoning, Macro vs Micro Economics, Synective Relevence,  more detailed work of Henry Mintzberg, more Harvard Business review theses, and finally the aggragation of the models of the Thinking Mind, in the late 1970's...an educator named Bob Samples tried to put a full Left and Right Brain Spectrum in the educational Curricula of various school levels.

Samples tried to integrate linear logical development with holistic visual education.  It is somewhat abstract, but interesting.

A Transcript of Bob Samples talking to some
Educators - Channel 9, November 1976, 6:30 - 7:00 PM

---- I should say the right side of my body is governed by the left side of my brain and the left side of my body is governed by the right side of my brain. So we literally have a cross over thing.

And that way of knowing, just allow me to do this let's say that I'm doing this so its facing you, that this is the left hand and this is the right cerebral hemisphere; this is the right hand and this is the left cerebral hemisphere.
As it turns out that the left cerebral hemisphere is essentially the rational mind; logical, linear and sequential. I'm leaving a lot out; as you well know this list can go on for about 24, 30, or maybe 40 descriptors, that appears in the literature of psychology and of education.

But essentially the left cerebral hemisphere is the rational logical sequential mind and the kind of thing that we'll be dealing with in this particular place is that when you have damage to the left hemisphere you don't do these things well. And the primary media for these are: reading, writing and arithmetic.

Now again, I'm not --; all I'm saying is that's the way it is, not anything about the way it should be.

And essentially in terms of our cultural heritage we happen to come from a culture that puts a great deal of priority on these; has a very high set of values on these. Again, this is not to say that's the way it should or should not be, but that's the way it is.

Now coming to the right cerebral hemisphere we get a different array of ways of knowing and these are what I call the metaphoric functions.

Intuitive, hollistic is getting to be a popular word; "spacial", and I'll put that in quotes. The sort of thing that I want to do at this point then is to share with you some of the constraints that we as educators have had essentially imposed upon us by a variety of people who have been thinking about knowing.

(According to Bob one of the most influential theories about child development belongs to the noted Swiss biologist, philosopher and psychologist, Jean Piaget.

Piaget contends that as a child grows his or her perception of reality becomes more logical. There are four steps on this intellectual ladder.  Step one is the sensory motor period. This is when the child learns to master the realm of physical reality and permanent objects. Step two, the pre-operational stage occurs at the pre-school age when children develop symbolic language and imaginative forms of play. Step three is the concrete operations stage; here children learn to add, substract and think according to abstract rules. Finally, during adolescence, children learn to evaluate differing hypotheses and generate multiple possible solutions to complex problems. This Piaget calls the highest stage, the stage of formal operations).

I am a Piagetian; I'm a very strong fan of Piaget, but I'm also just as interested in what Piaget leaves out of the System as I'm with what Piaget leaves in.

We're dealing with the development of a child essentially from conception or from birth; depending on what point you want to start.  We're dealing with a child who goes through this developmental sequence and by the time they get up here they're a different age
than they were down here. So that's what gives it this kind of arrow like quality of thinking; and by the way developmental sequences are just absolutely cherished by people in Western Technological cultures. They just love things that have a beginning and an end and change along the way.

And so as a result this has become in fact over accepted. And at this point people examine children and they examine them in a very specialized way to find out what it is that they are doing and how they're learning and how they're knowing. And the conclusion that an awful lot of people come to is that they don't know much; because it's so darn hard to talk to a two month old child. They hardly give you anything back that seems to make very much sense.

So what happens there is that we've got a built-in bias; the bias of the observer.

Now, what I'm getting at is essentially that an awful lot of school materials are currently being made whether explicitly to this developmental sequence they are being made passively to this sequence.

Well, what I'm saying is that essentially this is a value statement.  If I see any developmental sequence I must filter through my own perception as a researcher or as an observer those qualities of You that I will choose to use. And, therefore, that end in itself is a value statement.

So the kind of thing that I do then is that I look at you, your developmental stages, then I check you out after, by using language and we're finding for instance that language, English language particularly, is awesomely biased toward logical and linear thought. For instance a lot of people are really upset when a person comes in or says "Red apple orange violet sunset green" and then sits there waiting for an answer.  They say "aha, schizophrenic; send him up to Gregory Batesan!!" You know.

Some kind of a thing, we're going to quickly do something to this kind of person because, well strangely enough their culture's on a planet that talk to each other, that communicate with each other that way. Because it is their way.

The Trovian Islanders speak essentially in randomized language which drives anthropologists up a wall; usually it's an ivy covered wall, but non the less they go up the wall.

Well, the sort of thing that I'm getting at here is that even the language can carry that bias. So when I'm speaking to a Navajo class and they want to do sorts of things and I do my simple teaching technique I can't say "O.K., I want to show you this demonstration, Oom pa pa", whatever it was, and I say "What do you think happened? Well, this student would then answer and say "well it looked like you oom oom oom pow", and I say "that's really good; what do you think?" As I would turn to this child her response would be "(silence)". And then I would turn to that child "(silence)", and that one, and pretty soon I'd feel as though that something was wrong with the Navajo kids --- because I'm a nice guy.

And what's really wrong with those kids is that they haven't built within their own value context the legitimacy for asking questions, first; and secondly they do not have the legitimacy for competing with their brothers. When I ask this student something, this student refused to answer because she would be forced to compete with her brother and she will not do that! Because whatever she says is to judge her brother, and that is not her role, nor is it his role.

(Bob feels that our technological rationalistic value system leads school boards and administrators to make curriculum decisions in favor of subjects encouraging linear modes of thinking).

These kinds of things are passively excluded, not systematically excluded. There isn't a school administrator, I think, that wants to cut art, that wants to cut movement, that wants to cut certain kinds of, of body use, pieces of activity from the curriculum. But the point is when the budget crunch comes, very often it's logical to cut those because of things that are more logical are things we must retain. So I'm saying again, it's not like anybody declaring war on creativity although creativity has never been popular.

One of the things that cultures need to sustain themselves is status quo; they need continuity and the one thing that creativity tends to modify is this continuity; all of these. So, the sort of thing that I've done is, I've taken and created a series of modes of knowing here that can be operative at any of these levels that simply tend to, ah what's the word that I could use best, validate, although that isn't right; legitimize. Use it that way - - tend to legitimize these kinds of things because we've found that when people tend to experience  all of these modes the mode over here tends to be improved.

Now, I'm interested in improving the 3 R's too, I have a very strong feeling positively towards open school and alternate kinds of settings and experiences but I'm also a person who believes that a person, is, has not been treated well by the culture if they tend not to have access  to the 3 R's. So my interest at going at this thing was to try to make the 3 R's work better. And the sorts of things that we found in just an awesome number of instances is they do!

Now, this symbolic mode has two components of action that are very common to us in school everyday and this is the abstract and the visual mode. It may sound rather like a simple sort of differentiation except that literally at the very root of differentiating between these we may find some way of dealing with dyslexia, with a great deal more success. Here's how it works.

In the abstract mode what we're dealing with is that anything, (everything's got a visual mode) I mean if I put a mark on the board there's a visual component to it but if you see it in the, in its abstract qualities you'll see that as 1, rather than as a line on the board. In terms of ahah, I'll use the Japanese language because there is a series of ah, of phonetic systems that have emerged  in term of symbols that are phonetic rather than idiograph or pictograph that have emerged since the Japanese have developed a technological culture.
 
 

So we may have something like this and I'm just going to put some symbols down here and ah, like that, so that this would be a phonetic word and you'd have to sound out essentially the phonetic parts, the sound parts of it because each of these stand as an abstraction for a sound. So after you've said all these it would make sense. So that when you looked at this you'd have to understand its code; you'd have to understand how it was coded. 0.K., so this is essentially this one.

Another alphabet classic to Japan, China and other places has to do with, what you're dealing with there is, essentially a portrait of a concept. And there's no logical way to figure this concept out. You simply have to know it. You have to know its visual context.
This means horse. This would mean something else and it would have to come out this way.

Well, what I'm getting at is essentially this is the symbolic/abstract mode. This is the symbolic/visual mode. Japanese people never become dyslectic in this alphabet; only this one. so dyslexia turns out to be a system of non-compatibility and non functions with logic.

So what we're dealing here then, just by separating this mode out, what I'm getting at, is if we're trying to teach reading, writing, arithmetic and using only the symbolic/abstract things we find there's a whole bunch of learning disabled kids emerging; then quickly, the thing to do if we want to continue with this is switch and give equal time to the symbolic/visual. And that's just one little thing. That costs no money at all. You intend not have to buy a whole new curriculum and tend not have to buy a whole new text book series. You have to buy nothing really to try to put these different modes into effect. So I'll go across here and do these quickly.

So the abstract, the symbolic/abstract, the symbolic/visual is very important in certain ways of sight recognition of concepts. Moving over to the synergic/comparative. This one, it sounds like "oh gosh you can tell this person's background has been in the sciences because they keep using those queer words. Well, synergy is becoming a very popular word. I like to tease folks and say it's the first word that Buckminster Fuller every learned. His mother must have leaned over the crib and said "Synergy Bucky" and he responded in the way he did. You know, and here we have the geodesic dome. But the notion is that what we did in 1968, I had a lot of Federal money, and we did an analysis of standardized tests and one of the things that we found is that one of the more important items that tend to appear over and over again on tests are comparative words; comparative kinds of things.

And we found that for instance if we put 2 things up here like this and said "would you please compare those 2". Now what was meant was to separate them so that they're distinctly different, label, them, box them, and contain them, and make them eternally separate. So the idea was essentially "what are the differences between", rather than "how are they the same?"  In synergic/comparative thought we start the same way but then we start doing this, and end up with a transformation that may be some-thing like this. You know, we don't know. What I'm getting at is that suppose these were yellow and blue and we said, you know, compare those. Well in synergic/comparison you'd end up with green. Up here you'd end up with blue and yellow, separated, boxed, written down white, yellow, y, e, 1, 1, o, w; b, 1, u, e, the number of angstroms of the warelengths and all good things that tend to isolate these.

It's this kind of thinking that tends to create most of the prejudices in our culture; sexism, adultism, and racism. It's this mode of analytic comparative thought.

And the kind of thing that I'm talking about here then is essentially using the synergic/comparative mode as we approach any concepts that you have in any curriculum guide in any district in the country.

Moving on quickly here, the Integrative mode is essentially anytime your body is used in the exploration of a concept, a process, or a principle. You'll recall when we started out a while ago you were using a part of your body to get at a metaphor for the history of
Western Technological thought. When we're dealing with kids down here in the pre-operational and sensory motor, very often we use the body a lot for exploration of concepts; you dance out gravity, try to figure a way to express freedom, try to do these kind of things with one's body. This sort of thing takes place.

In the inventive mode what we're really dealing with at that point is anytime that you personally, this is a personal level of invention, not a cultural level, at a personal level think something or do something or know something that you didn't know before and you know you never did before. Now each of these kinds of things tend to be discredited by the people in our culture. For instance, one child that I saw, it was in the third grade, it had already been fairly well conditioned to not do things new, had been given by the teacher an assignment to work with coloured paint. She worked it with Blue paint and Yellow paint and with the grace of a Third grader, you know what happened, they mixed, and the child's response was to cover up the paper. And I came over and asked what the issue was and she said, "I broke it."

So, already the notion that this was not ---. You shouldn't have a new outcome of two things that already have identity. 2+2 must always equal 4, unless you're trying to define synergy. If you're trying to define synergy then 2+2=5 is a very good definition of synergy. In fact, it's one that a lot of people tend to understand much better than other definitions of synergy. So the inventive mode goes here.

Now very quickly, what we did is we started looking at the sensory motor level and each of these levels and all the way up to the formal operational  level and saw which ones were legitimate. We couldn't do much with this one, sensory motor, and symbolic/abstract because we couldn't communicate because we're symbolically abstract. We couldn't communicate with the kids; we're learning more about how to do this. But in terms of visual sensory motor, lots and lots of action there. In terms of synergic comparative, lots of it there because the child is effectively inventing their perception of the Universe; you know, the sensory motor days. Integrative body use, are you kidding; man they just love all kinds of body use as many of you know. Inventive, again they're doing the same sort of ----------

visual, capacity to be synergic comparative; capacity to be integrative and explore body use; capacity to be inventive. All of these capacities are there. Then what we do ---

(Now for Bob's discouraging discovery. As he travelled around the country to look at school systems, teaching methods, and curriculum decisions he found that very little is being done to train or test ,the metaphoric capacities of students of any age).

--- standardized tests say "what is the difference between", or they say "which of the things in this series does not belong"; "In which figure is there a mistake?" It's a reductive kind of an approach instead of a unifying one. Body use? No, we want them to sit still and pay attention. Inventive? No! If they start inventing things then how in the heck am I going to teach them that F=ma.

So what we're dealing with is essentially that when we're, when we're working with kids in the school context we're dealing primarily with people who by virtue of their experience in the culture are probably here, although when you test them and do a variety of things that Piaget shows us how to do you can find that a lot of people are operating at this level in the public school setting.

(We asked Bob to relate Piaget's theory to questions of values and morals. He suggested that Harward professor, Lawrence Colburg, originator of the moral development movement, has based his entire theory of moral growth on Piaget's model).

The same passive bias towards Western Technological thought that's in Piaget's model is in Colburg's model as well. The difference is that Colburg actually becomes a little bit more excited and in fact a little bit more adament at the integrity of this kind of thing because for instance he says at his higher stages of moral development you simply cannot do that unless you function up here.

Now the flaw in that is a very simple one. I will go back to my friends, the Navajo, and the Hopi and the Zuni. There are many many other cultures on the planet that I could go to as well. But the Navajo, the Hopi and the Zuni do not have written languages. They do not have a symbolic/abstract form of their own method of speaking. As a result, they have a cultural exclusion of practicing symbolic/abstract and formal operations thought. And so when we give tests to Navejo, Hopi and Zuni for that kind of way of knowing they tend not to score well. So what happens is if we do these kinds of tests we find out that very few Native American people score highly in formal operations function.

Colburg then says, you cannot be morally functional unless you're at the Formal operations stage of Piaget. That is simply a chauvanistic, biased statement.

It is not that, essentially that, Colburg is doing anything but being a good spokesperson for our Western Technological way of thinking. Piaget provided the construct in terms of intellect, Colburg adopted it to use it in terms of moral development and both of them are caught up inextricably  in the network and the threads and fibres of Western, rational, linear, logical dominant thought.

Navajo, native American peoples of all sorts tend to think in spherical and circular fashion as being the normal mode because "all things come and go". A statement that we made recently, "each star melts as surely as every snow flake, only to be born again another time, another place."  That is only popular to the Nobel level of Western Technological thought but not to the ones who are striving their way through graduate school.

(Bob's biggest concern however is not for the graduate student. He is concerned with the way that our rationalistic value system may influence our choice of educational materials as well as influencing the way we relate to kids).

My system here is full of Boxes and labels just like any system like this. But the kind of thing that I tend to do as I look at my array of labels, and my array of boxes, is I say, "If you were my class what can't you do," if this is the way that I'm going to grade you and plan for you and arrange the lessons. "Is there a thing you can think of that you cannot do, in any context area, any subject?"

If this system exists, there tends to be fewer things because you see, this system includes this system.

I do not think that the way to get out of the value quandries that we find ourselves in now is to perform a left hemispherectomy and throw away your rational mind. I still think that the rational mind and I'11 use a quote from Einstein, or at least it was attributed to Einstein which was that:

"the rational mind is a faithful servant;
the intuitive mind is a sacred gift."

And we have come to the point in our culture where we're beginning to recognize the difference. They are not enemies; they are not opposites;  they are not dychotomies. They are dualistic and the sacred mind of invention is now asking the servant mind, the working mind, the rational mind, the linear mind to do the right job better.

Too often we've thought of efficiency as being "doing a job well". Effectiveness is doing the right job well. And I think we're beginning to come to this place in our culture; and I do have to go catch an airplane...

(Bob took off before we could ask his feelings about left handed pilots, but he did leave us with some good thoughts to ponder. The human capa-city  for growth and learning is as diverse and varied as the human palate. We have taste for all kinds of foods. What Bob Samples is telling us is that our schools are only serving up a couple of dishes. But with a
thoughtful look at our own values and a little creativity Bob suggests that we can come up with a full course educational meal complete with left and right side dishes. Our next program concludes this series;

I'm Dave Bell)
Transcribed by H. Nygaard 79 05 01

As piaget set up a vertical sequence of steps to adult (linear) thinking levels, Bob Samples created a similar set of steps into the creative and Holistic development chain.

So we are Left and Right Brained...we have seen how both children as well as adults, and other cultures are affected by the Left/Right Brain.  Let's now see how it has defined our way of reasoning, via exploration of Deduction and Induction.
 

Britannica - 1976, On Logic

Induction
- reasoning from particular to general (specific to generalization)
- imaginative, creative, probabilistic, aleatory

- accounts for nearly all that is meant by ìlearning from experienceî.

"The ampliative and aleatory (chancy, non-demonstrative, probable) mode of generalization is doubtless the most important and interesting."

Aristotle, Bacon, Mill held that induction could and ought be demonstrative! (main form)

Assuming 2 Varieties:

* Demonstrative (held by Aristotle, etc.)
* Non-demonstrative (main form)

Deduction is clearly demonstrative - Aristotle et al tried to play both forms as parallel but opposing, yet both demonstrative -
here is where great differences begins.

Demonstrative Induction
- Primary
- Derivative

a) Primary - historically the first to be called induction
- depends on no prior inductions
- 2 forms

Intuitive & Summative

- intuitive - conceptual analysis; "grasps" the general

- summative - (or "perfect" induction) reaches generaliz-ation by inspection of all its instances.
eg. surveys, concensus, statistics.

- of limited scope but it provides the premise for non-demonstrative induction.

b) Derivative - establishes generalizations from a few instances by using additional premises - "hyperlaws" whose instances are classes or laws.
- best known hyper premise is the causal law of uniformity.

- ie. "every kind of phenomenon is universally associated with some kind of circumstance upon which it always follows" eg. per Spinoza.
eg. diagnoses, medical

- all but one symptom here.... if it were here, then....

- represents Mills famous "Methods of Agreement and Difference"

- and would be infalliable if (only) the premises were certain, but in practice are only probable and approximate results because uniformity is undemonstrated and such thorough elimination of factors is humanly impossible!

- other form uses hyperpremises of dependency.

- here again the premises are the fallible element, but they are often inductively highly probable (but still uncertain),
with exception: mathematical induction - self evident but unproveable!

- breaks down due to exceptions - remains probabalistic due to set of random specifics used to infer the general conclusion.

Non-Demonstrative Induction or ampliative induction.

- aleatory

- Induction itself, generally

a) Induction by incomplete enumeration

- "inductive leaps"
- predictions

eg. "ones radishes grown on clay soil are sickly.
- induce that all (or a friend's) radishes grown in clay soil do poorly"

eg.  general:  universal generalization using sample population(SP) and qualities (Q), "where all SP's are Q it is inferred and can be induced that all P's are Q." - this is familiar in the classical laws of Science.
- can be extended to predictions of smaller or following samples
eg. instance confirmation.

"a non-demonstrative induction can only be more or less acceptable according to its degree of reliability or probability."

- requires unbiased samples, or knowledge of biases, large samples and varied qualities.

Deduction

- reasoning, inference or proof

- reasoning from a more inclusive or general, proposition (premise) to a less inclusive, or general, proposition (conclusion) contained in or subsumable under the former.

(the general to specific)
 

Comment:

The old logical question...if all Admirals are Sailors, is it not true that all Sailors are Admirals?  This would be true, at the Admiral's Club, and in many sailors' own minds.

Clearly one quality of each is different.....yet, all qualities of the sailor must be shared by the Admiral, but not the other way around.  So we get into Qualitative Analysis, or Situation Analysis. And directional relationships...I love her but!

In the Trovian Islanders' Village, are all equal...the eldest, a very Rudimentary Quality, is the Chief!  Strong Argument Kemo Sabi for all becoming Cone heads.
 

With either induction or deduction, we are still facing factors that constantly change, so by the time the analysis is done, it is no longer valid.

If we could prove truths in one domain, or direction, we ought to be able to prove them in the other....

This entire issue also comes up when we look at doctrines and languages in our western society.  Mechanics and Mathematicians do not speak the same language....yet they can communicate.

Let us look at this visually............
 
 

Conclusion-The Main Model
 
 
 
 

What we see, think, write and visualize or imagine is bounded by the physical Mechanics of our Minds...and so much of those restraints are self imposed, the rest "induced" by the culture we live in.....
 
 

Arild (Harry) Nygaard

Langley, BC.
 
 

 Return to Top