Joined: Oct. 2012
The neuroscience forum discussion more or less ended after I found this, by googling keywords I found in a useful reply:
|Empirical evidence indicates that when an individual is in therapy for emotional distress, learning about a two brain system of perception can help provide relief and reassurance. Schiffer reports statistically significant success with the patients who learn about this physiological dichotomy. He has even worked with clients who have found relief from psychotic episodes, as well as severe obsessive compulsive disorder and bipolar.|
There are several ways that psychological distress is alleviated with individuals who engage in duel-brain psychotherapy session work. First of all, they stop thinking they’re crazy, or that there is something very wrong with them. It makes sense, this internal conflict. So understanding the mechanism of a dual brain protective function is the first step. Another step in the process of healing is to begin to identify the feelings of unease, feelings that something is wrong. Sometimes those feelings can be identified as triggers. Once an individual identifies the feeling or feelings they can begin a process of identifying when the feeling or feelings first appeared. What event or environment precipitated those feelings? What happened? How was it resolved? Or, was it ever resolved? Then they can learn new ways to think about them, new ways to comfort them, new ways to let them feel heard.
Dual Brain Therapy holds that each hemisphere of the brain exists as a specific, overt personality and that when this system becomes unbalanced and the struggle for dominance and control escalates, it creates psychological distress. When the knowledge of hemispherically based intrapsychic differences is applied in clinical practice, it enables an individual to help his emotionally healthier side convince the more troubled side to stop exerting such fear driven thoughts that create unwanted behaviors and unbalanced states of mind. Also, significantly, it helps remove a lot of the counterproductive guilt associated with internal conflict.
In any case, this theory makes a lot of sense. When we don’t know why we do or say or think or feel the way we do, this just might be the reason for it. And, understanding it, paying attention to it and developing a more balanced way of solving the things that puzzle us, may be a very good way to get better. Dr. Fredric Schiffer certainly knows that it has helped his patients. And, so do I.
Multiple areas of science are arriving at the same conclusion. We have two brains in our head, not one. In regards to science education it's an easy concept to make sense of, perhaps at the preschool level. And apparently one side or the other may for control reasons enjoy being taken as the "word of God" by the other. Combined result may very well be the "delusions of grandeur" that can make a person feel godlike and where given the power has out of paranoia already thrown many to their deaths in dungeons.
Teaching that the other "voice" in our mind is God talking to us is clearly asking for serious mental health problems. By psychology standards that often condoned practice qualifies as a form of "malpractice". Now there is a fist waving regular at Barry's forum who actually is at war with themselves and needs to get to know this Dr. Fredric Schiffer, instead of being further enraged by the Discovery Institute associated enablers.
Since I have long thought like Fredric in regards to who I'm conversing with the difference it makes in at least my science work might best be shown by this (thanks for reminder) example worth mentioning:
|Quote (clamboy @ Jan. 16 2017,20:55)|
|Over seven years, Joe, and you still can't come up with anything new, but have to plagiarize yourself? You lazy schmuck, at least Gary G keeps cranking out new stuff. Put down the toasters and pick up the crayons, kid!|
For anyone who doesn't know, I am referring to Joe's reissuing of a 2009 pile of crap from his blog as an original post at TSZ. Sad, yes, but not worthy of pity:
Same old same old
The newest stuff is now in the works in several threads after the "My replies to topics are not appearing" topic:
There is ID theory "intelligence" related work galore. Every week something else is in the news that further gets us to where we want to go, in science. Meanwhile the Discovery Institute and others are at war with even mainstream religion. It can be seen in what Barry and others condone, which can easily get out of hand and already involved many in "God told me to" crimes committed as a result of what was preached to someone who needed a qualified psychologist or else people around them will die.
From having studied what happens when things go wrong I felt the need to explain what I saw in what Axel wrote in Barry's forum. From a cognitive science perspective it sets a bad example to not explain why it's normal to carry on a two brained conversation. Those who see it as special ability are simply not aware of the science on that. The article indicates knowing just this is later helpful in life. It's something else very basic to easily teach on, in science classrooms.
In martial arts type conditioning there is already a tapping into the two sides of our being type message that makes sense from what I have. And they have been experimenting with this inherent duality for how long now?
We locally have a somewhat active program of this sort for kids. I certainly rather have something both complimentary and complementary from science to say that has a way of helping them along. They and others need and deserve theory that's about movement and self-control, not demonification from a now fringe religious group that more or less teaches the opposite.
It's good to know what such a scientific theory would actually end up saying, where its promoters had actually followed the scientific evidence to wherever it leads in regards to what makes living things like us intelligent. Barry would have jumped in with what was learned after consulting neuroscientists then psychology and the ID Lab computer model where in the two hemisphere/lobe versions one dominates a little over the other instead of expected exactly matching chart lines. This might be caused by specializing in two different ways of perceiving the same thing works better than not, encourages the hemispheres to fully develop one or the other possibility instead of fully developing neither. It's again not something that needs to be programmed into the model. It's something that on its own self-organizes out where (unlike where the chart lines were always perfectly identical) there is something unusual to explain, kinda related to what Axel said.
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.