One could certainly wish that it wasn't under the auspices of trying to better weaponize intuition, but sometimes you have to take research effort where you can get it. One would also hope that the people involved in this research would keep a certain amount of humility towards what they are digging into. For instance, just because you see signal correlations between confusing input, and broader areas of where experience is held, doesn't necessarily mean you've identified the main mechanism. Certainly it can be one part of a greater whole, but care needs to be taken in not too quickly dismissing a host of other interactions with the environment one finds oneself in; and in this, of course, lies a great deal of nature of the filtering we do to make sensory input manageable for meaningful processing, and integration into our current worldview, in the first place. What this might suggest is that the interplay of meaning space, and how we form our unique takes on that space, as well as its integration with the larger, shared meaning space of the cultures, and societies we live in, are also very important in how a gut feeling is interpreted in the first place, or whether it's encouraged to be felt at all.
One thing, though, that I find particular interesting here is how this plays through the limbic system. Of how that suggests that our connection to the animal part of us is still very important, and will likely remain so as we go forward in our mental, and physical evolution.
Being an animal with an unbelievably adaptive meaning processing, neuron and synaptic matrix, causes us no end in difficulties. It also, however, provides us with a connection to other biological systems. That importance of that connection may never be fully understood, much less fully appreciated, but we really do need to keep an open mind to the possibility that it is huge, and absolutely, and fundamentally, necessary.
See Also:
No comments:
Post a Comment