Junk In - Junk Out?

[jasonbrinn]

I have often heard the human mind is the most incredible computer. It seems that the human mind remembers everything, even though we can only recall some things.

1. Do you agree that the human mind is affected by "bad" information just as a computer is?

2. If so, how long does it take in your opinion to correct the mind on something it has come to believe especially when that belief is hardened by real experiences?


thank you in advance,


Jason Brinn

 

[Steve]

Short answer to number 1 is yes. Answer to number 2 is, as often as not, it is never corrected. Once a person has decided something is true, even in the face of clear evidence to the contrary, they will never truly change their mind.

It's actually pretty well documented that people have an amazing capacity to "see" what they're looking for and to not see what they don't want to see. There are a couple of reasons for this (lots of reasons, actually, but two jump to mind). The first is cognitive dissonance, and the second is the power of intermittent reinforcement.

Cognitive dissonance refers to the ability for people to screen out information that doesn't conform to a strongly held belief. In other words, it's the ability to reconcile conflicting information so that one can believe in something in the face of clear evidence to the contrary.

Intermittent reinforcement is a behavioral phenomenon where we are actually more inclined to create a habit and draw a causal relationship to an action based on infrequent or intermittent success. For example, my dog bumped his nose up against one of our doors and was able to pop it open and get into a room he wasn't supposed to be in. It happened one time, and based on that success he began testing every door when he gets bored. Over the years, doors don't get fully closed, but in spite of maybe a .1% success rate, that damned dog gets his nose prints all over our doors to this day.

In humans, this phenomenon can be seen all over the place, as well. Computers in particular have made people superstitious, but even in martial arts we can see the power of intermittent reinforcement. We experience some kind of success with a move and even though that move may not work again ever, we will continue to insist and train it because, after all, it worked once. Or on computers where someone will perform voodoo on a computer to 'fix' a problem, or click on a link 10 times to get it to work once.

It's also very common in religion and in politics. Something is seen and conclusions are drawn as to why that "something" came to be, and those conclusions become reasons, and those reasons become absolute.

 

[blindsage]

The human mind does not remember everything it sees. That's part of the power and elegance of it, it can automatically filter what is important enough to transfer from short term memory to long term. But yes in answer to #1, the brain can be influence by bad information. As for #2, it really depends on the individual as to whether it can change and how long it would take.

 

[Jenna]

I have often heard the human mind is the most incredible computer. It seems that the human mind remembers everything, even though we can only recall some things.

1. Do you agree that the human mind is affected by "bad" information just as a computer is?

2. If so, how long does it take in your opinion to correct the mind on something it has come to believe especially when that belief is hardened by real experiences?


thank you in advance,


Jason Brinn

On #1.. I think there is no sense in believing any information as bad information. All information is useful. It is only with a balance of information presenting different viewpoints and objectives and ideas that we can ascertain what is the truth in any thing.

On #2.. I think it depends first upon what experience or which evidence or thought has caused you to believe this thing. The implication in your question Jason is that you believe a thing that you unconsciously distrust despite the apparent experiential evidence you have accumulated which would appear to corroborate that belief, yes? Certain experiences can cause us to feel certain ways. These feelings however are mostly tempered by how we perceive our worlds and ourselves within that world (and this can go back to the beginning). Often these feelings are not objective. Our feelings they create thoughts and those thoughts engender our behaviour. To answer your question directly, belief can be altered by replacing with it alternative beliefs that we choose to supplant the former. This is a task easily accomplished if you wish it.. It does not take long if you have a desire for it..

 

[jasonbrinn]

So then...

How would what we all seem to agree upon as to answers for #1 and #2 apply to things such as;

1. Rolling
2. Sparring


thanks in advance,


Jason Brinn

 

[pgsmith]

How would what we all seem to agree upon as to answers for #1 and #2 apply to things such as;

1. Rolling
2. Sparring

Your question makes no sense since your original post was about psychology, and your latest question is about something else? (not sure what).

 

[jasonbrinn]

Your question makes no sense since your original post was about psychology, and your latest question is about something else? (not sure what).

I can see how that might be a little confusing. Here is what I mean now;

1. Do you agree that the human mind is affected by "bad" information just as a computer is?

Most people said have said yes, well, sparring is imperfect along with the moves people make during sparring and yet the mind is learning the whole time so it would seem to me that the mind is learning "bad" information as well as some good (although I imagine most people's sparring is full of more missed attempts and "bad" info than winning ones)

2. If so, how long does it take in your opinion to correct the mind on something it has come to believe especially when that belief is hardened by real experiences?

Hinging off of the question one - since you are in fact picking up "bad" info such as misses, etc. while rolling/sparring then when you get something right or corrected does that erase all the times you failed memory wise. I don't feel that one good try wipes out a bunch of bad ones but I am curious how people apply their stated beliefs to the first two questions the the two practices and efficiency of them one way or another.

thank you,

Jason Brinn

 

[ks - learning to fly]

regarding your first question...I think of the saying, "believe half of what you hear and most of what you see"...and the term 'selective hearing'.....I think being stubborn can limit a person's ability to gain new knowledge or perspective on a subject although I am not condoning to accept things on blind faith..I do think a person's mind can be affected by bad information - much the same as a computer, but I think the person's age has something to do with it too...as a person grows and is affected by more life experiences, they may be more inclined to investigate information and hold off on its acceptance until they've had time to test their ideas about it...I believe a person can mitigate the effects of bad information through education.

 

[Gemini]

So Jason, why would your application of a psychological response that you've received vary between a physical question or emotional or even spiritual question? Psychological is psychological. You are asking this as now that you have the answer, so how would it apply to this particular situation. It's in the answer, doesn't matter the situation. So let's try this a different way. You have an educated opinion on something that works. You now have doubt about what you've learned as correct. Your perception has changed because new experience begins to alter the perception. Maybe it would be easier to get your arms around this if you would provide what the situation is and what has happened that is causing you to question what experience has taught you to be true.

 

[Steve]

I can see how that might be a little confusing. Here is what I mean now;

1. Do you agree that the human mind is affected by "bad" information just as a computer is?

Most people said have said yes, well, sparring is imperfect along with the moves people make during sparring and yet the mind is learning the whole time so it would seem to me that the mind is learning "bad" information as well as some good (although I imagine most people's sparring is full of more missed attempts and "bad" info than winning ones)

2. If so, how long does it take in your opinion to correct the mind on something it has come to believe especially when that belief is hardened by real experiences?

Hinging off of the question one - since you are in fact picking up "bad" info such as misses, etc. while rolling/sparring then when you get something right or corrected does that erase all the times you failed memory wise. I don't feel that one good try wipes out a bunch of bad ones but I am curious how people apply their stated beliefs to the first two questions the the two practices and efficiency of them one way or another.

thank you,

Jason Brinn

The fundamental problem here is that you're using a judgement statement that is very subjective. What's 'bad' mean to you? Incorrect? Unproductive? Ineffective? Misleading? Evil? Destructive? It could mean any or all of those things.

Also, I'd like to point out that failure is different from lack of success. The former is an absolute statement. I tried to accomplish X and did not. While the latter can be both productive and positive. A lack of initial success can lead to greater gains in the long term.

 

[jasonbrinn]

So Jason, why would your application of a psychological response that you've received vary between a physical question or emotional or even spiritual question? Psychological is psychological. You are asking this as now that you have the answer, so how would it apply to this particular situation. It's in the answer, doesn't matter the situation. So let's try this a different way. You have an educated opinion on something that works. You now have doubt about what you've learned as correct. Your perception has changed because new experience begins to alter the perception. Maybe it would be easier to get your arms around this if you would provide what the situation is and what has happened that is causing you to question what experience has taught you to be true.

There is this theory of Aliveness and this affection for Sparring both of which I feel can improve fighting ability, however, I feel that they are the longest path to improved ability for the #1 and #2 reasons. I believe that drills, pad/bag training and fitness (even forms) minus "aliveness" and sparring equal a much cleaner approach to combat training. I was curious to see people's responses minus mentioning the scenario as it pertains to sparring/rolling. Now that we have some answers, which I agree with, I am curious to see if people will change their ideas or offer alternative narratives for them as applied to these to highly coveted practices.

 

[jasonbrinn]

The fundamental problem here is that you're using a judgement statement that is very subjective. What's 'bad' mean to you? Incorrect? Unproductive? Ineffective? Misleading? Evil? Destructive? It could mean any or all of those things.

Also, I'd like to point out that failure is different from lack of success. The former is an absolute statement. I tried to accomplish X and did not. While the latter can be both productive and positive. A lack of initial success can lead to greater gains in the long term.

I have always seen techniques as pure X. If you try to apply a technique and you did not accomplish it then I consider that a fail. I see techniques as one thing and transitions/entries as another. If I can't get to where I can apply technique X then I failed transition X and so on. To me stringing the two together complicates and slows training efficiency not to mention greater hinders "good" (accomplishment of all the Xs) results.