THE BELIEVING BRAIN
MORE IN DEPTH
(This, obviously, repeats some of the previous summary information, so you can scan over those parts and then get to the in-depth discussion and possibly choose to read the recommended book.)
QUIK PRE-COMMENTS
A number of cognitive processes convince us that our beliefs are truths. If we do not intervene cognitively, untrue beliefs will continue - and harm us or rob us of a better life. Some, of course, are harmless, but we must determine which are and which to change.
Basically, we are searching for patterns that we can rely on to predict and determine what to do. We want certainty, so we invent gods, we give "agency" to inanimate or imaginary being/things, and we invent explanations (with no sound proof) about why things are as they are - and then we believe what we made up is factual, the truth rather than something we made up!
We even come to conclusions first and then seek to provide evidence, often selecting the evidence to support our conclusion ("cognitive bias") and often not even "seeing" the evidence to support another conclusion. This leads to fundamental thinking errors which will often do us damage.
At other times, we see "patterns" that do not exist, concluding things like "if a graph goes up consistently, it must, therefore, continue on the same path" (major error often made in investing): since I've seen x occur several times, it must therefore continue (generalizing without thinking). If you do this, you will screw yourself up.
___________________________________________________________
15 page booklet:
THE BELIEVING BRAIN
PATTERNICITY, FALSE AGENCY, AND CREATING A NEW LIFE
WE "LEARN" PATTERNS "TO SURVIVE"
Our brains, as they have evolved to have us survive better, have learned to see patterns - and to operate from them.
However, some of them are not correct, as the brain will often connect things mechanically rather than examine them, as a short cut.
False positives
If we think there is a threat in a noise in the bush, and we run up a tree quickly, we might have made a "cognitive" error if, in fact, there is no threat in the bush. This is known as a "false positive". In other words, we detect the existence of a threat - that means we have a positive indicator of a threat, so we call it a "positive".
Yes, we think, there is a threat. If we're wrong, there is likely no harm done, as we will have protected ourselves against what could have actually been a tiger, but we were simply wrong, if there was no tiger. However, if there was a tiger, then it was good for us to react, even though we could not be certain there was a threat indicated by the noise in the bush. But there was, in fact, a possible threat.
And the person who ran up the tree survived to pass on his genes, while the thinker who pondered for awhile what the noise was might get eaten, so his genes and cognitive style is not passed on in the genes, since he didn't survive to do so.
False negatives
On the other hand, we can believe there is something that is not real when it in fact is real. This is a false negative.
Oh, that's just a rustling in the bushes due to the wind. That is a false negative. The danger here, however, is that you might get eaten. That's not a good outcome.
AUTOMATIC TO SEE PATTERNS
We learn to believe in patterns that might not be true but could be true where the consequences are important - but soon it becomes "automatic" to see any possible pattern and to believe it is true, until proven otherwise. And there is no wonder that we have this tendency, for those who did were the ones who survived. Since our brains are mechanical, this mechanical pattern occurs without higher thought and in an automatic pattern.
"Brains are 'belief engines', evolved pattern-recognition machines that connect the dots and create meaning out of the patterns that we think we see in nature." The Believing Brain, Michael Shermer
To help us survive better, as is suggested above, the default position is to assume that all patterns are real. This is just "associative learning", which all animals do. "It is how organisms adapt to their ever-changing environment."
Certain beliefs have evolved over time to have us survive better with others, but they did not evolve consciously but by natural selection.
AN EXAMPLE: RELATIONSHIPS
For instance, those beliefs and their resultant behaviors helped us to "learn" to cooperate for a better benefit (and survival rate, so that we passed it on in our genes) than if we did not cooperate. This resulted in "mutually beneficial exchanges", in relationships and even in trading goods.
Relationships are merely means of exchange, to which we have added meanings.
Many people will rebel against the conflict with their beliefs that "romance rules the world". But that is a belief we made up to explain the nice chemicals related to our doing a beneficial exchange, but it does not change the fact that our interactions with others are strictly "mutually beneficial exchanges".
We don't like to think someone being in relationships with us is anything but due to our superior attractiveness or worthiness - often considering it a validation of ourselves, rather than of the effectiveness of what one is exchanging. But, alas, it is only because we gave the other person what he wanted - and we had learned to identify what has value to other people and how to deliver it - because then we could get the benefits ourselves of having a relationship.
So, if people are not responding to you, it does not imply any lack of worthiness, but is only an indicator that you need to correct your behavior, looking for what is more effective in behavior and then providing that to the other person, who is then rewarded in the "transaction" with you.
Yet we want to believe that "it is because the other person loves me", as if it were a condition that will persist. But try not doing a good exchange and see how long that person "unconditionally" loves you.
As much as it sounds cruel or unfeeling, the reality is that it is simply about "fair exchange", from which we all learn that we gain.
RULES OF THUMB, PATTERNS OF WORKABILITY
If something seems to work, we develop "rules of thumb", which are simply patterns we noticed where we get more of what we want if we do a particular behavior. To operate well in life we need to develop those, but it is a good idea to check out to see if they really work.
It is said that rats are smarter than people, because when there is no cheese at the end of the tunnel they stop going down that tunnel. Somehow humans get stuck in believing if I do x enough times somehow I will eventually to get what I want.
JUST A PATTERN: DO THIS, FEEL THAT
So, anyway, we see patternicity wherever possible and then we recognize those patterns when we see them again, recognizing them and then doing them. But we see patterns that aren't there, as we "jump to the conclusion" (the belief that the pattern is true) quite naturally. Remember, that is our (very workable) default pattern. If there is anecdotal evidence from which we can see a possible pattern, we are likely to adopt it as a believed pattern - and we'll stick with it unless we intervene with our thinking. If we don't intervene, then we are letting our life be run "by default" (by thoughtless automaticity) rather than by reason.
The ideal way to operate is to sort for important beliefs and then to focus on first correcting those and then firmly grounding those into our minds, so that "automaticity" causes those correct patterns to be implemented without effort or thinking. This is the basis for the most powerful mechanism to run our behavior: HABITS.
If we allow wrong beliefs to persist, then we have "bad" habits. If we notice the "bad" habits don't get us what we want, if we want to live life intelligently using our greatest gift, human intelligence, we intervene and set up a pattern that will work to get us what we want. Simple.
Unfortunately, the patterns are simply mechanical, locked in, cable-like physical neurons linked together in a particular way - and therefore they take some effort to change. And your body will see something and then automatically link it to what is most available or strongest.
We try not to eat the ice cream, but we do anyway. We try to concentrate for good periods of time, but our habit is to dart our attention to whatever pops up. All because of habit, an existing pattern available to access and follow.
WE MUST INTERVENE
However, if we intervene and stop doing a pattern, we will then not be stuck in the old habit. That is because the physical neuronal pattern is no longer physically reinforced and is eventually dissolved because of non-use However, if we try to "stop" something and there is no alternative path to plug into, wouldn't our minds just plug into the same old thing, finding no alternative?
You bet. We've got to establish the alternative and then develop the path, so that it gets stronger and stronger and then finally is automatic and effortless. But there is no shortcut to this process - you must follow it!
WE MUST PRACTICE THIS KEY "HABIT"
The process involves "discipline", which is simply a word for "keeping on the path".
Note that it is a habit itself, an ability we create that is not just automatically there.
We make discipline sound hard.
However, discipline can be effortless (pretty much), if we practice it enough.
That is true of anything that involves a neuronal pattern - which means it is involved in everything we do, since we do, except for our intentional attention and decisionmaking, everything automatically.
If we practice a good tennis stroke enough, it becomes automatic because we have formed a good solid neuronal pathway (a pattern). If we want to put in a new belief, we need to practice that belief (repeat it, as repetition is the basis of learning). In the physical practicing, most people believe it is true. However, in the second case, due to some lack of thinking and some false belief in magic, they believe that there is some short cut or that they should somehow be able to "power over" the other neuronal pattern/habit just by force. Wrong!!!! (Believing that causes life to be hard and a struggle.)
One simply has to recognize how the mechanics work - and then follow the pattern of its workability.
The pattern of workability is pretty simple. And when it is applied lots of times, we get the results that a champion gets. If we think we will be an excellent high jumper simply because we are coordinated and can see what others do, then we will forever be experiencing non-success.
The champion seeks
1. Feedback (as to what is working and not working),
2. Seeks to figure out what will work,
3. Tries it out (getting feedback as soon as possible by discerning if one is getting better results or not),
4. Probably actively seeks input (great athletes have coaches and seek inputs from experts), and then
5. He repeats, repeats, repeats (called practice) until it becomes an ingrained pattern.
Once that pattern becomes automatic and correct, then he looks to see what else to correct and practice - and pretty soon the "good performance" becomes relatively effortless, so that he can automatically do well and also concentrate on improving even further to get what he want.
Somehow, people don't seem to want to operate this way, believing somehow that it should be easier and/or take less time and/or require less practice or concentration or thinking. And then they experience not getting the results that they want. Plus they don't know how long to persist (the answer is "until you get the result. Duh!").
According to the law of cause and effect, in reverse, if I see a person is not successful in their life I know that the person believes wrongly and needs to learn to believe in the pattern that creates workability. If a person starts applying the workability concept frequently, they soon will find themselves on a corrected pathway in life, where they are getting the results they want in life and feeling good about life and oneself.
Remember, the breakfast of champions is "feedback". And the champion is simply the one who seeks feedback, and thus correction and learning, more often. And voila! One has a "corrected", effective life, with champion performance that is not effortful but is automatic with lots of good results. Doesn't it make sense that a person who corrects only once a month will not do nearly as good as a person who corrects something every day or several times a day - not letting anything that doesn't work go unnoticed and uncorrected?
Doesn't it make sense that a person may also need "correct" observations about what works, such as expert input, so that he can proceed more quickly than simply trying every alternative available thoughtlessly and trying to learn "by trial and error". Yes, we can learn by trial and error, by our mistakes, but it will be a straighter path if we try to study what is workable and then to practice what works, rather than practice what doesn't work for awhile.
______________
The champion is one who seeks frequent feedback and who make frequent corrections so it is no wonder he gets to where he wants to get sooner and better than anyone else.
______________
And, yes, of course, trial and error is necessary for learning. You'll try the right tennis stroke, but you'll inevitably do it wrong (what some people call 'making a mistake'), gradually correcting and getting better as the new pattern starts to be stronger and the old weaker. Somehow many of us have grown to believe that it is "bad" to make mistakes and that it indicates that we are not worthy - but those are unreal beliefs that are totally in conflict with what is required by reality.
Those beliefs can keep someone from confronting what doesn't work and from trying to learn - as learning requires mistakes. And making a mistake is solely an indication of having not learned something yet.
BECOMING A CHAMPION OF RELATIONSHIP
If we get a bad result in a relationship (such as rejection), then we often seek some magical solution, some great truth that will make us forever lovable or some great truth about who to associate with - but we do it without bothering to learn alot of facts about what works and without deciding to practice and implement those.
Somehow we hope it will all come about by some mysterious force. But we should have passed out of "magical thinking" shortly after we were eight years old, gradually though, even starting to doubt the existence of Santa Claus. Then hopefully we will be exposed to and learn critical thinking skills, such as writing things down, examining to see what is true, looking at the facts and then using logic - which is the great power that differentiates us as humans from animals - and, notice, it is what will make you a champion: frequent looking, input, and correction.
Yet some people even resist that. And all resistance is simply the natural "feeling" we have when something we believe in is threatened in some way (see Cognitive Dissonance, which is an emotion). And if we have the false belief that somehow our beliefs "r us" - that they are a part of us, rather than just something we picked up and can discard - then we stop ourselves from correcting those beliefs. And that, of course, means one has to discard the old incorrect belief - and it helps to know that it doesn't diminish any person to get rid of a belief. It's like wiping a recording clean, so that one can then record a better message, method, song, pattern.
One big error in thinking, and a big saboteur, is the "natural feeling" of resistance (it doesn't "feel right") when we start to do something that is unfamiliar is an indication of a threat to us (actually it is Cognitive Dissonance). Well, that is a false positive, one where the "false-positive" indication of a threat is just not true. And this conclusion is one we must decide with our brain, with our logic.
To effect a change we need to recognize that, usually, the human being "speaks" his/her thoughts, not only out loud but even in his/her head. In order to record in our brain, we must be language a thought, speaking in aloud or internally (in our brain, through the microphone that senses all the input).
Wait a minute, you say, there is no microphone and no recording machine. That's only a metaphor - or probably a bunch of bull. But, is it, really? A microphone is simply something that takes input, just as a lens is something you get visual input through. And surely you do get input from outside of you and surely, unless you haven't been paying attention, you can "hear" yourself inside your brain. And surely your brain remembers alot of what is put into it - and that is a recording, but one done with the memory bubbles called neurons forming into electrochemical connections that are "patterns".
To change a belief and to install it, you must decide what it is to be (and have it be true or possibly true and not a bunch of positive hooey) and then 'speak it' so that it is recorded into the brain.
HABITS
As mentioned above: Developing new habits is the only super effective way of having a greater life. (Read "Habits".)
And the process we engage in on this site is deciding which new habits to install - and then encouraging you to stick to it until they are installed, through all of the natural "failures" (simply not getting the result you want) and "mistakes" (simply not getting the result you want) - and persisting until you get the results - not giving up, stupidly, before that. (A person who is not successful in life, accordingly to the law of cause and effect in reverse, must have not followed the process of workability, either just not looking for and finding out/learning what worked and/or then not persisting long enough to install it.)
WE HAVE EMOTIONS WE CAN'T AND WE CAN CONTROL
Natural selection endows us with certain genetic emotions, which happen automatically given certain stimuli. Disgust, incest disgust, pleasure, displeasure, etc. - all items that helped us survive.
When we see these things as "just happening to us", we could create the belief that we then have no control over our lives - and if we do that we will simply become lumps of emotion, victims of our circumstances. But if we do that, we are giving up our ability to use our higher brains and to choose.
Yes, the emotion pops up because of some "belief in the brain" and then we become conscious of it - and it is only at that point that we are now in charge. Whether unconscious or conscious, if an emotion happens there is always a "reason" for it, but some of the "reasons" are just programs in the brain that interpret something and give it value and a suggested action in most cases. Thus, it operates according to the traditional "cognitive behavior" model:
A --> B --> C
A = Actual event, happening
B = "Belief" (Pattern that interprets the event, containing what to feel and do)
C = Consequence: Emotion and behavior as a result of B
A is in actuality simply a neutral event. Then we interpret (correctly or not) and add what that means to us, matching up a pattern in our brain that has an emotion and a suggested behavior. (Actually, the process includes reactions to our reactions and behaviors in a continuing chain that ends at some point.)
When we are aware of the emotion, then the responsibility is no longer somewhere "in the mind", it is now in our control arena. We now get to choose. (And we can, without the misconceptions as to cause, do effective Psychological Problem Solving.)
In order to choose, we have formulated ways of doing so. Those are the patterns in the brain, but patterns that we have chosen consciously (though possibly thoughtlessly or erroneously) - which means we have the power to look, correct, and reprogram, since we chose them in the first place.
And where there are genetic patterns, we also can exert quite a bit of control by retraining the mind's response and, sometimes, by "tricking it". (We aren't really tricking "it", we are simply intervening and using any of its patterns in a conscious way that serves us better.)
If we make patterns ourselves, as opposed to those we are given genetically, then it would make sense that we'd do our best to make sure they are correct. But how do we know a pattern is "correct"? That, too, is quite simple. We simply note the result. If is not a useful or good result, then we need to create a different pattern that produces the desired result. Simple.
That's it. The basic system is pretty simple.
It is I who am responsible for my life.
_________________________________________________________
PATTERNS AND JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS: THINKING ERRORS
Notice that our jumping to conclusions, such an in generalizing and believing in something because we have "anecdotal" evidence, is natural - and that it can only be corrected by looking and by inquiring - i.e. using critical thinking, intervening on purpose.
If there is a medical miracle right after someone prayed for someone and then you start to believe that prayer causes medical miracles, then you are committing an anecdotal belief thinking error. You need to follow the rule of thumb of saying "is this actually true?" and then use the verification process to see if it is.
A good example of a cousin of this is generalizing. If Michael Moore believes in the same stuff you do and from that you conclude that everything he says is true, then you are committing an egregious thinking error. If you start to look at the evidence, you will find that he has a rather extreme cognitive bias and that many of his assertions (beliefs that he asserts as if they are 'truth') simply don't line up with the facts. One might reply to this with the belief that "well, it's harmless to think that everything he says is true", then you'll be reinforcing the pattern of not using critical thinking - and create more of your life habit of doing passive thinking, living as if a machine. And I assert that not using critical thinking will reduce how good your life can be - by a considerable degrees - in fact, hugely.
Another error is believing that an effect is related to a preceding occurrence, where it may only be that the preceding occurrence happened on its own and had no effect or at least not the effect that occurred right after it.
For instance, if a President is in office during a big boom in the market, we often attribute the boom to the President. But if anyone has studied the economy and the causal factors, one will know that there is often a lag (the last President might have helped cause it) and/or that other factors that are coincidental all acted together to form a unique combination that caused the boom.
Or the rather common belief that the great financial collapse of 2008 was caused by financial institutions making mortgages into saleable packages is one of the great errors in reasoning - at least a failure to look deeper. It is more accurate to say that an excess of liquidity (lots of money in the world) looking for a place to invest it lowered interest so much that it pushed people to come up with investments, making it so easy to invest in housing, with standards lowered by the government's Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, compounded with people speculating and borrowing too much...
____________________________________________________________
A SENSE OF CONTROL
"When individuals are unable to gain a sense of control objectively, they will try to gain it perceptually." (Shermer, op. cit.) In other words, they'll make up something.
Humans are creative and that is useful. But when they make up something and then believe that it is an objective fact, we have a problem. We cannot deal with objective reality while in the make-believe world. The real world is the objective world and the only test of whether something is valid and functional is that it works to get what we want. In other words, the only criteria for anything we do or believe is workability - it either works or it doesn't work. If it doesn't work, then we correct the belief, the program, the behavior and so forth. Simple.
To regain a sense of control we simply need to direct our attention to understanding what is actually going on. Although we can make up something to get a sense of control it is an illusion that is subject to rude interruption by reality. Do the former and stop doing the latter.
Low control people believe in conspiracies and in some mysterious and/or powerful forces controlling our lives or the prices of oil. The "control" is mysterious and nonlogically attributed to "out there." This will keep someone stuck in life.
Understand control, and also how to use it effectively!
REDUCING UNCERTAINTY; A SENSE OF CONTROL AGENT
Where we find we have control over things, we feel confidence. We have a control that we can generate from within - called an internal locus of control.
But when there are things that happen "to us", over which we believe we have no control, we try to tamp down the anxiety by inventing an alternative "agent" - we want to lower our uncertainty level - of course. So we create false delusional 'controls'. They are not controls but we "make them up" to be controls that we can use to affect things for the better.
We create superstitions, where we think that if we do "x" then "y" will happen. If we pray, then someone in the hospital will be benefited medically (which has been proven to not be true, despite the studies that have been touted).
We create "entities" (like gods or monsters) in our mind to explain what happens outside of our control - and then we seek to influence the gods, as a means of getting some sense of control, though it is not actual. In fact, this is so important to us that we will go to great lengths to prove that these entities are real and that our beliefs are true. Religious people do it with gods and religion. But we also do it outside of the religion area: we create "entities" that do not actually exist, but seem to explain things. We even create an entity that somehow has power over us, kind of a mind of its own that exists in the ether, over our heads.
For instance, we create the "inner child" of an adult, which is nonsense, though a useful metaphor for therapy. (See "The Child Persona" we make up.)
We create our "dark shadow" or an entity that sabotages us or exerts control over us. (See Self-Sabotage?.) That also is nonsense, despite the plethora of books using the idea. We fail to see that there are just patterns in our brains that don't serve us, as they are incorrect - and that they will operate until we do something to correct and overcome them. Simple.
Interestingly enough we also create fears and treat them as if they are entities that have control over us. Yes, the fears are patterns that create emotions, but once we feel the emotions we are responsible for managing the game - and correcting the fears.
WHAT WE MAKE UP - DIFFERENTIATING, OR BEING STUCK
The only catch here is that we get hung up on believing as fact something we made up. Yikes! Isn't that preposterous, nonsensical, etc. and etc. Yes, it is, but that we do it does make sense. We are simply trying to create something that serves us in some way, in this case to explain things so that we do not feel so uncertain or to have us feel "right" so that we don't feel uncertain and/or fearful to some degree.
It makes sense, sure, to conjure up things and then believe in them - or at least the reason we do this conjuring makes sense. But beyond that it makes no sense to not see that we made it up - and then to improve it by having it fit reality.
And when we have our thinking fit reality we have the basis for true happiness and for the elimination of suffering. Suffering is the result of not accepting reality and operating within it.
In Landmark Education, they have a thing called "stories", which are things we made up about things. The idea is to begin to differentiate between what we make up and what is actually true, so that we can then take what we made up and correct it. Simple.
And then there is a process that is also simple, though it takes some cognitive training, where people are asked to identify what is real and what is story.
Basically, everything that is not reality is story - of course. So they train you to identify 'what (actually) happened' - so that you are separating all that is in your mind from what is real and what is made up. (Read "What Happened".)
Byron Katie, though criticized by those who do not understand the essence of effectiveness that this has, stopped being depressed for many years by simply learning to ask "is this (absolutely) true?" (beyond question, proven). Note that this is a virtually parallel approach of separating fact from made-up fiction.
Unless one differentiates, through whatever method, between what is made up and what is fact, one cannot achieve true sanity-happiness. Not that insanity is being totally out of touch with reality. Correspondingly, sanity is being in touch with reality and knowing the difference. (Read, optionally, Unsanity To HighSanity.)
It is interesting to note that even those who think they are powerful, rational people engage in make-believe and believe it is reality. The sure signs are if someone gets angry (in other than a truly threatening physical situation) and doesn't see that they are creating it (they believe it is the other person that is causing it, a clear misbelief and a story). Or those who have a downfall because of "love" and have an affair. But those who are truly powerful and rational enjoy the emotions but do not let them run them, nor let the stories that we still believe, rule us. (They also accept all of the emotions but do not add suffering about or to them.)
ACCEPTING "THE WEATHER" OF LIFE
Can we control everything? Certainly not.
Therefore, since this is reality, we have only one decent choice: to accept reality. But many people keep on fighting it, only to lose every time (as Byron Katie says).
We get rained on. We get wet or cold, etc.
Someone hits us with a fist, we get injured.
Certain things are built into our bodies and minds and they create effects on us.
We need, simply, to acknowledge that we do not control certain things in life and then accept that. The stupidest thing to do would be to try to control things we do not control - and then be unhappy about not getting the results we want! But people do persist in trying to do that. Some examples:
They try to control the behaviors of others. They try "willpower" to overcome some body process. They try to ... and on and on.
The secret there is simply to see the lack of control - and stop trying to control. Duh!
The "Serenity Prayer" is wiser than most people recognize. It is actually a guide, which one is exhorting oneself to wisely follow. (My version: The Prayer For Serenity)
Those who argue for themselves being victims in life will use the fact that other things impact us and that we cannot control them extending that as a basis for a belief of their not being at all powerful. This is "all or nothing" illogic (= total nonsense).
We cannot control a certain portion of things, but we can control what makes us happy and satisfied and fulfilled. There is a portion of life that is not controllable but that does not mean the other portion is not controllable. (And part of our control is to be able to accept reality and live with it without any resistance.)
________________________________________________________________
One of the greatest thinking errors involving patternicity is for a person to think that they are a victim of his/her past. It has been proven scientifically that one's childhood does not cause one's adulthood. People will often say "I know that the past does not determine the future", one of Tony Robbins' reminders, but then they continue to believe that their current life is the fault of their childhood or their parents. See Bad Past, Good Life for examples.
________________________________________________________________
ATTRIBUTING AGENCY: AGENTICITY
Somehow, as we grow up and take in programming from 'out there', we start attributing "agency" to "out there."
We create inanimate, neutral, random forces into intentional forces. We create gods, ghosts, angels, aliens, government or business conspiracists, etc. - and then we imbue them with meaning, power, and intention. We attribute what happens to us to invisible agents, who are either for us or against us.
This is a form of getting a sense of control, over the uncontrollable.
We give human traits to essentially mechanical entities.
Our 'heart' "thinks" at a highly intelligent level, we think, when actually it is purely mechanical with a medium simple computer running it. We think the heart has emotions like we do - and that it has a personality. All this with no real evidence - only anecdotes and made up causes.
We think that a "sensed presence" is real.
Another great one is "universal intelligence", giving inanimate matter that comprises the universe a great intelligence beyond ours, as if it can think like a human. And then we "get in touch with the universe" and apply the Law Of Attraction so that the universe is positively inclined toward us and will support us. Totally untrue. It is just an inanimate compilation of inanimates that make up the universe.
No "presences" have been proven and lots and lots of so-called entities or paranormalities have been proven to not be real.
Humans are the only "agent", for themselves, that has intention and the ability to direct its mind toward higher level functions. The power is not "out there", not in made up entities. Nor is it in other people, who may be able to affect us, as the weather does - but the absolute power is in us, period.
Inner child, dark shadow, inner parent - all false, not real, all made up.
One of the biggest cognitive errors is to believe that our emotion is a powerful agent, whereas it is actually a concatenation of neural events, creating sensations in the body, which are rated as good/bad, comfortable/uncomfortable, etc.
The error is that we think that emotions have power and that we must follow them and/or that they mean something other than being resultant physical sensations from some process in the body or mind. We "have" emotions; they don't "have" us. As we develop ourselves, we find that we can simply note the emotion and then exercise a choice of action, not necessarily the one dictated by the emotion/pattern. In other words, our behaviors/reactions are not caused by emotion, instead we choose to cause the behaviors, thoughts, and emotions (once we become conscious of them, of course).
In Landmark Education, they attempt to drive home the point that feelings do not determine our behavior and that it is choice that determines it. Those who are stuck in the slot of being a victim dispute this idea and think that feelings rule. (See Live A Life Dictated By Feelings...Or Not?) To live a happy life, one must correct this victim belief.
THE MECHANISM THAT CREATES BELIEF
Dopamine is a chemical transmitter that is the basis for "operant conditioning". Operant conditioning simply says that we will repeat any behavior/belief that is reinforced - with a reward. We repeat the behavior in order to get the reward. We repeat it to get a "hit" - of the chemical reward called dopamine.
Dopamine is released from:
Mastering a task
Accomplishing a goal
Pleasures, especially orgasm
Taking risks
Gambling, pornography, drugs
Being right (= trying to maintain certainty, reduce uncertainty in life)
Based on research conclusions by UCLA neuroscientist Russell Poldrack: "the role of dopamine is in motivation rather than in pleasure per se, whereas the opioid system appears to be central to pleasure." Dopamine is a motivator where we seek to get a 'hit' from getting a reward (of dopamine's effect).
"The central point is that dopamine reinforces (1) behaviors and (2) beliefs and (3) patternicity, and thus it is one of the primary belief drugs." (Shermer, op. cit.) Note that this will go on even without our consciously engaging our brain to be at cause over it.
When we think something is significant for our survival or well-being we give it more "juice" the more significant it is. Survival, to our brain, is of course a reward. When we think we see patterns (even if false), we get a jolt of dopamine - and thus it is reinforced. Dopamine enhances the ability of neurons to transmit signals between one another, increasing the neuronal synaptic connections, so things are more thoroughly and deeply ingrained in our memories.
The more dopamine present the better we learn as it physically enhances our ability to detect patterns.
MISBELIEFS
However, if we have too much dopamine our inclination is to find patterns where they do not actually exist. Way too much, and you'll have hallucinations, and even become "dopey". "A person with schizophrenia picks up on ridiculous patterns and draws conclusions based on them" quote of Kuszewski by Shermer, op. cit.
A more prosaic example of false patternicity is to assume that one is so perceptive that one is sure that a particular pattern of conversation or a particular look must mean something.
We can, indeed, notice that if a group of people is talking and laughing yet looking over at us that they must be laughing at us. The healthy person does not assume that their perception/interpretation is accurate but is only a possibility to consider.
John Nash, Nobel Prize Winner, as portrayed in the movie A Beautiful Mind, saw patterns everywhere, with nonexistent people often involved in complex conspiracies. His "cure" was not in eliminating the mis-seeing, but in realizing that they were not necessarily real. You must see the movie! (Notice what it suggests for you, but in regard to the beliefs that you see and think are true - know that many are not and don't take them seriously!)
While it is true that the right hemisphere of the brain is more creative, it is more likely to create patterns where none exists. This is the reason why "intuition" and "hunches" are not to be considered as being indicators of facts or truths but are actually detected patterns that may be worth considering. The feeling that a person is dangerous is an example of "intuition", which in this case is a putting together of various learned subtle indicators from our lives that generally mean there could be danger. That is, of course, useful and should be paid attention to. But it also may be incorrect. The better choice, rationally speaking, is to go ahead and react, as it may be a false positive or it may be real and you can't afford to sit around to see if you'll be harmed.
To balance off this tendency to see patterns where none actually exist, we humans developed a part of the brain (anterior cingulate cortex) to detect errors.
The way alot of this ties back to creating "agents" that don't exist "is that the brain does not perceive the process of binding all the neural networks into one whole self, and so imputes mental activity to a separate source" other than yourself. (Shermer, op. cit.). We see something that is like a separate spirit or self, that gets to ride in our body but is not us.
We do "mind reading" (the process of inferring the intentions of others by projecting yourself into their minds and imagining how you feel - which as with anything involving pattern detection and inference can be useful, but not always right - and it is only a fool who considers himself a 100% accurate mind reader). It was useful in evolution to attempt to detect if a predator had the intent to eat us, so we developed the ability, which was good even though it generated alot of false-positives.
BELIEFS COME FIRST AND AUTOMATICALLY
"Beliefs come first; reasons for belief follow in confirmation of the realism dependent on the belief". (Shermer, op. cit.) We want to believe our belief for it gives us more certainty or less uncertainty, so naturally we will "prejudice" our selection of evidence to support it and discount that which contradicts it. That is a natural, primitive mechanism - just not one you want to let ride and continue to be unchanged - you've got to intervene. We must develop, if we are to live good lives, the ability to ask "is this true?" and then to sufficiently answer the question.
We tend to automatically believe what is said (if there is no existing belief otherwise), as it is easier than doing the process of rejecting a belief. We just need to be aware of what is unquestioned, in case we have to use it in our lives and it isn't actually true.
COGNITIVE BIAS
Some people simply believe that their perceptions and many of their beliefs are simply right. Though this is not backed by actual facts and reality, it is not that they are "bad" for doing this natural thing. They are simply attempting to do what a human is preoccupied with: reduce uncertainty.
To reduce uncertainty we set up "rules of thumb", so we don't have to reinvent or decide each time what to think or do. That's smart, of course.
And we set up beliefs, to certainize our existence and ability to cope with life.
But we also develop cognitive biases to keep certainty in place, even where the facts are contrary to the belief. Our beliefs are set up as "this is how it is" and "if I do this, then I'll get that" - all of which helps us reduce anxiety and fear by increasing certainty. Basically, we mold the evidence to justify the belief.
We come up with the belief first and then we seek to confirm our beliefs with reasons, justifications, and explanations. (However, I suggest that rationality will work better, once you are aware!)
Almost everyone recognizes the idea that we see through "filters", but most people don't seem to apply that to themselves. But, if you want to live a great life, you simply must learn to tell the difference between B.S. and facts, between altered or misbelieved "facts" and real facts. The more you do this, the more sane you'll be.
Shermer, op. cit., refers to "confirmation bias, or the tendency to seek and find confirmatory evidence in support of already existing beliefs and ignore or reinterpret disconfirming evidence."
Read in Shermer's book about "self-justification bias", "attribution bias" (where we misassign cause to something largely coincidental or co-related), "sunk cost bias" (where we want to avoid recognizing losses by not selling a losing stock, while freely selling off winners), "status quo bias" (the tendency to opt for whatever it is we are used to), "endowment effect" (tendency to value more what we own more than what we do not own [or have]), "framing effects" (a positive frame focuses on gain, not loss), "anchoring bias" (when we lack an objective standard we pick what is at hand), "intentional blindness bias" (where our focus is intended at one objective, we will actually not even see a gorilla walk through the picture), and last but not least "not seeing our own tendency to have blind spots"
THE BASIC IDEA BEHIND ALL THIS STUFF ABOUT BELIEFS/STORIES
The basic idea here is not at all complex. Use the scientific method to decide if something is true and to not believe in what you make up as if it were a fact instead of a "made-up".
Be sure you use critical thinking or you'll keep repeating your thinking and belief errors and keep on getting results you don't want.
WHAT'S NEXT?
