Unconscious Mind, Subconscious Mind...Tomato, Tomahto... What do you think?

Both relics of times when we had no actual information about brain functioning -- advances in neurology and MRI scanning are making such terms redundant, even if we're not quite sure what to replace them with.

Great! "Neither" is a delightful option.

This is our mind (subconscious/unconscious); this is our mind with filters (conscious).

Please elaborate on the advances in neurology and MRI scanning that you wrote about.

Here are a few pointers to areas of brain research that fascinate me:

Mirror neurons are -- in the eyes of some -- contentious, and without doubt there needs to be more work done. Good news, under researchers like V. Ramachandram, that's happening. Here's an overview. Even if, as some contend, mirror neurons are merely a metaphor and one that's being stretched too far, people like Phil Farber, whose work is in the realm of NLP and magick, are making the most of it.

And then there's holographic theory, which is rooted in physics but has profound implications for psychology too, pointing as it does to the fundamamental interconnectedness of mind and matter. This BBC piece gives an overview. I'd also recommend reading Michael Talbot's Holographic Universe and the work of parapsychology researcher Dean Radin.

As for the brain, all kinds of people are poking around. Some of them for fairly trite reasons, to help big brands develop a foothold in human consciousness. But there are others who've been exploring religious experience as it relates to brain function, as this report indicates.

While there's some theory involved in all of the above, it's rooted in observable phenomena, unlike much of what passed for psychology last century. And I suspect that progress will come from those who base their models on what's there, rather than what they hypothesise.

Nannette, check this out for some cold hard science beyond theory for the "unconscious"

The new unconscious - Google Books

Alistair, thank you for the link! The articles are great. I feel the subconscious is the powerhouse, its interesting to see it documented in a study. Adrian, the mirror neurons are fascinating! When I have more time I'll take the time to look over these links you sent.

Thank you!
Nannette

Sheesh... Thanks

You know how they say the map is not the territory?

There is also a theory that consciousness is a map of a self inside this map of the territory.

Hi again Nannette,

I, like you, am not trapped in the simple dichotomy. For several reasons. Take a look at these ...

1. Carl Jung: the boundary between us and our "unconscious" and then between that and the collective "unconscious" sometimes becomes most permeable, and we tap directly into both. And not just in dreams, either.

2. Rupert Sheldrake with his many experiments and writing on what he calls "the extended mind".

3. Playwright Trevor Griffiths who stays up all night in a rented two-up-and-two-down in Leeds, awake and yet "plugged into" his unconscious ... and writing.

4. Ditto Samuel Beckett (the up all nite and the plugged into part, not the rented house in Leeds part.)

5. In Blink, Malcolm Gladwell talks about a fire chief who was in a burning house with his men, dealing with a raging fire, and who didn't hear what he expected to hear - the fire was quiet instead of noisy. And suddenly, he told his men to get out - seconds before the floor caved in.

Only thing is, at the time he wasn't "conscious" of what he was missing - but he was aware of his alarm bells going off. Later, with the help of psychologist Gary Klein, he identified what his conscious/ his preconscious/ his unconscious had been "paying attention" to - the ABSENCE of an expected signal.

6. My own work - I'm not only fully aware in myself of what other people are mostly unaware of (the sub-conscious), I am often fully aware of what other people are totally unaware of - the "unconscious". So where is the almost totally impermeable "boundary" I'm supposed to have?

(And this goes for some of my more advanced students too - for example, the ones in my on-going mentoring group.)

7. Particularly to do with SMEACs: a young woman comes up to me at the end of an "evening with" I'd just given in Toronto. Maybe I can help her. The thing is, "I can't see my pictures ... "

"Oh. OK, well go ahead, and make a picture for me, now."

I can not only see her picture - about six feet in front of her, and just off to the left-hand side, and bright and mostly yellow and clear, and with people in it, but I can also see this thick black "filter"/ barrier/ screen between her and her picture.

No wonder she can't see her pictures.

It doesn't matter whether you call it the unconscious, the preconscious, or the subconscious ... what counts are the concepts behind the words - the stuff of thought.

And most people, the way they are introduced to these topix invites them - with all kinds of illative force - into adopting the restrictive dichotomy.

There's even been garbage talked here on this forum quite recently about the "unconscious" being "incommensurate" with the "conscious". As if bean-counting or measuring salaries were the issue, and not the kind and ease of access.

No, no, Nannette, I think you and I are on to the right thing here.

Greater fun and flexibility :-)))

Eric.

ericrobbie wrote:

6. My own work - I'm not only fully aware in myself of what other people are mostly unaware of (the sub-conscious), I am often fully aware of what other people are totally unaware of - the "unconscious". So where is the almost totally impermeable "boundary" I'm supposed to have?

Hello Eric,

Could you give some examples of what you're conscious of in yourself that most people are unconscious of in themselves?