Left, Right, and Wrong Brain

[Mike Estep]

There has been much experimentation and discussion on left-right brain theory since Roger Sperry’s split brain experiments in the 1950s-1960s. In most people, it has been generally determined that the left half of the brain is more verbal, logical, sequential, and analytic in function – while the right half is more visual, intuitive, random, and synthetic in function. These terms imply a distinct contrast in how the two brain hemispheres work. Also, the right half is more imaginative. When writing this post, I found it interesting that there are few antonyms for imaginative that don’t start with “un.” So, if the right half is imaginative, then the left half would be unimaginative.

It has also been generally discussed how our education systems tend to favor teaching predominantly to the left side. What is not discussed is the impact that this has on students and society as a whole. The rest of this post will focus on the amount of time spent on - and the ultimate effects of - unbalanced left-brain training. I will also discuss the potential to impact the world if we truly practiced whole-brain learning.

Let’s look at a common scenario. Depending on how a public school system (or equivalent) is set up, children may spend an average of 6 hours per day in classes focused toward exercising left-brain activity. Regardless of the academic subject of study (math, science, history, language, government, etc. - even art and music) students are taught to analyze logically and learn in a sequential order. It is genuinely rare to have cases where the main focus, or any focus, is on intuition and imagination with these subject areas.

So, children start their schooling excursion at 5 years old and spend about 6 hours per day studying academic information with the left half of the brain. Classes continue for 5 days per week, around 4 weeks per month, 9 months per year, for 13 years (K-12). Multiplied out, that ends up being over 14,000 hours of left brain exercise in school…

6 hrs x 5 days x 4 wks x 9 mo x 13 yrs = 14,040 hours

This approximation is just during class hours in public school. It doesn’t include time spent on homework. It also is not taking further college education into account.

My question is this – if we are designed with two halves of the brain, does it logically make sense to spend 14,000 hours exercising just the left half while virtually ignoring the right half? In my humble opinion, I believe that this process is just incorrect.

I have heard people try to justify this with statements like “Intuition is inferior to logic. Intuition can’t be trusted because there is too much chance for error. Logic depends more on facts and is more apt to be correct.” This justification is not well thought out. How do people know their intuition is more error prone if they don’t exercise it enough to ever develop it? Also, how many students in school make 100% on every assignment they do? If they don’t have perfect scores all the time, does this mean that their logic is error prone and should not be developed and trusted? People certainly make mistakes with their logical left-brain thinking - but they still exercise it plenty in public school (14,000 hours). It stands to reason then that our intuitive right-brain has the potential to be just as accurate if given adequate exercise and training.

Other than many decades of cultural indoctrination, I believe there is one main reason why predominate left-brain training continues in our schools. Without known benchmarks, it is difficult to develop curriculums and evaluations for right-brain training. Left-brain training has been established for centuries and is therefore much easier to develop strategies for. It is human nature for administrators and educators to avoid confronting and devoting long hours to the unknown within limited time constraints and budgets. However, this is a poor excuse for allowing mental decay and doesn’t make the situation correct.

I have been independently contemplating and studying geniuses and savants for almost two decades. We casually mention da Vinci, Einstein, Mozart and the like in our textbooks. We marvel at what these geniuses were able to accomplish. We wonder how it is possible for savants to have handicaps such as autism and simultaneously be extremely brilliant in areas such as math, music, or art. What mechanisms are in place to allow such genius and brilliance to exist in the first place? Also, are these mechanisms only in the gifted/disabled few or latent in all of us?

I have come to the conclusion that much of mental genius comes from right-brain - or at least whole-brain - exercise. I also believe that savants are able to display feats of brilliance because their mental disabilities tend to suppress left-brain activity. The right-brain is not suppressed and is able to display the brilliance that is already there. This has also been shown with normal adults who received physical damage to the left hemisphere of the brain later in life - afterward displaying newly acquired feats of brilliance.

What are some results of excessive and imbalanced left-brain training to individuals and society? Consider the following two ideas…

How many geniuses are we pumping out of our school systems? If left-brain exercise alone is what it took to produce genius, then surely 14,000 hours of practice in public school is enough time to develop this.

Why is possessing traits of genius such a big deal? Because, geniuses can solve difficult problems, create solutions, and literally change the world. Are our school systems suppressing true genius without even realizing it? If so, then it is being done out of ignorance – which is totally opposite to what education is meant to promote.

Four centuries ago, da Vinci was independently studying anatomy, botany, art, music, optics, and various engineering areas. More importantly, he was drawing diagrams of helicopters, tanks, submarines, underwater breathing apparatus, parachutes, etc. It obviously took much practice with intuition and imagination to accomplish this.

What if most people were capable of displaying such genius and the key factor to making it happen was true balanced exercise of left and right brain activities? I believe that we would have another renaissance period and that the benefits to mankind as a whole in all areas of our lives would be exponential.

What about the dangers? Wouldn’t it be bad to have a bunch of genius criminals running around? I think a better question is what effect would having hundreds of millions of geniuses in our society have on crime?

Would there be as much criminal activity if we were able to use da Vinci types of thinking to eliminate hunger and material wants? Perhaps we could make machines such as those depicted in Star Trek that could create food and possessions by rearranging atoms out of the air. Or how about eliminating all forms of mental disorders and physical diseases? This type of thinking is no more outlandish now than it was for da Vinci to conceive a helicopter in his mind 400 years ago.

Mike Estep PhD
______________________________________________

Mike Estep.com - Common Sense Outside the Box

[Erock]

Excellent article. I agree with you fully, but it's going to take a lot of arguing to convince those logical education minded parents that their child should be doing art instead of math.

I have a friend who is very good at school. He is not exactly "smart" but he has an uncanny ability for taking tests. We are taking physics this year and he doesn't do homework, or any of the problems for 3 weeks, and figures it out on the test. I've questioned him on it, and it seems like he uses a lot of "intuition" in addition to logic. It amazes me every time.

Erock

[RT Wolf]

^ You make a great point. The idea of how scientists work in general society couldn't be further from teh truth. A lot of it is inspiration (as well as hard work and just repititious experimentation). Intuition keys in. Few people solve problems by going "If x to the power of d, I need milk!"

The OP also makes a great point, which is essentially that genius is not innate or "natural" but can be greatly influenced by practice and hard work. The results are similar to a Harvard study that was released a while ago, which concluded that there was little in terms of "innate talent" and that the music geniuses and so forth of today just worked really, really hard.

Creativity is a skill. That is to say, you can believe it is a skill and it will become so. You can believe you have a set amount and that will also be true, so I think the most effective belief is that creativity is a skill. Work on it, you'll achieve some surprising results.

[Mike Estep]

Thank you for your comments on the importance of hard work and repetition RT Wolf. I did not mean to imply that there was a free lunch with intuition. Many of my philosophies have come from years of pondering, studying, and feeling.

I am a scientist, educator, and musician and have not come to my conclusions lightly. I have been in the trenches for many years.

I am not trying to downplay the importance of left-brain learning. I have a B.S. in Music Education, an M.T. in Computer Science, an Ed.S. and Ph.D. in Computing Technology in Education, and 21 hours toward a 2nd Ph.D. in Information Systems (I have had my head buried in textbooks and peer-reviewed journals for way too long!).

I also teach music instruction on guitar, bass, drums, keyboard, voice, and music technology. I currently play in a Texas Music band and have performed in all of these capacities for a number of years.

I am obsessive-compulsive by nature and have spent a great many hours over the last 38 years honing my left and right brain skills.

My intent with my post was to get people to think. There is a lot of hard work performed on left-brain training in school. The same does not hold true of right-brain training - it is almost non-existent in our school systems. There will certainly be differences of opinion on what repurcussions are of such imbalance, or on the possiblities afforded with correct whole-brain training. But it takes discourse like this to address all issues involved in order to inspire people to change their world.

I do have many intuitive insights now that just "come to me", but this is mostly because of the blood and sweat I've poured into practicing and developing my intuition over a period of years.

Mike Estep PhD
________________________________________________

Mike Estep.com - Common Sense Outside the Box

[Brutha]

With fMRI around the strinct distinction between left and right brain thinking doesn't realy seem to exist.
The brain is a bit more complex, it does multiple things in different parts during tasks, some in the left brain some in the left.

I have come to the conclusion that much of mental genius comes from right-brain - or at least whole-brain - exercise. I also believe that savants are able to display feats of brilliance because their mental disabilities tend to suppress left-brain activity.

Keep in mind that the "average" savant has poor social skills.
They can't read bodylanguage or understand irony with their intuition. They have to learn those things analytical.

How many geniuses are we pumping out of our school systems? If left-brain exercise alone is what it took to produce genius, then surely 14,000 hours of practice in public school is enough time to develop this.

They key is diliberate pratice. Most stundents don't do that.

In addition you can't add the time listing to boring talk of your teacher as praticing your logic skills.

[Erock]

Is music your main Right-brained activity? I definitely could have a few more right-brained activities in my day, but I don't really like music or art.

Erock

[Ibanez]

I agree.

I think the Logic vs. Intuition is interesting. People don't trust their intuition because logic is supposed to be superior. However, when taking an exam I find that I will reach a question and lean towards one answer and then somehow use logic to convince myself otherwise and then in the end it turns out my original intuition answer was right to begin with.

Even with music classes in k-12 it's just ok, here's a song play it. A better way would be to teach kids a rhythm and then just let them solo over it.

It also seems like academia doesn't like areas that involve imagination so much. Most of the time they are looked down upon and people say that you should go into something more practical and science oriented.

[Mike Estep]

Brutha:

While there may be integration of left and right hemispheres during various activities, recent fMRI studies also indicate seperateness as well. Read this article from research done at Carnagie Mellon university with normal functioning adults and those with autism.

Here is a very informative site on genius from Win Wenger PhD - And another on savant syndrome from Darold Treffort MD. Both of these men are leading researchers in their fields.

Although I believe in the general premises of left-right brain activity, there are overgeneralizations in popular media. But there is still no reasonable excuse to only be taught logical process while ignoring intuitive ones, when geniuses who change the world obviously use both.

Also, the 14,000 hours does count in practice because students are being trained in logical processess by teachers. It is immaterial to this point whether teachers are boring or not in their presentation. Also, most children are not studying math, science, history, language, etc. independently of their schooling. It is definitely happening in school.

Erock:

You don't have to apply right-brain activity only to music or art. What matters more is practicing and developing your ability to feel and know intuitively toward any area you pursue.

Ibanez:

I don't get it either! That is why I evangalize to my students, with my blog, and in forums like this.


Thanks,
Mike Estep Phd
___________________________________________

Mike Estep.com - Common Sense Outside the Box

[DarkSociologist]

Dear Mike,

Wow, you sure have a lot to say, but then again there is a lot to say about the brain.

First, about the suppression of genius. The government's first and foremost role is to perpetuate society. This means that it must train the majority of the population to be workers, with a minority of individuals who direct the masses. If everyone was a genius, then who would work at McDonalds?

About the role of left-side functionality vs. right-side functionality. Although the brain has a general structural format for processing centers, it also has a great amount of plasticity. I was watching a show about a baby girl that had a major tumor on one side of her brain that had to be removed. The doctors feared that she would be paralyzed on one side of her body, but not long after the surgery she was seen kicking with both legs.

About mental disorders such as autism. It is my personal belief that autism is not a deficit, but merely a non-standard distribution of brain processing centers. The autistic are noted by their lack of social skills, but often have preternatural logic, artistic, etc skills. There is also another disorder (which the name escapes me), in which the individual seems highly intelligent because he has a very eloquent speach. The only problem is they are incapable of understanding simple concepts like addition. Logic has been traced to one area of the brain, whereas communcation skills have been traced to another area. It seems to make sense to me that due to the constraints of our skull, if one area is enlarged, then another area must be reduced.

About genius and crime. I think the crime of geniuses would be directly related to the goals of the individuals and the constraints placed on the individuals. This is deviant theory. If an individual values a goal, he will first try to achieve the goal via traditional means. If the individual is inhibited from achieving a goal via traditional means, then he will seek non-traditional means (which may or may not be crime, depending on what society deems acceptable behavior). The only result of genius is that more avenues of non-traditional means open up to the individual.

Finally, let us not forget the corpus collosium (the bundle of nerves that connect the two hemispheres together). Although you may be focusing on the development of the right-brain and it's role in genius, it is the synergistic interactions between the two sides that creative thoughts to have practical applications. An interesting fact is that women generally have a thicker corpus collosium, which would probably explain why they are generally better at multi-tasking.

[Brutha]

Also, the 14,000 hours does count in practice because students are being trained in logical processess by teachers. It is immaterial to this point whether teachers are boring or not in their presentation. Also, most children are not studying math, science, history, language, etc. independently of their schooling. It is definitely happening in school.

The point was that while the learning does take place in those 14,000 hours not all those hour are taking in which the student learns.
Most student don't have very good criticial thinking skills when they leave school.

I do also think that it would be good if student weren't detaught creativity, but you don't need to talk about right and left brain hemispheres to make a case that creativity should be taught.
The only reason you talk about brain hemispheres is to sound scientific.
This mindset is not only the mindset you want to have less taught in school, it also doesn't help you in this case to add brain hemispeheres to your argument.

First, about the suppression of genius. The government's first and foremost role is to perpetuate society. This means that it must train the majority of the population to be workers, with a minority of individuals who direct the masses. If everyone was a genius, then who would work at McDonalds?

Robots, but that isn't the point.
Each country would benefit if it had more genuises. Theire is no educational system known today (to the people that make politics), that could be adopted that would make every child a genius.
Politicans want good education, but they don't know how to archieve it.

The general public doesn't think that a process like Win Wengers Image Streaming is effictive.
If the public would think so you would find politicans who would try to get it into the classrooms.

So take Hanlon's razor to explain why the school system is the way it is.

[Ibanez]

Plus it' would be hard to grade imagination works I would think.

What would your plan be to foster right brain development?

[Mike Estep]

Brutha:

You are correct that Dr. Win Wenger's image streaming (Project Renaissance with Win Wenger, Ph.D.) is not mainstream to the general public or in our education systems. However, the average consensus of people who have read his most well known book "The Einstein Factor" is 4 out of 5 stars according to over 90 public reviews of the book on Amazon.com that have taken place over a period of several years.

The lack of schools implementing his techniques does not negate Dr. Wenger's credentials. He is a recognized leading authority in accelerated learning research. I have not personally tried all of his techniques. However, before reading about his techniques, I was simultaneously and seperately using my own variations in private music instruction for at least 11 years (now 22 years). After seeing the overall results on myself and on over 2500 private students from all walks of life, I am convinced that the general premises of his theories are correct.

I do not talk about brain hemispheres only to sound scientific. I talk about them in relation to research that has taken place since the 1950's by world renowned experts and Nobel prize winners. Their research, including recent fMRI studies corroborate my beliefs on the matter.

Darold Treffert, M.D. is arguably the world's leading authority on savant syndrome. He has studied living savants for decades. Here is a quote concerning brain hemispheres in savants and previously normal older adults from the FAQ of his website (Wisconsin Medical Society - Savant Syndrome Home Page)...

Quote

"One theory, which quite consistently provides an increasingly plausible explanation for savant abilities in many cases, is left brain injury with right brain compensation. While left hemisphere/right hemisphere separation in the brain is an over-simplification, the fact is that the two brain hemispheres do tend to have specialized functions. The skills most often seen in savants are those associated with the right hemisphere, and those most lacking are those associated with the left hemisphere. A number of cases studied thus far do document left hemisphere damage on CT and MRI scans, and those imaging studies are also correlated with corresponding left-sided deficits on detailed neuropsychological testing. Further, recent PET scan studies, in previously normal, non-disabled older persons where savant skills have emerged as a fronto-temporal dementia proceeds (see below), have shown defects in the left anterior temporal lobe. When those same PET scan studies were carried out on an 11 year old autistic, artistic savant, the same left anterior temporal lobe dysfunction was present. PET studies have also shown particular defects in left hemisphere function in autistic persons, with confirming left-sided findings on neuropsychological tests. Even before CT and PET imaging were available, pneumoencephalograms demonstrated left hemisphere abnormalities, particular in the left temporal lobe areas, in 15 of 17 autistic patients, four of whom had savant skills in music or mechanical interest areas."

End Quote

The reason I use brain hemispheres in my arguments is because it is something that many people can relate to. Also, because I'm dealing with credible evidence from leading authorities and not pseudoscience, it gives more credence to my argument that we're predominantly teaching to half of our brain in our education systems - which in light of the evidence is obviously the incorrect thing to do.

Ibanez:

I have received a number of requests for techniques I would use to increase right-brain learning since I posted my article. I do intend to outline specific techniques I have used. However, I would like some time to reflect and put thought into my explanations. I will post this information here and on my blog as well within the next few weeks.

Thanks,

Mike Estep PhD
______________________________________________

Mike Estep.com - Common Sense Outside the Box

[Iksander]

If you take a drawing (higher quality, the better) of some sort and turn it upside down - you can free-hand copy the drawing with a very scary accuracy. The right brain does a better job of perceiving the whole of a thing without burdening itself in recognizing every little detail and shape.

If instead you turn it right side up and try to free-hand copy it that way, it always turns out to be irritatingly hideous. The left brain tends to analyze all the details and shapes, trying to line them up in a sequential order on the page (much how a computer builds pixel maps) to build the perceived object.

The right side tends to be more holistic and broad - while the left side is more focused and singular. Whether a specific activity is suitable for one or the other is really dependent on the individual - I, for one, greatly enjoy certain logical processes. When I am building computer programs, financial strategies, or entertaining philosophical ideas are a few examples.

There are places for me where the logical process is absolutely meaningless, for example, snowboarding - sailing - martial arts - imagination (something I do the most) - inspirational speaking - and loving a woman.

Now, many of those activities at one point may have required 'logical' step-by-step instruction before it became a holistic activity, the martial arts for one uses quite a bit of logical orientation to build a foundation of efficient and powerful movement. Repetition slowly transfers it into a movement that needs no remembering - or logical steps. Sailing is similar, snowboarding is not - I just 'picked it up', imagination certainly isn't, inspirational speaking is not (I do not use any notes) - and loving a woman is so far from logical it must be right brain. Imagination and love being the two mental and (only for the latter) physical activities that I engage in the most.

I am using the word love to connote the three Greek foundations "Eros", "Logos", and "Agape" - making love to her, reciprocated emotional conversation, and taking care of a woman. My masculinity is always backed up by my logical side, my logical side - is - my absolute foundation upon which I define and evolve my strength and respect as a man. However, who I am becoming always seems to be defined entirely by what I imagine myself to be, or conceive myself to be - a right brain activity.

(Based on that, left brain would be much like 'roots' in the ground, and the right brain would be the foliage growing towards the sun...?)

Personally - I think if you were to 'train' the right side, it would simply end up operating much like the other one. Fretting about how, when, why, and where to use the 'right' side is a very 'left' brain activity. The right side is akin to the chaotic, yet, powerful mother nature - redirect your attention from trying to make the right brain 'brilliant' and just let it be what it already is, brilliant.

So what if we were to, instead of, devising processes for developing genius - devise processes (because the left brain loves processes) to train the left brain into allowing more room for the right side to do what it always does - be brilliant.

From all this, I do personally feel genius is absolutely NOT something that requires 'hard work' to become. It already exists, and simply requires focus. If you love something with enough passion that you can direct your undivided focus and attention - becoming a genius is effortless (assuming you hold no negative self conceptions going into it), focus is not a difficult or strenuous state to engage in unless the object of your attention is something that does not bring you joy, in which case it does become 'hard work'.

The above statement has not been considered of a Savant, do Savants practice their skills obsessively, combined with a less restricted right brain activity for brilliant thinking? Or is the brilliance just 'there' and all they need is basic instruction before it begins to express itself? - that I think would be an interesting discussion, I will think on it further...

Cool topic, hope it keeps going!

[Brutha]

However, the average consensus of people who have read his most well known book "The Einstein Factor" is 4 out of 5 stars according to over 90 public reviews of the book on Amazon.com that have taken place over a period of several years.

A amazon rating can is no good measure. People can write reviews for their own books etc.
In addition you have people who write something like " I have been practicing Wenger's techniques for a year now and have had a 200 pt increase in IQ " If we assume he had a below average IQ of 60 before he now has 260, which would make him by far the brightest person in human history.
To archieve a good amazon rating a book just needs to make high claims but doesn't need to back them up.

But my point isn't that the system is ineffective, I don't know whether it is. My point is that you can explain why it isn't used in public school without asserting that the policticans that are evil.

left hemisphere/right hemisphere separation in the brain is an over-simplification

Right in your quote.
To base your argumentation on an over-simplification is bad.

The reason I use brain hemispheres in my arguments is because it is something that many people can relate to.

Win Wenger states something like IQ can be improved by X points on average by doing imagestreaming a resonable amount of time.
If that claim is right, that is something most people can relate to very well. Most people would want an increase in their IQ.
It is also a good argument to conclude from the fact that Imagestreaming improves IQ that it should be taught in public schools.
If you could get the general public (at first the scientific community) to accept Win Wengers claim that it improves IQ by that amount, it should be possible to get it into school. (you would also need to find a way a teacher could teach it to a class of students, but that should be manageable)
Talking about left and right brain hemispheres metaphysics doesn't get you anywhere.

I just 'picked it up', imagination certainly isn't, inspirational speaking is not (I do not use any notes) - and loving a woman is so far from logical it must be right brain. Imagination and love being the two mental and (only for the latter) physical activities that I engage in the most.

An overall but slight decrease
in right hemisphere activity, i.e., asymmetry, particularly
in prefrontal and limbic regions (including amygdala),
can be stated for love.

It doesn't help us to label these kind of brain processes right brain or left brain.

[Mike Estep]

Brutha,

At this point, I must contend that we agree to disagree about brain hemispheres. I do respect your opinions and appreciate your comments.

My main goal is and always has been the betterment of my students. As long as I teach, I will always think in these terms.

The thing that's really good about forums like this is that it gives everybody a chance to voice a different perspective. This is one way to keep us all on our toes.

Thanks,
Mike
_____________________________________________

Mike Estep.com - Common Sense Outside the Box

[Mike Estep]

Since I wrote my article on left-right brain training, many people have inquired what I would suggest or what I currently do to exercise more right-brained activities. During the next several articles, I will give suggestions from what I have done myself and what I teach my students based upon 38 years of performance and 21+ years of private instruction in music. Keep in mind that my teaching methods have included many years of contemplation and study in personal development, philosophy, and genius. I also use the best parts of my academic education.

In this article, I will discuss exercising and engaging intuitive feeling perceptions: These are the same types of perceptions we rely on before learning how to speak our native tongue. This includes the five senses (see, hear, touch, taste, smell), and emotion. When people drive cars they are using feeling perceptions more than intellectual perceptions. It is evident to see such perceptions when a person plays a musical instrument by ear, plays video games, plays organized sporting activities, or participates in certain martial arts training. However, we are not taught the importance of transferring these feeling perceptions over into every area of life, including intellectual and academic areas. It is important to understand that doing so is a matter of focus.

So, how does one begin to include these perceptions in their endeavors? One of the easiest ways is to GUESS. Yes, I said guess. Guess what the answers are to things – a lot. Regular guessing exercises intuitive processes. When guessing, a person should focus their awareness not only on intellectual information, but also on the previously mentioned feeling perceptions (five senses and emotion). This puts you more in touch with your primal self. When I say primal, don’t confuse this with primitive. There is absolutely nothing primitive about the processes I’m referring to. These feeling perceptions played a big part in the way Mozart, da Vinci, Einstein, Edison, Tesla, and others were able to display brilliance and genius.

We are led to believe in school that to assume is a bad thing (you know, it makes an ASS out of U and ME). However, the very act of assuming puts one in the position of guessing intuitively. Just consider this - intuitive guessing is like a muscle. If exercised properly and regularly, it develops into a consistent and accurate process. If ignored, it atrophies. Now, just because you guess at an answer does not mean that you have to tell everybody what is in your head or use all information gathered. Reserve these things for later when you become proficient. Until then, many people will not understand what you are doing.

The way a musician learns to play by ear is by guessing where notes are on an instrument - a lot. At first, the person guesses wrong. S/he listens to notes in a song on a CD and by trial-and-error tries to find them on the instrument. Over a period of weeks and months the guessing becomes more correct, which leads to finding desired notes in a shorter period of time. The musician begins to develop an intuitive feel of where things are and how things work with a high degree of accuracy. I have personally used this process now for over 38 years. I can listen to any piece of guitar music, regardless of the musical style, and find where the notes/chords are on the guitar with 90-100% accuracy depending on the quality of the recording. During the last 21+ years, it began to occur to me that this process could be, and should be, applied to every area of life.

With all of this guessing, I’m not trying to negate the importance of intellectual study or using the intellect. However, I have come to the conclusion that the intellect alone is too slow and impractical for most endeavors – including academics. As I discussed in my previous article, we are being taught left-brain activities in school, while virtually ignoring right-brain activities. I believe exercising mainly half of the brain leads to a form of mental decay. It is simply incorrect and even harmful to do so. Geniuses regularly exercise both halves of the brain. This is one of the reasons that the trait of genius exists.

In summation, a simple way of exercising your intuitive right-brain is to practice guessing a lot. Include your five senses and emotion – even in academic areas. With enough practice, the skills developed and information gathered will become increasingly accurate, dependable, and highly useful.

Mike Estep PhD
________________________________________________

Mike Estep.com - Common Sense Outside the Box

[Wormwood]

Great article, Mike, and very thought provoking. I have several comments and I’ll try to lay them out in a coherent fashion.

Regarding playing music by ear as a product of intuition; I’m not sure that intuition is the only faculty we utilize. I have played guitar for years without the benefit of formal instruction and so, we might say, I play by ear. There is certainly some intuitive guessing involved but I have noticed that the “guessing” becomes more accurate because my ear has become familiar with and recognizes tones in much the same way that one reads by the use of phonics. As I listen to a song my brain thinks, “That’s a C chord, that’s a G, that’s an E minor…” and so on. When I encounter a sound (a chord) I do not recognize automatically, the intuition kicks in and I only have to make a few stabs at it before getting it right. But the ‘stabs’ are based on notes and their position on the fret board that I already recognize. “That sounds like…” something I already know.

That said, I find that in my case successful right brain function and the ease with which it occurs depends on the application.

I once worked for a large corporation in a position in which I juggled a number of responsibilities as the coordinator of various projects. I developed a reputation as a creative thinker, one who “thinks outside the box” because of my ability to come up with new ways to accomplish business practices that were long thought to be “this is the way we do it because there is no other or better way to do it”. On that plane of creativity I excelled effortlessly and coming up with entirely new ideas seemed my forte.

When I was taking high school and college composition courses, if the instructor asked for a 500 word essay on some specified topic, I could whip one out in record time and always made an A. But if the instructor said, “I want you to make up a story…” it was like a huge steel door in my mind slammed shut; my brain locked up and all I could see was the computer equivalent of the ‘blue screen of death’. This plane of creativity seemed to elude me entirely and the harder I tried the more elusive it became.

For quite some time I convinced myself that I simply do not have that ability. But in the last few years it has occurred to me that perhaps because that plane of creativity does not come naturally to me that I have convinced myself of a falsehood for the sake of convenience, and am further convinced that creativity can be developed on any plane and to some degree if only one believes that this can be accomplished and sets forth with that belief firmly fixed in mind.

Further, it is my considered opinion that we often do not develop right brain faculties because we are so trained in left brain operations as to believe that right brain development should follow the same sort of logical patterns as the left, when in fact that approach is erroneous for obvious reasons. Using established left brain patterns as a template for right brain development simply cannot work. I think we must treat the right brain as a completely different animal, learn its ways, and train it accordingly.

Cheers,
Mike