The Duality of the Brain in Perceiving and Processing Information
(Chapter 3)
We can begin to understand the human body as a nonlinear network by looking more closely at how we have developed a linear model of the universe through our self-awareness process, and how that model has led humanity to perceive itself as disconnected from the guidance of the self-organizing process of the universe. What we will find is that this perception both granted us the capabilities of incredible technologies, and that this linear perception based subjective observation ultimately is an approximation of the real performance of the universe.
Early in our development, human beings began using their hands and vocal systems to increase their ability to cooperate with each other. They used sign language for short-range communication and vocal projections for long-range communication. They mimicked the sounds of other animals to attract certain animals and distract dangerous ones. Combining sign language and vocal projections eventually created a subjective virtual world of information. The expression of abstract concepts enabled an agreed upon perception of physical objects when the communicator and communicatee were physically distant from the objects being described.
This separation of subject from the object was a major achievement in communicative technology and the development of human consciousness; and it also allowed us to illusively separate ourselves from the greater environment. This illusive separation created a linear perception that assumes that we are all alone in this universe, struggling to survive, independent and separate from the greater network. And we therefore created a linear, approximate model that aims to protect our separated self from the rest of the universe.
The stability and order that exists in our immediate surroundings including the orderly cycles of our sun, moon, seasons, and so on led us to believe that this approximate linear model is an accurate model, because there is a perceived proportionality and predictability of cause and effect in our observations. The approximate model is a simplified model that eliminates randomness by reducing the web of events to only one or so seemingly most significant causes, and the result is that we overlook the randomness that is a part of the real world and reduce it all to a narrative of orderly and linear events. And so from our linear observations, we began relying on linear thinking—a reduced logic. This perceived order of linear thinking is a very powerful tool to work with when working with systems that are performing at equilibrium. These orderly and stable systems are modular and can be broken into pieces. Each piece can be analyzed separately and solved, and finally all the separate answers can be recombined, literally added back together, to provide the same answer to the problem. These linear systems are what our current reductionist science is based on, and with linear perception the whole is equal to the sum of its parts. But linearity approximates a nonlinear reality, and therefore overlooks a reality that is performing at the edge of chaos: where cause and effect are not proportional, and the whole which is greater than the sum of the parts.
Any event is the result of a collective web of events
According to the universality of the power law distribution of nonlinear networks, there is a dominant participant in any network of events. Eliminating the supposedly insignificant participants of the event and focusing on only the dominant participant provides a predictability that provides determinism, certainty, and expectation as tools for judgment and control over outside events. When we focus on the dominant element and get the expected result, it further reinforces our belief in the linear model. Therefore, our linear thinking becomes a judgmental logic based on approximate models. Then by modeling the world in our mind this way, we notice that there is proportionality between the distance from the source and the clarity of what we see or hear. This reinforcement leads us to believe that cause and effect are proportional, as focusing on the dominant element provides higher predictability and reinforces our judgmental logic and linear thinking.
Let’s observe the lack of proportionality between cause and effect in an event such as a car crash. In this scenario consider a car crash at an intersection with a stoplight. If one driver received a phone call just as they were heading out the door and it was a wrong number, this would have delayed them by just a few seconds. This delay would have the driver reaching the intersection at a slightly different time than they would have otherwise. The second driver runs a red light and hits them. This event, like any other we experience, has an indeterminable network of interconnected events and experiences that precede the moment of the accident. Using linear logic, we freeze the event at the moment of the accident and judge the dominant cause based on information most immediate to the moment of the crash: the other driver might have been drunk, sleepy, or otherwise distracted leading them to run a light. But in reality, there are many factors that led to the crash in that intersection. If the first driver had not answered that wrong number, they would have passed through that intersection a few seconds earlier, avoiding the accident. The phone call was such an insignificant cause, but it potentially had a major effect.
Since our linear logic is based on the proportionality of cause and effect, the chaos and uncertainty in the nonlinear world highlights the non-proportionality of cause and effect and inconsistency of our linear judgment system, and our values and beliefs rooted in our linear model. So why do we continue to perceive, think, behave, relate, and create value systems based in linearity?
Linear thinking as a defense mechanism
Linear thinking has been implemented as a defense mechanism to protect this illusively separated identity. It is possible that the areas of the brain that create procedural memories and define our orientations when we are thinking linearly are the same areas of the brain that activate our survival instincts. The defensive nature of linear thinking leads to a negative attitude towards change as it codes that which is being perceived by the body network based upon difference or judgment. And this judgment of what is “different” or “separate” has led to a perception of the world that is dominantly biased towards fear, guilt, blame, anger, violence, and hopelessness. This general fear of change also results in a lower quality of information processing, particularly of chaotic events and challenges that we are witnessing in our increasingly nonlinear digital world. By focusing on the liabilities of our actions rather than the achievements, we are unable to benefit from our achievements because we are not appreciating them as assets of a greater whole that could then be combined with other appreciated assets to create a sum that is greater than its individual parts. Guided by our perceived illusive separation, we created linear relationships based in this linear judgment for the purposes of self-assertion, short-term gain, domination, competition, control, and liability management. And this has led to our development of linear values based on rigidity, quantity, and consumption.
Some neuropsychologists are calling linear thinking the “default state of mind.” According to psychologist Kelly McGoinigal in her work The Neuroscience of Change (2012), in the default state of mind, we hold a critical opinion about the present. By time traveling in our minds, we create an alternate reality, regretting the past and projecting it as a negative liability onto the future. Worrying about the past or future prevents us from giving full attention to the present, and it hinders our ability to focus our creative brains to manage current challenges. The default state of mind also creates a self-referential identity, or ego, separate from others, which linearity leads us to be compelled to defend it. As scientist Jill Bolte Taylor explores through her personal experience in her book My Stroke of Insight, the human brain perceives and processes linear and nonlinear information primarily in left- and right-side hemispheres, respectively. Although dividing the brain strictly into two regions is an oversimplification and is not a holistic approach, the construct simplifies our discussion. When we think linearly (in “default” or “survival mode”) most activity takes place in the left-side brain; when we are thinking nonlinearly by implementing systems thinking, the majority of activity takes place in the right-side. While the left-side brain is analytical, deterministic, judgmental, reductionist, archetypally masculine, and materialistic, the right brain is observant, nonjudgmental, holistic, archetypally feminine, and spiritual. The left-side primarily perceives and processes information in a more orderly, linear way, creating a model or perception that separates us from the self-organizing universe. The right-side, however, primarily perceives and processes information in a nonlinear manner creating a model or perception of the world that is holistic, as it is connected and synced with the inherent self-organizing process of the universe.
Currently, linear thinking and left-side brain activity is dominant not only in our minds, but throughout our societal structures. The social design favoring linear thinking propagates linear values and those who are able to learn to embrace and operate by these values are rewarded by social advancement as they navigate our various social systems. This linear bias can also be seen in the design of so many of our tools that favor the left-side brain, which controls the right-side of the body. By designing this way we are perpetuating linear values and their domination over the whole human network. And by aligning with this pattern of a dominating perception of the world, we are furthering an imbalance within the physical body while we externally design our environment and education systems encourage linear, archetypally masculine, dominant thinking. In exchange for our linear biases, we have lost touch with a natural intuitiveness, spirituality, and creativity that will only re-emerge once we bring back into balance our left- and right-side brains.
On the other hand, systems thinking is nonlinear thinking that is rooted in the greater self-organizing process of the universe, and so it is a perception that observes the universe as a highly interconnected, dynamic network of relationships and recognizes how the components of a network interact to give rise to emergent processes. It is a holistic logic based on behaviors of nonlinear living networks in which all members implement their assets in a manner of cooperation and partnership to achieve the long-term goals of the whole network, creating a whole that is greater than the sum of the network’s parts that is beneficial to all members of the network. The non-proportionality of cause and effect that creates an inconsistency in our linear judgment also provides an observant and nonjudgmental quality to nonlinear thinking. Nonlinear logic is a thinking that welcomes change and challenges as it recognizes chaos as a prerequisite to evolve to a higher level of cognitive order through self-organization.
Because systems thinking is consistent with the inherent self-organizing process of the universe, we can use systems thinking to guide us to reconnect with the greater creative process. It’s a paradigm shift in our model of the universe toward simplicity, flexibility, quality, patterns, relationships, cognitive process, interconnectivity, and interdependency, shifting our perception from separation to connectedness of the whole. This shift in perception encourages our thinking based in negativity, blame, anger, revenge, violence, and hopelessness to shift to logic that is observant, positive, forgiving, tolerant, peaceful, and hopeful. As we shift our thinking, we too will shift our behaviors as this new highly interconnected model, and subsequently we will see a shift in our relationships from self-assertive to integrative, from rational to intuitive, and from reductionist to holistic, as we begin to observe the value of practicing unconditional love. It will also shift our values of consumption to conservation, competition to cooperation, quantity to quality, domination to partnership, rigidity to flexibility, and liability management to asset management, as we become more interested in supporting all the parts and their relationships because it is acknowledging each as contributing assets serving the greater system. As we shift from linear to nonlinear thinking, we gain a greater ability to intuit as well as to process information analytically, further benefiting all highly connected members and their connections with highest efficiency. In this way nonlinear thinking provides a hopeful, creative, peaceful, ecologically harmonic framework to navigate a nonlinear, chaotic, digitally integrated world.
Nonlinear thinking provides an arena for a state of mind commonly being referred to as “mindfulness.” When we are mindful, we experience events with our senses rather than our judgments. We are fully aware of the present moment as a creative mode where we are selfless, totally connected to the flow of the inherent self-organizing process of the universe, with the knowledge and power of the whole system. Many athletes and musicians describe this flow state as being “in the zone” where the linear, logical mind is no longer the dominating force and the person’s performance seems to be nearly effortlessly guided by higher intuitive instruction. It is highly possible that this state of mind activates the areas of our brain where all metaphysical experiences of our ancestors have been stored, and this is likely why many nonlinear scientists have a certain degree of spiritual awareness.
It is very important to recognize that linear modeling, reductionist science, and its corresponding technologies are incredibly useful tools that enabled us to achieve our current understanding of nonlinear science, the concept of the living universe, nonlinear logic, and even our realizations of the limitations and liabilities of the linear model itself. In this way, the linear model is a major achievement in our expanding understanding of our universe and of the continued development of human consciousness. Linear thinking is an asset in providing communicable order to our routine activities, including communicating the ideas inspiring this writing with you, the reader. And so, the main purpose of this writing is to encourage the unification of linear and nonlinear perception in order to achieve the ultimate potential of our creative minds. And though the process of developing linear thinking may seem off course from the greater self-organizing process we are a part of, it has served more as a detour that is leading us back to join with the self-organizing process with more measurable understanding of how to perform in synchronization with it. We are at a point in human history where we have consumed the resources of the Earth and converted them into information that we’ve used to reinforce our linear model, perception, thinking, behavior, relationship, and values. And now we have arrived at a moment where this information is allowing us to recognize that we are part of a greater self-organizing process, to examine how that process works, and to discover how we can align ourselves with it.
In the current digital age, a combination of nonlinear theories, cognitive science, neuropsychology, and spiritual teachings allow us to acknowledge the power of the linear and nonlinear perceptions and how to holistically integrate the two to achieve the ultimate potentials that exist within us. By investigating how the domination of linear logic functions in the human body, we will gain deeper insight into how to realign ourselves with the ongoing self-organizing process of our body.
* * *
With what we have learned about self-organizing living networks, next we’ll investigate our body network as a metaphor for any self-organizing network. In the process we will find out how the domination of linear thinking and relationships created a disconnection from the universal, ongoing, self-organizing process. And because of the universality of behavior of all nonlinear networks, these observations can then be applied as a metaphor to any network at any scale.
