Sometimes a Spinning Dancer is Just That

In a previous post, I introduced an image of a spinning dancer and included the theory behind why some see her spinning to the right and some to the left (right brain versus left brain.)

An article today in the NY Post refutes that theory. They say it is something that happens entirely in the visual system (I thought the brain was part of the visual system??)

At the time, I remember being wary of how they could KNOW that it was a right/left brain phenomenon because a number of friends that are very "right brain" could not see it the way they were supposed to be able to see it. And vice versa. But, I went with the theory presented without digging deeper because I thought it was neat. And harmless.

Now I wonder.

I wonder how much of that happens? Recently on the Ellen Degeneres talk show, Dr. Wayne Dyer was talking about how research has shown that serotonin levels (a chemical that makes us happy) are increased when someone receives a gift of kindness. He cited that same research as stating that not only the receiver benefits from those happy feelings (serotonin increases) but the giver as well. Not only that but all of those witnessing the exchange had a similar increase in serotonin. Of course, I could infer so much from this. THIS is why people get addicted to doing service and get so high off of it. It made something make sense in my head. Only after talking about it with someone else did I go... wait a minute. Let me search for that research.

I'm pretty good at finding things on the internet and I couldn't find any indication of that research that he mentioned. I found many people asking where he got that fact from (it appears that the first time it was mentioned was in one of his books) but no one else is familiar with that study... including one psychiatry site I visited. Did he make it up and now other people are passing it around as fact? (including myself this weekend) If so, is that a bad thing? I mean, it's a nice, beautiful image.. what's the harm? That's the logic behind the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus after all.

Interesting, isn't it? Just for ourselves. What else are we accepting as truth because someone cites an authority in order to bypass our own system of questioning.

Question everything. Even me saying to question everything. Why not? What is there to lose?

Distance Factor, Angle Factor: Perspectives

A few days ago I got another reminder of how your views and perspective are more dependent on where you are now, than any sort of universal truth. Several of us were setting up some flower arrangements around a tree and each person was standing in a different position so we all saw "center" as a different place. It was outside and the goal was to have the arrangements placed so that the oak tree was centered between them, but all of us had a different idea of where the audience was going to sit, so we all saw "center" as relative to where we were standing - so it was different for each of us. And actually all of us ended up being "wrong" in the end. That may be hard to follow. Perhaps an easier way to explain this is to post this image:

Sitting close to your monitor, you see Mr Angry on the left and Mrs Calm on the right. Now, get up from your chair and back up 10 feet or so. Watch them switch positions. That's what I mean. What you see, depends on where you are looking from. That's why arguing about truth is so futile. You can be absolutely sure of what you are seeing, but the other person is looking from a different position and sees a different truth. Each may be "true" but the difference in perspective makes them seem different. And most people have a hard time believing that multiple opposing views can be true at one time.

Adyashanti actually addresses this in an interesting way:

There is a very famous poem written by the third patriarch of Zen, Seng-tsan, called the Hsin-Hsin Ming, which translates as Verses in Faith Mind. In this poem Seng-tsan writes these lines: "Do not seek the truth; only cease to cherish opinions." This is a reversal of the way most people go about trying to realize absolute truth. Most people seek truth, but Seng-tsan is saying not to seek truth. This sounds very strange indeed. How will you find truth if you don't seek it? How will you find happiness if you do not seek it? How will you find God if you do not seek God? Everyone seems to be seeking something. In spirituality seeking is highly honored and respected, and here comes Seng-tsan saying not to seek.

The reason Seng-tsan is saying not to seek is because truth, or reality, is not something objective. Truth is not something "out there." It is not something you will find as an object of perception or as a temporal experience. Reality is neither inside of you nor outside of you. Both "outside" and "inside" are not getting to the point. They both miss the mark because outside and inside are conceptual constructs with no inherent reality. They are simply abstract points of reference. Even words like "you," or "me," or "I," are nothing more than conceptual points of reference existing only in the mind. Such concepts may have a practical value in daily life, but when assumed to be true they distort perception and create a virtual reality, or what in the East is called the world of samsara.

Seng-tsan was a wily old Zen master. He viewed things through the eye of enlightenment and was intimately aware of how the conditioned mind fools itself into false pursuits and blind alleys. He knew that seeking truth, or reality, is as silly as a dog thinking that it must chase its tail in order to attain its tail. The dog already has full possession of its tail from the very beginning. Besides, once the dog grasps his tail, he will have to let go of it in order to function. So even if you were to find the truth through grasping, you will have to let it go at some point in order to function. But even so, any truth that is attained through grasping is not the real truth because such a truth would be an object and therefore not real to begin with.

He has more to say about it so follow the link to read it if you are interested...

Awareness Test

Care to test your awareness? This is interesting... especially in light of the subject matter of this website.


On another note: Sinapalooza '08
This article was hilarious. What was being written about was not that surprising really. But I thought his tone was right on the mark. Here is a snippet:

...what's perhaps most amusing is that in this modern age, someone still feigns to have the authority to invent new sins in the first place, to perpetuate the inanity of the very concept, to torque and mold and reshape divine will as he sees fit, just sort of making it up as he goes along, expecting everyone to basically kneel and cower and kiss the ring. Is that not fabulous, in a hey-look-we're-back-in-1328 sort of way?

Ah, the Pope doesn't hold the monopoly on that does he?

Which Way Does Your World Turn?

Do you see the dancer turning clockwise or counter-clockwise?
(Note: You may have to click the image to see the animation.)

Most people see her turning counter-clockwise. That means most of us rely more strongly on the left side of our brain. If you see her turning clockwise, it means you live more from the right side of the brain.

However you see the dancer turning shows only what you are initially inclined to perceive. But you can always try to see things from the other perspective.

Try it now. Try to see the dancer turn the other direction (you may have to look away briefly and then look back).

LEFT BRAIN PEOPLE	RIGHT BRAIN PEOPLE
Are influenced more by logic are into details rely on facts focus on words and language see present relative to past excel in math/science know acknowledges see order/patterns remembers the name are reality-based form strategies are practical play it safe	Are influenced more by feeling are into the "big picture" (meaning) rely on imagination focus on symbols and images see present relative to future excel in philosophy/religion believe appreciates see spatial relationships remembers the function are fantasy-based present possibilities are impetuous take risks

It's all about perception. This is a series of graphics, strung together to simulate something happening. However you see it, you are SURE of what you are seeing. Is it any wonder that we can all have a different experience of an event and come away thinking that we KNOW what we SAW?

More Fun Mind Control

Derren Brown and his Mind Control program continues to fascinate me. For those that are interested, you can go here to take the tests to see how easily you are influenced and how likely you would fall for what he does. You can read the section on planting ideas for a very cursory overview of why you may have chosen the answers you did.

For those wanting a more in-depth look -- examining how Derren does what he does (and how you can too), you may want to order the book Mind Control Revelation (it's only available in the UK at the moment, but you can order it just like you order from the U.S. version of Amazon):

Mind Control - for fun and profit

If you are not watching the new show, "Mind Control" (Wednesday nights, Sci Fi channel), you are missing something fascinating. The premise of the show is a self-proclaimed illusionist, Derren Brown, who seems able to impose his will on others with "little more than a pep talk or a gesture." Derren uses various manipulations and persuasive techniques to push people's psychological buttons and get them to do some pretty amazing things (in a very "These are not the droids you're looking for" kind of way.)

There have been a few episodes already but the Sci Fi channel will probably rerun them. Some clips are on the Channel Four website.

Among the most interesting stunts I've seen in the last two episodes:

• Derren uses subconscious cues for about 20 minutes on unsuspecting shoppers and, at a verbal cue from him, they stop mid-stride and raise their hand into the air. When interviewed later, all seem baffled as to why they did it. They think it curious that other people all raise their hand suddenly only to look at their own hand and find it raised. Seemingly, it was of their own volition. But was it?
• Another fascinating clip is when Derren invites two advertising executives to a meeting. On their way to the meeting, they are unknowingly exposed to things that plant images in their minds. So, when Derren asks them for suggestions for an advertising campaign, their 'original' ideas merely reflect what they have already been programmed to come up with. Fascinating perspective on how someone can be manipulated into thinking something and even made to think it was their own idea in the first place.

Perhaps it was so powerful to me because I've been doing these interviews, but I thought I'd pass it on in case it strikes a chord with any of you as well.