Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LeftishBrit

(41,514 posts)
21. Curtis' description here is pretty misleading
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 01:05 PM
Dec 2012

He is no doubt an excellent artist and art educator, but he has picked up some very misleading myths that go around about the brain.

In particular: the right and left hemispheres do not have fundamentally different cognitive styles and personalities in the way that's often implied. There are some important differences between the hemispheres: the left hemisphere in most people controls language, and the right is more involved in spatial awareness. It is also true that in visual processing, there is a tendency for the left hemisphere to be better at perceiving features and the right hemisphere at perceiving wholes - though this is not cut-and-dried. However, it is not the case that the left hemisphere is analytical and logical, and the right hemisphere intuitive and creative. Both hemispheres are heavily involved in all complex mental tasks, whether 'logical' or 'creative' (the two are not mutually exclusive in any case). Nor do most people consistently 'prefer' one to the other, insofar as they can be divided; it tends to depend on the task and context.

As regards preferences for visual/auditory/kinaesthetic, etc. learning - it is certainly true that some people seem to rely more on particular senses than others, though even here on the whole, except for people compensating for a disability (e.g. blind people emphasizing learning through hearing and touch), sensory processing is influenced by task differences at least as much as through individual differences.

Moreover: most complex activities involve a wide variety of skills, and can't be reduced to two different cognitive styles. For balancing the budget, approximate 'intuitive' arithmetical estimation is at least as important as systematic arithmetical reasoning in working out what you can afford. And mathematical reasoning can be quite important to art.

This is not a comment on religion - and indeed there is some (controversial) evidence that particular areas of the brain are particularly activated by religious emotions and experiences - but attempting to counter some of the 'neuromyths' that have become prevalent.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I think I disagree with your last statement notadmblnd Dec 2012 #1
I agree that there are situations to which the theory does not apply, cbayer Dec 2012 #27
OK, so 'normality' tama Dec 2012 #30
While I respect your POV on this and can see the validity of your arguments, cbayer Dec 2012 #32
That's why tama Dec 2012 #35
tama, you are talking over my head. cbayer Dec 2012 #36
Sorry, I'll try, and thanks for asking tama Dec 2012 #38
Thanks, that makes more sense. cbayer Dec 2012 #39
Well, the "quantum looney" etc. tama Dec 2012 #40
This is where we will part ways pretty dramatically. cbayer Dec 2012 #41
Hmm tama Dec 2012 #42
Thank you. okasha Dec 2012 #50
If you recognize the condition, how can you continue to suffer from it without being equally insane? NoOneMan Dec 2012 #56
And then... what the heck do we know? tama Dec 2012 #65
"using this species to develop an antidote against..." NoOneMan Dec 2012 #69
No tama Dec 2012 #70
From what you said Laochtine Dec 2012 #43
I did not say that. cbayer Dec 2012 #44
In silent agreement. Well put. humblebum Dec 2012 #45
The possibility that something is true has no relation to the number of people who believe it. trotsky Dec 2012 #46
So then, if one juror thinks a defendant is guilty, he's guilty, but if all 12 say he's not guilty, humblebum Dec 2012 #47
If one juror 'thinks' he's guilty EvilAL Dec 2012 #74
Never said it did. But I did say that there was a higher probability of guilt humblebum Dec 2012 #83
I don't see it like that, EvilAL Jan 2013 #113
Justin Beiber is the best singer? Laochtine Jan 2013 #88
I think I should probably have added okasha Dec 2012 #49
I have been struggling with putting a similar idea into the right words and cbayer Dec 2012 #60
I recently saw an article about a local group of matachines, okasha Dec 2012 #62
I see no reason to presume otherwise tama Dec 2012 #71
If this is the case, NoOneMan Dec 2012 #76
In terms of their adaptational advantage, for humans, being part of a tribe could be critical. cbayer Dec 2012 #77
Why of course people find religion important NoOneMan Dec 2012 #78
It is interesting that those most discriminated against or who suffer the most have cbayer Dec 2012 #79
Where else are they to turn? NoOneMan Dec 2012 #81
Also tama Dec 2012 #84
I see what you mean. okasha Dec 2012 #48
There were three stages tama Dec 2012 #82
As usual, this discussion is not of much use skepticscott Dec 2012 #2
The two examples you chose actually illustrate two disjoint sets of "knowing". Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #3
The distinction may or may not be valid skepticscott Dec 2012 #4
You may think so tama Dec 2012 #23
It's not my OP skepticscott Dec 2012 #25
Oh, words can mean things tama Dec 2012 #29
Should've been posted in GD. DCKit Dec 2012 #5
Discussions in 'religion' have always dealt with ways of knowing, Thats my opinion Dec 2012 #6
False, as usual from you skepticscott Dec 2012 #8
"fails to respond to challenges to describe in detail these 'other ways of knowing'" - still humblebum Dec 2012 #10
Yes, fail skepticscott Dec 2012 #11
Yep. Same old tired excuse - 'It never happened' - but we know it did, humblebum Dec 2012 #14
Thanks for proving my point skepticscott Dec 2012 #19
Yep, same old tired excuses, er um uh - LIES. As per humblebum Dec 2012 #20
Yep, same old tired excuses AlbertCat Jan 2013 #90
Don't make me laugh. The subject has been covered and examples given ad nauseam as humblebum Jan 2013 #91
The subject has been covered and examples given ad nauseam AlbertCat Jan 2013 #94
This is one of those areas where a suggestion in the scientific literature ... Igel Dec 2012 #7
Very interesting. Thats my opinion Dec 2012 #13
Do you have anything substantive to say, Charles? skepticscott Dec 2012 #17
Scottie tama Dec 2012 #22
Is there a remotely relevant point here? skepticscott Dec 2012 #24
Yup tama Dec 2012 #31
Actually, TMO was condescending and patronising to a poster, mr blur Dec 2012 #34
That's your interpretation, then tama Dec 2012 #37
There really is argument about this- digonswine Dec 2012 #9
The claim by utterly failed claimants skepticscott Dec 2012 #12
You have been so thoroughly debunked in the past from telling this same lie humblebum Dec 2012 #18
I seem to remember a big discussion about this- digonswine Dec 2012 #33
You're correct okasha Dec 2012 #51
just stopped when i hit 'scientism' Phillip McCleod Dec 2012 #15
Doesn't surprise me that okasha skepticscott Dec 2012 #16
That's ok. In that case, you only skipped the last two sentences. cbayer Dec 2012 #28
Yeah, let's chuck out the one thing that we know works. nt Deep13 Dec 2012 #54
Curtis' description here is pretty misleading LeftishBrit Dec 2012 #21
One of my favorite movies is Rashomon by Kurosawa. cbayer Dec 2012 #26
"Is one recollection more valid than the other?" Deep13 Dec 2012 #53
But who is to say which is more true? And does it really matter? cbayer Dec 2012 #61
It matters, and often, as I said, we just don't know. Deep13 Dec 2012 #66
When you talk about the most objective method, you describe science. cbayer Dec 2012 #72
Thanks, cbayer. okasha Dec 2012 #55
When you turn fiction jamtoday Jan 2013 #134
This has nothing to do with the veracity of religious claims. Deep13 Dec 2012 #52
No, you're only assuming that okasha Dec 2012 #57
No, theologies--whether folk or official--are the religion... Deep13 Dec 2012 #58
Wrong. okasha Dec 2012 #59
As further evidence in your presentation... sanatanadharma Dec 2012 #63
How po-mo can you get? Deep13 Dec 2012 #68
Wrong. Deep13 Dec 2012 #64
Mythology and literalism tama Dec 2012 #75
Well that may be true... Deep13 Jan 2013 #111
Thanks for your response tama Jan 2013 #119
Mythology is not theology. okasha Jan 2013 #103
So what's the difference? Deep13 Jan 2013 #108
That's all theology. okasha Jan 2013 #116
A quick and dirty distinction, Deep 13. okasha Jan 2013 #132
Where do you get the idea that there is no theology associated with Native American humblebum Jan 2013 #97
humblebum, tama Jan 2013 #98
The particular subject being addressed was that humblebum Jan 2013 #99
Native rituals are experiental tama Jan 2013 #100
Agreed, though all of us came from tribal cultures similar in many ways to those humblebum Jan 2013 #101
Yes, tama Jan 2013 #102
I get that idea okasha Jan 2013 #104
There does seem to be some equivocation regarding what constitutes theology. humblebum Jan 2013 #109
Please see my post #103, above. okasha Jan 2013 #115
Again, there does seem to be an ambiguity here. I hardly see theology as related solely humblebum Jan 2013 #117
Would you like to tell more about your background and practice? tama Jan 2013 #110
I'm Tsalagi (Cherokee). okasha Jan 2013 #114
Thanks tama Jan 2013 #120
Should have added: okasha Jan 2013 #121
Yup, Road Man :) nt and thanks again tama Jan 2013 #122
Could you define "medicine man" ? Leontius Jan 2013 #127
What I really dislike about the term okasha Jan 2013 #131
Are you trying to claim there's a thing called "the religious experience"... Silent3 Dec 2012 #67
Maybe these "experiences"... NoOneMan Dec 2012 #73
Can you give an example of "self-evident knowledge"? Silent3 Jan 2013 #87
This came first to mind: tama Jan 2013 #93
You're making some assumptions for which I see no basis. okasha Jan 2013 #105
I find Curtis' explanations, to be simplistic and demeaning to human variety, but your last.... Humanist_Activist Dec 2012 #80
basically you are claiming that reality is determined by popular vote, which is the most idiotic... cleanhippie Jan 2013 #85
But isn't that tama Jan 2013 #86
Aka, "consensus reality." okasha Jan 2013 #106
Learn about things before spouting off about them otherwise you come off... Humanist_Activist Jan 2013 #124
He seems to know exactly what he talking about and what he is talking about IS taught humblebum Jan 2013 #125
I just can't imagine why you complain that people don't listen to you. cbayer Jan 2013 #133
No, because that isn't accepted as evidence alone... Humanist_Activist Jan 2013 #123
No, but tama Jan 2013 #128
A problem with your example, the word "pretty" is itself subjective... Humanist_Activist Jan 2013 #129
The example was bit tongue in cheek tama Jan 2013 #130
He argues that the art student must rely on intuitive rather than rational information processing .. AlbertCat Jan 2013 #89
Are you an artist? tama Jan 2013 #92
Are you an artist? AlbertCat Jan 2013 #95
You have your theory of inspiration tama Jan 2013 #96
You're arguing with a number of things that neither Curtis nor I said. okasha Jan 2013 #107
rely on parts of your brain that do not depend on such "rational" divisions. AlbertCat Jan 2013 #112
May I suggest that you try to draw a rounded object using 1- or 2-point perspective? okasha Jan 2013 #118
Then tell us how one determines whether a drawing is good or not? humblebum Jan 2013 #126
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»"Other ways of knowi...»Reply #21