On topic: book reviews, intuition, creativity, learning, etc.

[Edward K. Ream]

I've read several books recently that all have something to do with
the brain's hemispheres and intuition. The relationship with
creativity and learning is direct, in a round-about way ;-) I mention
them here because there will be some strands of thought that will
reappear in some future threads.

In the order I read them:

The Gift of Fear, by Gavin de Becker
http://www.amazon.com/The-Gift-Fear-Gavin-Becker/dp/0440226198

My Stroke of Insight, by Jill Taylor
http://www.amazon.com/My-Stroke-Of-Insight-Scientists/dp/0340980508

The Power of Habit, by Charles Duhigg
http://www.amazon.com/The-Power-Habit-What-Business/dp/1400069289

Imagine, by Jonah Lehrer
http://www.amazon.com/Imagine-Creativity-Works-Jonah-Lehrer/dp/0547386079

All these books relate to what scientists now call the "default
state", or "default network", the *active* unconscious mind that is
always working in the background. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Default_network

Edward

[Matt Wilkie]

> My Stroke of Insight, by Jill Taylor
> http://www.amazon.com/My-Stroke-Of-Insight-Scientists/dp/0340980508

Jill Taylor also has a very good TED talk on the same experience:

"“I realized, ‘Oh my gosh! I’m having a stroke! I’m having a stroke!’
The next thing my brain says to me is, ‘Wow! This is so cool! How many
brain scientists have the opportunity to study their own brain from
the inside out?’”"

http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html


Haven't read the book yet, it's on my todo list though. Thanks for the
other titles also.

--
-matt

[HansBKK]

Yes, I love it when people play "scientific rationalist skeptic" to the point that they don't maintain the one attitude fundamental to a true scientific approach and claim "if our current state of science can't prove it then it doesn't exist and you're a gullible superstitious idiot to believe X is possible".

We haven't even begun to scratch the surface of understanding consciousness and mind from an "objective/evidence-based" POV, and I'm sure that many currently non-mainstream interpretations of such, whether from traditional spiritual practices "new age" "new thought" etc movements will turn out to have nuggets of truth in them down the road.