Skip to main content

expanding horizons and letting go: a recurring message

I look up to the people that are able to carry out things lightly
Not that these things don't take hard work and effort
But their trust in themselves that what they are doing matters
The way they are able to gravitate in a certain direction without any initial hesitation

And this is what I lack, I let so much of my judgment in my brain run the course of my life
Instead of letting things be, letting nature run its course

How many days am I filled with thoughts that stunt my motivation
In some ways, it is better to follow your heart, that instinct.
And these messages keep coming back to me through literature and experience

The art of archery requires complete interaction with the subconscious being, letting go of the idea of yourself and trusting your natural instinct.
To be a master of the movement that's required for this art, you need to stop thinking about the target and let your motions dictate the course of the arrow.

Even in neuroscience, there's research that shows that we have very limited conscious control over our movements and our behavior.
So much so that the question of free will becomes a more controversial topic.

So if this were the case, how much of our thoughts actually matter and are necessary? I'm still on the fence with this one. Ofcourse our automatic movements are taken care for us by the subconscious brain. But how much of our voluntary actions and decisions are affected by the thoughts we have about them and the level of reflection that we have?

I've heard stories of people in sport and art being completely present in their craft, not letting unnecessary thoughts guide them. How much of this influences our performance and our presence in the world? What is the most natural form that we are supposed to exist in? A state of reflection/introspection or instinct?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

theories on brain localization

There are three major theories on how the brain is organized, in terms of its structure and function. Phrenology was proposed by Gall in the late 18th century who thought it was possible to determine character traits by examining the external bumps on the head. All behavior/mental function was assigned a location in the brain, and using more or less of these regions determined these bumps. The aggregate field view was raised by Flourens (1920s) using experimental evidence that showed that all areas are important for each mental function. So any part can perform all functions and there was no localization. Cellular connectionism (supported by Hughlings Jackson, Wernicke, Sherrington, Ramon y Cajal) states that individual neurons are signalling units that are arranged in groups, each having a particular function. References  E. R. Kandel, J. H. Schwartz, T. Jessell, Principles of Neural Science (McGraw-Hill, New York, ed. 4, 2000).

Is there an emotional brain? (arguments against)

The limbic system has been commonly referred to in scientific literature as the emotional brain. But we know now with more information and advanced technologies that the limbic system is an ambiguous concept, it is what LeDoux says is just a “useful anatomical shorthand”. One evidence that challenges this theory is that areas that are considered unique to mammals (therefore termed the “mammalian brain”) is also present in ‘primitive’ creatures such as reptiles and amphibians. For example, a study conducted by Gilles Laurent and colleagues in 2018 using single cell RNA-sequencing technology showed that the neurons of the pallium of reptiles had similar genetic makeup to that of the hippocampus and amygdala of mouse and humans! These areas are what MacLean included in the limbic system theory, yet they are present in these ‘lower’ animals. Moreover, the same study showed that the anterior dorsal cortex of the pallium in reptiles was similar to the human neocortex, which is a layer ...

on empathy & kindness

 i've learnt so much about empathy and kindness and love these past few months  i always expected another person to show love for me,  before i can give it to them.  and if they did show love from the start, i always thought there wasnt a reason to. that they were just desperate, or being crazy, irrational.  but if we all think like that, no one will ever take a step forward  (luckily not everyone is like this, and we can heal eachother) i ran away from people that showed me love but i also never gave people that love either  we should be kind to people, as they are  without expecting reward or praise or something back from them.  if they are willing to accept that, then good if not, then such energies should be attributed elsewhere (you can't pour tea into a close pot) if they return that love, we should accept it and not question it (when someone opens the door for us, do we question why they're doing it? no) no matter how bad his bad habit...