The Brain Diagram
(To download document, click on the download button at the end of this document. To download the audio, click on the three dots just below.)
How Living for the Future Inspires Irrational Behavior
By Chet Shupe
As modern humans, we live in a world in which everyone thinks what he or she believes is right, a world in which very few can agree on what is right, and yet a world in which everyone believes they are rational. What is there about our brains that enable us to overlook the senselessness in this situation? For another example, the Bible proclaims itself to be the word of God, which provides believers with sufficient evidence to declare that it is. Nonbelievers can see the flaw in this logic yet remain blind to the flaws in our own. If everyone thinks they are rational and right, yet cannot agree on what is right, then all of us are either not rational or not right. We cannot be both.
However, because of confirmation bias, we continue to believe we are both rational, and right. Confirmation bias is a term introduced by English psychologist Peter Wason. It is the tendency of people to acknowledge only information that confirms or strengthens their beliefs or values and is difficult to dislodge once rooted. How does the brain’s ability to produce ideas, beliefs, and behavior that is not based on verifiable evidence benefit our lives?! There must be some advantage, or our brains would not do it. If we could determine what that benefit is, then, by figuring out how to forgo it, our lives may end up making far more sense than we can presently imagine.
In search of an answer, we will discuss the brain diagram, which I developed years ago, to provide a visual reference for studying human behavior. The brain diagram is a functional description of the brain, not a biological one. To create it, I had to decide on the brain’s purpose. While the brain can perform many functions, such as recognizing faces, interpreting body language, and seeing color, this discussion focuses on its ultimate objective—to produce behavior that maximizes the likelihood that the species will flourish. If the brain had any purpose, other than promoting species survival, life, itself, would not exist.
As we move forward with the brain diagram’s explanation, it’s not necessary to thoroughly understand the description of how the different elements of the brain interact. The message lies in the overall picture, not the details.
The Six Elements of the Brain Diagram
· Innate wisdom is the source of our common sensibilities, thus defines our behavioral nature. It has continued to evolve, just as our physical nature has, since the first stirrings of life on earth. Innate wisdom expresses itself exclusively through feelings, never words. To honor this wisdom, on which our species’ survival depends, we do what feels good and avoid what hurts. Because every animate being follows its heart by seeking pleasure and avoiding pain, countless species have lived in sufficient harmony for life to flourish on this planet, for hundreds of millions of years.
· Learned awareness is the adaptive element of the brain. It records the location of life’s necessities—such as food, water, and shelter—and manages routine patterns of behavior.
· Conscious awareness employs what-if rationales to figure out how to manage new, or nonroutine, situations, for which reactions have not been learned.
· The pattern processor interprets the millions of signals arriving from the five senses, in a way that provides the mind with an objective awareness of its circumstances.
· The correlator detects differences between the signal arriving from the sensory system and the one arriving from learned awareness.
· The motor system is the brain’s output. It produces behavior that minimizes the signal it receives from the correlator.
For an overview of how the various elements in the diagram interact, let’s begin by discussing the “subconscious behavioral system.” This system includes the pattern processor, learned awareness, the correlator, and the motor system, all of which are depicted with heavy lines. When driving a car, for example, sometimes we are surprised to realize that we have no recollection of what happened, during the previous five to ten minutes. This does not mean that our brain has not been occupied. Remember how challenging it was to drive, the first time you were behind a wheel? All that activity is still going on, but, now, you are skilled. The adaptive element of your brain has learned the awareness necessary to operate the vehicle.
Learned awareness knows, from experience, where the road should appear, relative to the car. When the vehicle drifts to the right, or left, the output of the pattern processor doesn’t match the output of learned awareness. This results in a signal, at the correlator output, that directs the motor system to turn the steering wheel, as necessary, to ensure that the output of the pattern processor, and that of learned awareness, correlate, indicating that the vehicle is positioned correctly. When this happens, the motor system input signal returns to zero, indicating that no more action is needed. The routine patterns of behavior, in driving a vehicle, or playing a musical instrument, for that matter, are, thus, managed subconsciously, without the involvement of innate wisdom, or conscious awareness.
These two elements come into play when an unexpected event occurs. Suppose another vehicle places you in danger by running a red light. The pattern processor will process this event but learned awareness will not. As a result, the correlator’s output contains all the information about the impending disaster. This information goes to multiple places. Initially, it triggers the “threshold of emotional response,” which notifies innate wisdom that something unusual has occurred. It is also applied to learned awareness, since whatever information appears at the correlator output must, eventually, be learned, to enable the mind to manage routine tasks subconsciously. (Although having to avoid a car that has run a red light is not routine, the fact that the correlator output is applied to learned awareness ensures that we will always remember the event. It also explains why people so often vividly recall the details of their circumstances, at the moment they were informed of unexpected news, such as the assassination of a religious or political leader.)
The correlator output, which contains information regarding the impending disaster, is also applied to innate wisdom, which reacts, by changing the body’s chemical state. This rewires the organism’s neurological system, in a way that prepares the mind-body to optimally react to the situation at hand. And finally, the correlator output is applied to conscious awareness, one of three inputs to the conscious mind. The signal from the correlator provides the conscious mind with an objective view of the emergency. A second signal, from learned awareness, provides the conscious mind with access to knowledge learned from personal experience, which may help resolve the problem.
The third input to conscious awareness is from innate wisdom, but that connection is not shown on the diagram, because it is expressed chemically, not physically. Innate wisdom reveals the species’ needs, through feelings, thus exclusively in the subjective domain. (Yes, even when satisfying feelings of hunger, we are serving our species, because, without its members’ ability to experience hunger, no species would survive.) Each arrow shown arising from the heart-shaped element represents a unique chemical state, in which innate wisdom automatically places the mind-body in reaction to the details of the situation, at hand. The conscious mind detects chemical states as specific feelings—sometimes pleasurable, and other times painful.
Innate wisdom is multi-minded, and thus attends to all the species’ needs, simultaneously. If something needs to be taken care of that can’t be managed subconsciously, because learned awareness has not yet learned how to manage it, then, innate wisdom uses a feeling to request the conscious mind’s assistance.
If more than one issue simultaneously needs attention, the conscious mind will “choose” to resolve the stronger feeling. For instance, if a buffalo is grazing, while a blizzard is moving in, the animal’s desire for shelter will gradually increase. Eventually, it will become stronger than its desire to satisfy hunger, at which time the conscious mind will start “what-iffing” its choices—what-if I go here, what-if I go there—to decide on its best option.
Conscious awareness is single-minded. In the case of a car running a red light, it focuses exclusively on producing the behavior required to avoid hitting the car, thereby returning the body to its unaroused chemical state, by resolving feelings of fear. Consciously managed behavior is applied to the motor system, after being added to the output of the correlator. The conscious mind is never totally in control. It just contributes to the control being continuously provided by the subconscious behavioral system.
Regarding further considerations on how the elements of the brain diagram interact, I leave that to the reader, if so inspired. As an example, individuals who have practiced a performance, to near perfection, are often unable to perform it as well, on stage. This occurs because innate wisdom is so concerned about doing well, that it “emotes” feelings/chemicals of anxiety which we typically refer to as stage fright. This inspires conscious awareness to contribute, by trying to improve the rehearsed performance, an effort that usually degrades it.
But again, the details are not important. What’s important is to recognize that innate wisdom is a reaction device, not a thinking one. Evolution’s process of natural selection has programmed innate wisdom to react to every situation that might occur in the natural world, in a way that enhances the species’ ability to survive. It is also important to notice that innate wisdom controls everything. For example, by changing the body’s chemical state, it modifies the organism’s functionality to optimally manage each unfolding situation—from the need to avoid a predator, to the need to rest. The feelings that result from changed chemical states also control what the conscious mind thinks about—whether it’s about finding a tree to climb, for safety, or a comfortable place to sleep.
The fact that innate wisdom values the life of the species above the individual’s is evident, when a man risks his life, to save others. When asked why he did it, the typical reply is: “I just did what anyone else in that situation would have done,” or “I knew that I would never be able to live with myself, if I didn’t.” He never sees himself as a hero, or special, in any way. Simply put, he instinctively placed the needs of others above his own, because it felt good, which is how innate wisdom rewards us, for serving life—i.e., do what feels good. He also did it because, through feelings, innate wisdom offered him no other choice.
Learned awareness manages all routine behavior, and maintains a “map” of one’s habitat. It is also the brain’s creative device. It constantly rearranges learned information, as it looks for new combinations that will result in novel ideas, solutions, prose, poetry, or music, in response to desires being emoted by innate wisdom. The creative process is largely subconscious. This is most evident when significant solutions appear, out of the blue, at a time when one isn’t even thinking about the problem.
Conscious awareness is the brain’s thinking device, but its thinking is strictly limited to figuring out how to satisfy feelings, as they arise. Unfortunately, because political, ideological, or religious beliefs exist to satisfy imagined future needs, the evidence that verifies what those beliefs promise is never at hand. The human—or languaged—mind, shall we say, solves this problem, by doing something that animal minds can’t. We humans can believe in anything that makes us feel good! In other words, our test for truth, regarding what a belief promises, is never based on critical thinking, because there is no irrefutable evidence on which to base our thoughts, not yet anyhow. Our only test for truth is: Does it make me feel good? If a belief makes us feel good, then our minds perceive it as an established truth, and vice versa.
For example, the belief that Jesus is by our side, and deeply cares, can be a lifesaver, to a person who is suffering from acute loneliness. Indeed, people often speak of their beliefs as having saved their lives. That is why they believe. Their emotional health—that is, their mind’s ability to renormalize their body’s chemical state—depends on the strength of their belief in God, an ideology, an institution, or whatever. An animal that is suffering from loneliness, on the other hand, finds relief—i.e., returns its body to the unaroused chemical state—by finding other animals to be with. Animals are doers, never believers. This isn’t the result of biological differences. They are doers, because they are free to do what feels good, in the moment, whereas, as subjects of rules, laws, and personal ambitions, modern humans are not.
So, we believe we are critical thinkers, not because we have verifiable evidence to support what we believe, but because it feels good to think that our “truth” is irrefutable. The benefit of confirmation bias now becomes evident. Modern humans live in a reality in which virtually all values are established by beliefs. Thus, our minds have little choice other than to somehow convince us that we are correct in what we believe, and that whoever disagrees is wrong. Otherwise, we would not be able to trust any decision we ever made, about the distant future.
Interestingly, since common sense informs us that the future is unknowable, making decisions about the distant future makes no sense in the first place. But, as subjects of legal and monetary systems, we must plan our future for the sake of our very survival.
Animals naturally take pleasure in obeying the simple, but immutable, “Law of Life:” To serve life, do things that feel good, and avoid activities that result in emotional pain. Animals don’t need belief systems because, when complying with the Law of Life, innate wisdom establishes all values. Animals are not cognizant of life’s law, of course. But they don’t need to be. When living in the moment, the only activity that makes sense is to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Humans are also unaware of the Law of Life. But, because our language enables us to worry about having access to future needs, for us, living for the future is the only activity that makes sense. To cure ourselves of conformation bias we would have to forgo whatever advantage we think we are attaining by living for the future.
Having to live for the future, to survive, not only forces us into irrational modes of functioning, but it renders us vulnerable to the same offer by which civil authorities, albeit unknowingly, emotionally/spiritually imprisoned the human race: “If you will agree to comply with our written laws, we will guarantee that you and your descendants will have a permanent place to live, by deeding you ownership, thus, God-like status, over a parcel of land.” Our predecessors had no choice but to accept this offer because all other livable land was quickly becoming unavailable due to everyone else accepting the same offer. Not only did civil law force us to unknowingly break the Law of Life, but conscious awareness is so single-minded that the question, “What’s going to happen when a few people own everything?” never occurred to anyone, in those far earlier times, nor has it since. (The question has obviously occurred to me, but only as the result of circumstances unique to my life.)
Poverty and eventual revolution will be the unavoidable results. But, by the time revolutions occur, people’s sense of wellbeing will have become so tied to their right to own property that confirmation bias will inspire them to blame people for their problems. What starts, as blaming, ends in killing. Revolutions kill people, not rights of ownership—our real problem. Indeed, because the right to own property resides exclusively in our imaginations, it can’t be killed by anything. It can only be walked away from.
Walking away is simple, in one respect. All it requires is that we get on with life. But, to take care of life, we need to be cognizant of the real nature of our circumstances. Whether we live by depending on our sisters and brothers, for survival, as Nature created us to live, or as we now live, by depending on personal wealth, something is going on that we could never have imagined. When we follow our hearts by attending to the needs of those around us, we unknowingly serve life, while we think we are serving ourselves. But, when we follow the law by realizing personal ambitions, we are unknowingly serving the state, while we think we are serving ourselves. The consequences of these two ways of survival are vastly different. The reward for serving life is the spiritual wealth of unconditional love, for our sisters and brothers. The reward for serving the state is material wealth, the value of which exists almost entirely in our imaginations. One may imagine, “If I won the lottery, just think of all the things I could do!” The fact is that, if you did win the lottery, you would feel so spiritually estranged from the rest of the populace that, given time, you would discover that there was nothing you wanted to do!
The question before us is: Do we prefer to be deluded by our imaginations, or inspired, by our innate wisdom, to experience life as Nature intended? Once we can answer this question, we will need no instructions on how to get on with life. By honoring our feelings of the moment, we will have access to our innate wisdom, for the first time in our lives. Our conscious awareness will begin thinking about how to return to the spiritual homes in which we will, again, naturally support each other, as the vulnerable interdependent beings that Nature created. No longer will we have to present ourselves before siblings, friends, and associates, as the invulnerable, independent beings that our institutions keep insisting we must strive to be.
The answer to the question of whether we are rational, or right, is: Yes, we are rational. But we need to remember why conscious awareness exists: The conscious, or rational, mind exists to figure out how to respond to feelings. When the feelings we are trying to satisfy are based on our innate wisdom’s reaction to our immediate circumstances, then our ability to reason empowers us with the agency to react to the present circumstance, in a way that serves life. But when our feelings are based on imagined future concerns, our ability to reason—assuming it is perfect—will perfectly lead us astray.
Regarding the issue of whether we are right, or not, there is no absolute “truth.” There is no proof, for instance, that life, itself, should exist. It is just that, in the world Nature created, life happens to exist, and it is governed by feelings that reveal the wisdom evolution has accumulated over hundreds of millions of years, not by ideals. All concepts of good and evil are based on the unverifiable opinion that we humans can create a peaceful and just future, by forcing one another to comply with a system of laws that define what’s right and wrong. By having us believe that we know what is good and evil, our brains, unbeknownst to us, are taking comfort in the greatest fantasy of all—the idea that we can overrule our feelings with written laws, and still find our lives meaningful, and remain viable lifeforms on this planet.
Despite the unsettling nature of that observation, we can still trust that we remain viable expressions of life, because our species exists. It takes Nature millions of years to create a viable lifeform. That viability cannot be erased in just a few seconds of evolutionary time, no matter how gravely we defy the forces of Nature that created us. But, for the members of a social species to experience the grace intrinsic to being a viable lifeform requires vulnerability and interdependence—vulnerability, because, without our need for one another, we can’t love one another. And, without interdependence, survival requires independence—and there are no grounds for love, there, either!
The connection between love, and being a viable lifeform is that love is the way evolution rewards us, for serving the species, by placing the needs of others above our own. It is through love, not good intentions, that we become viable lifeforms. So, the issue is not how to save the world, but how to regain vulnerability and interdependence. If we can do that, we will, again, be living in the moment. When embracing the circumstances of love—interdependence and vulnerability—we will no longer be guided by our personal ambitions, but by our spirits. If the world is to be saved, it is through the free expression of our soul’s wisdom that Nature will protect it.
Copyright © Chet Shupe 2024
