Intuition and the brain (the saga continues…)
The German magazine (Der Speigel) has an article about some scientists investigating the brain to find our what goes on when we think.
More specifically, they are interested in finding out what goes on when we realize we have made a mistake. They think that what they have found might explain our sixth sense. (Or not, of course)
Briefly, the research is being carried out at the Max Planck Institute (which we have run across elsewhere). The central discovery which has the scientists hopping up and down with glee is that there is a wave of voltage which sweeps across the brain whenever an error is detected.
They have researched this phenomenon carefully and found that there is a warning aspect to it which could give rise to emotions or feelings of something being ‘not quite right’.
Then we get to my favorite part of any scientific reporting, the outline of what they have researched and found. This investigation is a good one (from my point of view).
So far scientists have inventoried, categorized and analyzed errors. They have found that anyone who places too much confidence in technology is at risk of failure. Another cause of error, scientists conclude, is a combination of poor preparation and stress. Unresolved organizational issues, such as the ones that doomed Robert Falcon Scott’s legendary expedition to the South Pole, can also spell the downfall of a mission.
In many cases there is a fine line between a disaster and the discovery of an error.
Well, there you have it! Pretty impressive stuff? If you rely too much on technology, you’re going to get screwed (pardon my language). Who’d a thought it?
As for the other reasons, I could have come up with those myself without too much prompting, but would it have had the clout that an accredited scientist from the Max Planck Institute could have given it? Probably not.
‘But’, I hear you say, ‘where is intuition in this report?’ And I’m glad you asked! Because someone found out
that a large part of error processing occurs in the subconscious. Like Ullsperger, he (a scientist called Ridderinkhof) too suspects that he has tracked down the neuronal correlate of intuition — that inner voice that protects people from errors.
There you have it! Intuition protects people from errors. Nothing else. Again, the narrowing down of a definition to accommodate a small idea and make it seem bigger.
And that, I suppose, is why I am skeptical of scientific investigation of intuition, by and large. Too often the research deals with one small aspect and one small definition and lets everyone assume that they are both much more important than they really are.
No-one seems willing or able to make large claims, to take a broad view or think in new ways about this subject in scientific terms. Maybe that’s the fault of the way research is funded as much as it is the way science is practiced. Whatever the reason, it remains largely ignorant of what the general population knows; that something in us, some aspect of us, allows us to know things that we could not know through our normal five senses.
Once the totality of that reality in all its varieties and experiences is accepted, maybe we’ll make some progress and I’ll stop being gently sarcastic.
Popularity: 57% [?]