Putting the More Powerful Part of the Mind into a Position of Control!
I just finished Malcolm Gladwell’s 2007 book, Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking; how I came into possession of Blink is stronger evidence for the power of the other-than-conscious parts of the minds of these human bodies we occupy than even the content of Gladwell’s book …which is very compelling! About three years ago I started doing a bit of research on the internet into the branch of science called neurobiology; which culminated in the writing of my latest “Brad Cullen” book, Integration of the Mind, ©SHS Publishing, Burnaby, BC, Canada – November 2014.
That study developed in me the thesis that the mind, contained in this body-bag I occupy, is comprised of each of the billions of cells scattered throughout the entire body; each of those cells having a neurotransmitter which is in constant communication with all the other cells, from the top of the head to the tips of the toes and which make up the entire nervous system and IS the mind.
The brain, according to much of the available neurobiological research, while an integral part of the whole, is more like a telephone switching station or the microprocessor of a computer and not the entirety of the mind as we’ve been led, until just recently, to believe.
The other-than-conscious parts of the mind, according to neurobiological research, are able to process information multiplied millions of times faster than the conscious part. This fact indicated to me, and the primary reason for writing Integration of the Mind, that I needed to find a way to involve the other-than-conscious parts of my mind in the kinds of things we’ve been led to believe are the sole responsibility of the cognitive or thinking “conscious” part of the mind.
During a telephone call with the CEO of the company, that published Integration of the Mind, he told me that the reason he felt this was such an important book and what so many people missed, he felt, was the concept of bringing the conscious and subconscious into a loving, cooperative relationship with each other.
Before elaborating a bit on exactly what I mean by such a relationship and the ways I’ve discovered to implement it, let’s go back to Gladwell’s book Blink and how I obtained it, because it will provide a perfect example of one of the advantages of having an active and cooperative partnership between the two parts of our minds.
I had about two dozen books cluttering my office which I decided to donate to the library within the clubhouse of our neighborhood. As I was placing them on the intake table, my attention was drawn to a title on a bright yellow dust jacket cover on the book shelves nearby. All of a sudden it was as though there was a spotlight focused on the shelf above the glaring yellow cover to, Blink: Thinking without thinking, I immediately knew I was supposed to take it.
I didn’t realize the reason until I brought it back to my office and couldn’t put it down …until I read it to the end, while scribbling several notes. Here’s the deal: Two days ago I very purposely told MEGA-me, the affectionate name I use for what I refer to as the internal supervisor of all the parts of the other-than-conscious parts of the mind of this body I occupy (and who is also a co-chairman and equal member of my imaginary mastermind group of advisors with whom I sit around a conference table for advice in making decisions), that I needed some reference material for a thesis growing in my consciousness.
As is becoming a habit, I trusted and fully expected MEGA-me to follow through …and Blink was the result; …and, it is doing the job perfectly! The thesis referenced just above, is that there are many things, such as obtaining Blink, that are far better left to the other-than-conscious and that I needed, as a purposeful intent, to take the conscious part out of the equation and to stop interfering with the automatic work of the other-than-conscious. As bizarre as this may be sounding to some of you, I urge you to stop judging and look at it from my perspective.
If you have any of the tendencies that I, just as millions of others have been trained to believe, that is, that the conscious part of the mind should be the captain of my ship of life and that all the other-than-conscious parts of the mind should be subordinate members of the crew –my rightly or wrongly interpretation of a strong contention of one of my favorite authors, Robert Anthony– then you may want to pay attention to the amazing discoveries a number of us are enjoying by allowing our imaginations and other-than-conscious parts to play a far bigger role in decision making and, again, to stop interfering with the process.
Now then some important stuff gleaned from Gladwell’s Blink: Thinking Without Thinking; boiled down into just four questions this best-selling author and his thirty-year experience with the New Yorker and the Washington Post as a top rated science and medical journalist posed and answered in his book: (1) Why are some people brilliant decision makers, while others are consistently inept? (2) Why do some people follow their instincts and win, while others end up stumbling into error? (3) How do our “brains”* really work-in the office, in the classroom, in the kitchen, and in the bedroom? (4) And why are the best decisions often those that are impossible to explain to others?
The answers Gladwell gives are brilliant and authoritative with some great neurobiological scientific data about the power of the “subconscious”* to back it up, BUT he, as does any top, experienced journalist tends to do is report, without a whole lot of useful suggestions as to how us common folks can engage the other-than-conscious parts of the mind to take over and get the conscious part to get out of the way when that is an appropriate avenue to get better results.
* “Brains” and “subconscious” are in quotes simply because these are both words that tend to reinforce our archaic programming forgetting that the subconscious is merely one of the labels of the many facets of the entirety of what I have chosen to call “other-than-conscious” as a catch-all rather than get into all the various subsets and each of their distinct purposes and “the mind” to get me out of the habit of thinking the brain is the entirety of the mind when it clearly is not.
In the intervening months since the publishing of Integration of the Mind the publisher, Mark Kennedy and I have been experimenting with the concept of engaging the conscious with the other-than-conscious in a loving, cooperative relationship between the two and with surprising breakthroughs for us both; and out of which came the decision to share some of what we’ve learned with two introductory YOU WITHOUT LIMITS free “Workshops” …please visit www.youwithoutlimits.life then scroll down to the articles – there’s no cost or obligation and if you do decide to get involved in a workshop it will be online and therefore in the privacy of your own home.Share on Facebook
…and what Do I Mean When I Say that I AM (Perfect)?
Well, to prove the point, in the top line of the title, let’s start off with a verbatim quote from dictionary.com
1. The state or quality of being or becoming perfect.
2. The highest degree of proficiency, skill, or excellence, as in some art.
3. A perfect embodiment or example of something.
4. A quality, trait, or feature of the highest degree of excellence.
5. The highest or most nearly perfect degree of a quality or trait.
6. The act or fact of perfecting.
Moving right along let’s check out what Wikipedia has to say within the context of its section about paradoxes which also tends, at least from my point of view, to prove that the word “perfect” does, indeed, depend upon perspective and perception:
The parallel existence of two concepts of perfection, one strict (“perfection,” as such) and the other loose (“excellence”), has given rise — perhaps since antiquity but certainly since the Renaissance — to a singular paradox: that the greatest perfection is imperfection.
This was formulated by Lucilio Vanini (1585–1619), who had a precursor in the 16th-century writer Joseph Juste Scaliger, and they in turn referred to the ancient philosopher Empedocles. Their argument, as given by the first two, was that if the world were perfect, it could not improve and so would lack “true perfection,” which depends on progress.
To Aristotle, “perfect” meant “complete” (“nothing to add or subtract”). To Empedocles, according to Vanini, perfection depends on incompleteness (“perfectio propter imperfectionem“), since the latter possesses a potential for development and for complementing with new characteristics (“perfectio complementii“). This view relates to the baroque esthetic of Vanini and Marin Mersenne: the perfection of an art work consists in its forcing the recipient to be active—to complement the art work by an effort of mind and imagination.
The paradox of perfection—that imperfection is perfect—applies not only to human affairs, but to technology. Thus, irregularity in semiconductor crystals (an imperfection, in the form of contaminants) is requisite for the production of semiconductors. The solution to the apparent paradox lies in a distinction between two concepts of “perfection”: that of regularity, and that of utility. Imperfection is perfect in technology, in the sense that irregularity is useful.
Let’s admit something right up front …I’ve been pissing people off with my perspectives ever since I left Christianity in all its myriad forms, that is, organized, unorganized and disorganized – this, after late in life, becoming ordained and licensed to do things such as officiate at weddings, funerals and speak from a pulpit and I even became the lackey (right hand, go-to guy) of the president of the denomination (the largest of its kind in the world) as well as becoming a contributing writer and the senior editor of its monthly magazine and a conference speaker, often as a stand-in for the above referenced president, when he had to be elsewhere.
Please don’t ask me what denomination, because what I write is anathema to many of their pet doctrines and thus they tend to discredit anything I say …even that I exist and one of the three primary reasons I have hidden behind the pseudonym “Brad Cullen” who was the imaginary hero of my first novel Leapfrog which is basically a collage of true stories buried behind names and places changed to protect me from litigation.
How I came to use “Brad” as my pseudonym was because my agent in Los Angeles said that the large publisher who finally accepted Leapfrog (after seven rejection slips from others) was insisting on a name rather than the “anonymous” I’d been using for almost 4 years for what I wrote of a spiritual nature.
Since Brad was a cool, suave, handsome character in the book, we landed on that name after a bit of legal wrangling with my insisting upon my constitutional right to use an alias, like-it-or-not – in-their-faces! …I tend to piss off a lot of people besides Christians and, if you seriously want to talk about my current religious persuasion, I insist that I’m Baha’i, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jew, Muslim, Taoist continuing all the way, alphabetically, to Zoroastrian – pleasing absolutely nobody.
Some people, who admit to knowing both my names and, strange as it may seem, who even like me and what I write, call me both Brad and by my given name, Doug, as well as “Pops” and other affectionate handles all the way to names that fit under the category of expletives.
After all that, my current publisher and Webmaster is impatiently wishing that I would get to the point – WHAT I MEAN WHEN I SAY, I AM PERFECT.
Coming from whence I’ve been, I’ve heard the old saw many times, “There was only one perfect man,” and for those who claim him as their leader, and whom I admit is one of my closest imaginary, yet very much real and alive friends and advisors along with nine others he brought along with him; what he says (present tense), and has been quoted as saying past tense …we’re talking two thousand years ago, is that he never claimed to be perfect and still doesn’t.
For those who want chapter and verse for the past tense quote, write me and I’ll provide it (reluctantly and only with the caveat that I refuse to get into dialogue about my perspective …if you have an argument take it up with him.
…and just as he says today, I say today: “I AM,” because we both allow I AM to speak through us …and all twelve of us around our imaginary conference table, in my mind, are speaking in a chorus, of I AM Perfect(s). Both from within and beyond, and you are quite welcome to join in – yeah, in our humanness we admit to all kinds of imperfections – warts and all, everyone has them, but from the perspective of I AM, both within and beyond; we …and you are perfect as well.
(In order to gain the perspective, you might want to allow I AM to come through your mouth as well).Share on Facebook
What Else is Possible?
If you want to “Google” Steve Jobs …you may run into the same thing I did …a You-tube of his commencement address at Stanford in 2005 …and, if you are looking for it, which I wasn’t, you will get a clue of how Steve Jobs programmed his mind to expect early death.
What I was attempting to research was proof of what three businessmen had insisted, that is, Steve Jobs was a lousy example for me to use as a model of imagination and creativity …because he treated his employees poorly.
What I found were tons of interesting points of view and little proof in either direction of whether he treated people fairly or unfairly – some of whom thought he was “a jerk” and others “an angel” – two direct quotes from former employees; go figure!
Now then, back to my point of view that Jobs used his own creative imagery to program his own death …which you can “prove” or “disprove” based on your own research.
If you want to watch the referenced address at Stanford, go to Google.com and type in Steve Jobs Stanford address and you’ll get 15 minutes of fascinating stuff right from the man’s heart and maybe something he says during that talk will reveal to you the reason I say he used his own imagination to bring about his early death.
If you prefer to spend your time listening how Ryan Bruce came to the point of believing he doesn’t have to experience physical or spiritual death, EVER …about five years ago he recorded a telephone interview he did of me …and as much as I dislike listening to the sound of my own gravelly voice, particularly when Ryan comes across so clearly, you will hear some fascinating stuff about one of the causes of disease and death and how to overcome it – listening to it, again, for me, was rather painful, yet I feel a huge re-emergence of what I call “extreme faith.”
You will have to listen all the way to the end to hear Ryan’s “confession,” but you’ll find it a huge faith-building exercise rather than listening to Steve Job’s words indicating death is inevitable and that you must die.
Try it, go to the top menu bar on the spiritualhealingsource.com website and click on the “Podcast” tab, scroll down to Podcast 15 (and then 16) and you can begin living FOREVER …NOW, today.
If you have a problem with the concept living in the realm of “eternity” and “forever” beginning right NOW – write me firstname.lastname@example.org my primary purpose for being here is to help those who want to break through into living in excitement, gratitude, and extreme faith, BEGINNING TODAY!
bShare on Facebook