Meditation, Brain Training, and the Detachment Technique — More

 Here's a previous post that ties in with the post of May 30, 2012. I'm doing all the stuff that's suggested by the new neuroscience. I have to acknowledge improvement in my intuitive thinking — but not enough yet. I have to notice those flashes more and write them down. Just listened to The Queen's Fool by Philippa Gregory on a long drive. It upped the ante on intuitive thinking. I'm doing well with wandering thinking, but not keeping close track of what the wandering produces. Plus, the process of breaking old habits to supplant with new does not come easily or quickly, as several of my earlier 2012 posts point out.


The cover headline, Newsweek, January 10, 17, 2011 — "Grow Your Mind: The Truth About How to Boost Your Brain's Performance" by Sharon Begley. She asks, "Can You Build a Better Brain?" The answer of course is YES — or else there would be no article. I've enjoyed Begley's articles and books over the years.  She writes clearly about neuroscientific topics and always supports what she says with the newest research findings.

Begley describes what she labels as the holy grail of brain training, which has become the newest trendy training for Boomers and beyond: exercise, meditation and specific video games. Meditation, like mindfulness is a slightly altered state of consciousness and both are forms of detachment, a technique that can be useful in eliminating negative self-talk. Begley points out that there's a difference between reaching your natural potential by removing impediments such as stress and actually raising that potential. Meditation delivers a double whammy. The technique helps reduce impediments such as NST and it also augment's the brain's skills, leaving you relaxed and attentive.

According to Begley, meditation increases the thickness of regions that control attention and processes sensory signals from the outside. She cites  mindfulness-based mind-fitness training at U of Miami which builds concentration by focusing on, for example a particular body sensation over a period of time. The result is enhanced  mental agility and attention caused  " . . .  by changing brain structure and function so that brain processes are more efficient. She also points out that the brain starts diminishing at age 20. S-o-o-o,  it's never too early to start training the brain and increasing opportunities to augment your already good thinking skills. 

Here's the link to the complete article that I'm referencing.http://rewireyourbrainforlove.com/can-you-build-a-better-brain/ http://rewireyourbrainforlove.com/can-you-build-a-better-brain/

N-Back Games to Increase Intelligence Still Iffy

Do you know what the N-Back game is? I didn't either but now I do because it and its cousins are the mainstay of brain training, aimed at improving memory and attention for all ages. I tried one brain training game, about a 9 months ago, although I don't remember the brand name (ironic). Actually I bought it as a gift for my husband with the idea that we could use it together. The information about the brain training was on sharpbrains.com

 I returned the game fairly quickly because neither of us had the patience or boredom tolerance to practice 20 minutes a day, a problem that I later learned was also a concern of manufacturers and researchers. Players have to summon their own motivation and willingness to delay gratification, which is tough for adults, but even harder for kids as you can imagine.

The basis for this type of brain function enhancement is based on research that showed that improvement in n-back training could result in improvement in fluid intelligence: "the capacity to solve novel problems, to learn, to reason, to see connections and get to the bottom of things." Sounds like problem-solving thinking to me. The NYTimes Magazine, 4/22/2012 article by Dan Hurley noted, "To find that training could result in an increase in fluid intelligence would be cognitive psychology's equivalent of discovering particles traveling faster than light." The early mission of the training aimed to increase kids' intelligence. The later added goal was to build working memory and  attention for adults, young and old.

Problems arose. Researchers couldn't come up with the same excellent results that the pioneering research found. And again, the problem of how to build and maintain a habit that doesn't have immediate rewards, involves strategic allocation of attention on the training game for 20 minutes every day,  and requires patience, focus, and determination still hasn't been solved.

Nonetheless, I think the N-Back games training is something for adults, particularly parents, to keep on their radar. In the next year or two,  developments may bring this intelligence enhancing tool to an effective level, an adjunct to everyday life for kids and adults.

Men/Women and Different Experiences of Sexual Arousal and Desire

 Women's sexual desire and arousal is the topic of Leon F. Seltzer's PT blog article, "Paradox and Pragmatism in Women's Sexual Desire". He bases his thoughts on Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam’s comprehensive volume A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What the World’s Largest Experiment Reveals About Sexual Desire (2011).
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201205/paradox-and-pragmatism-in-women-s-sexual-desirehttp://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201205/paradox-and-pragmatism-in-women-s-sexual-desire

Women and men have differing experiences of desire and arousal. Not surprising. Men's subjective experience of desire is accompanied by objective experience — an erection. Women can subjectively not feel desire, but still objectively experience lubrication and even orgasm according to the Internet research conducted.  The researchers say that this female disconnect between body and mind results from “wisdom inherited from millions of sexual transactions conducted by women over a period of a few hundred thousand years.”
They conclude that women are more pragmatic and less romantic in matters of sex than men, stemming from evolutionary necessity.

 H-m-m-m. Maybe so? Maybe not? I would also guess that there would be differences among women depending on ages and stages of life. For example, an 18-year old college student,  a 24 year-old single woman, a 30 year-old married women with children, a 50-year old post-menopausal women, would all have different ratios of pragmatism and romanticism, desire, arousal, and frequency of orgasm. Maybe that's covered in A Billion Wicked Thoughts, but I'm probably not going to get around to reading it.

Interesting to me is that all three authors, book and article, are men. I'd like to see female sexuality research and writing done by women. Is it just the same old stuff? Men are more interested in sex than women, therefore more interested in researching and writing about it than women? Women are reserved, awkward, uncomfortable about their sexuality, at least publicly if not privately?