Try introspection and self realization, proceed onwards to reprogram your own mind as you see fit. I started the process in the third grade with mnemonic associative memory retrieval techniques, for which I thank Mrs. Dowd, who would likely be in her 80s by now if not dead. My earlier teachers before the AT program regarded me as a pestilential nuisance, but AT program teachers regarded us all as a challenge to their own ability to take raw ore and turn it into glittering blades of intellectual incisiveness. Somewhere along the way I became distracted by entertainment rather than pondering, but I THINK that I have shaken off the death grip of frivolousness. To clarify a point regarding my posts elsewhere, I use frivolity to see if I can prod unguarded responses from others goaded into replying. The problem with being intelligent is that your wits become dull if you fail to clash swords with similar talents.
If you have a child at hand to manipulate, be cautious, because there is untapped potential in even the most obviously dim-witted of youths. Did you ever stop to think that perhaps a so called dimwit merely finds the outside world dull and lacking challenge, sunken into introspective apathy from boredom? I suspect that lacking brain damage in the womb, all infants are more or less intellectually equal, what varies widely is the traction gained by the environment upon the infant's attention. If you want a child to succeed with worldly interaction, then provide a stimulus rich environment. To attain failure, place into a white crib in a soundless white room and initiate sensory deprivation protocols. As an adult you will probably be forced to employ more sophisticated tricks to derail old habits of thought. Couple the activities which provide maximum reinforcement of changed protocols with reinforcing rewards. Pavlov knew a trick or two. As a revised mental process gains strength through usage, vary the reinforcing rewards so that the specificity of cues is diminished. Eventually you will be able to shake loose from semi-compulsory associations and range freely within your own mind, cultivating your programmed processes with any applicable mental tool at hand rather than having to employ a specific trick. Lonnie Courtney Clay On Sunday, June 5, 2011 4:57:16 AM UTC-7, Awori wrote: > > We are there...if not almost! > > On Jun 5, 2011 2:51 PM, "Lonnie Clay" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Mmmhhhmmm... It Goes something like this : > > > > [Context -> Interaction -> Events] -> > > [Observations -> Abstractions -> Prioritization and Categorization -> > > Memorization -> Recall -> Pondering and Correlation] > > > > Lonnie Courtney Clay > > > > On Sunday, June 5, 2011 3:55:24 AM UTC-7, Awori wrote: > >> > >> Good. That is...before the fact..there is fact. The existence of > >> phenomena..'data'...is independent of the conscious fact that, it is > there. > >> > >> On Jun 5, 2011 12:29 PM, "Lonnie Clay" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Oof Misunderstanding! Information continuously cycles within an > awareness > >> between the so called "conscious mind", the "memory", and the > >> "subconscious". Furthermore there are often many layers within each of > those > >> broad categories, each of which exchanges content within its own realm > of > >> control. For example, when I want to fetch a particular datum from > memory > >> due to a fleeting wisp of recollection, I must follow a path of > mnemonically > >> associated compactions to attain retrieval. If I have secreted the > memory to > >> prevent unauthorized extraction, then I must also follow a keying > sequence > >> of permissible windows of synchronization, such that I am not diverted > into > >> false leads which provide bogus imitations of the buried data. > Information > >> exists as datums taken WITHIN CONTEXT in my mind. Perhaps I could > clarify by > >> saying that every transitional exchange of a datum is information > regardless > >> of whether the transmitter and receiver are located within the same > >> awareness? As extraction proceeds, the information attains a solidity of > > >> form which approaches clarity of its true meaning, until the final stage > is > >> attained with the clarity at which the datum was stored. This begs the > >> question of how much subtext is contained in the clarified information, > and > >> how many associated datums must be synthesized together within the > conscious > >> mind to attain a true vision of the meaningfulness of the data. > >> > >> So far as derived conclusions go based upon the gibberish which I spout > - > >> Arrggghhhh Yaarrr, Good Luck Pilgrim! > >> > >> Lonnie Courtney Clay > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Saturday, June 4, 2011 8:01:57 AM UTC-7, Awori wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > Interesting...but the assumption is that data only becomes > information > >>> when it is transmitted f... > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > On Jun 4, 2011 4:54 PM, "Lonnie Clay" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > > Wonderful to hear from ... > >>> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >>> [email protected]. > >>> > >>> > >>> > > For more options, visit this group at > >>> http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > >>> > > > >>> > >>> > >> -- > >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups > >> "Epistemology" group.... > >> To view this discussion on the web visit > >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/MFh5Q3JvSFB3UVFK. > >> > >> > >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> To unsubscribe from this group,... > >> > >> > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Epistemology" group. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/LWstQTBZenJvZ3NK. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/TDlHTnFBaUo2djRK. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
