You only use 10% of your brain- myth or fact?

[Ben]

now how does the part in bold explain the abilities of entropic overlords that seem to be rulling our world and using said abilities without any consequences all the time

It doesn't. I'm confused - what level of understanding about such concepts were you expecting to find at that site?

apart from this the whole concept does sound very simple and too easy to be true

but then again truth is often very simple

in any case this has put me off from further investigation,

for now...
maybe ben could point out to the info that is most relevant

The information is simplified intentionally for the purposes of accessibility, I realised just how much more complex this area was when I continued my research into the 'executive' function of the frontal lobes. I have not been able to locate the research of TDA Lingo and his students, despite ordering some of it twice from Neil's site.

I guess the 'beginning' of the information is this: http://www(dot)neilslade(dot)com/chart.html

I'm also pleased to see that this has appeared since I was last on the site
http://www(dot)neilslade(dot)com/Papers/911.html

Overall the perspective provided by this information is too limited and seems pointless compared to where I am now, I would expect most people who are familiar with Laura's work and SotT to feel the same. I simply provided this link because it offers some evidence which pertains to the original topic of this thread.

 

[joejoeba]

I found this on neuroscience for kids!!




"The question is: Do we use only 10% of our brains?
Let me state this very clearly:


There is no scientific evidence to suggest that we use only 10% of our brains.

In other words, the statement, "We use only 10% of our brains" is false; it's a myth. We use all of our brain. Let's look at the possible origins of this myth and the evidence that we use all of our brain.


Where Did the 10% Myth Begin?
The 10% statement may have been started with a misquote of Albert Einstein or the misinterpretation of the work of Pierre Flourens in the 1800s. It may have been William James who wrote in 1908: "We are making use of only a small part of our possible mental and physical resources" (from The Energies of Men, p. 12). Perhaps it was the work of Karl Lashley in the 1920s and 1930s that started it. Lashley removed large areas of the cerebral cortex in rats and found that these animals could still relearn specific tasks. We now know that destruction of even small areas of the human brain can have devastating effects on behavior. That is one reason why neurosurgeons must carefully map the brain before removing brain tissue during operations for epilepsy or brain tumors: they want to make sure that essential areas of the brain are not damaged.

Why Does the Myth Continue?
Somehow, somewhere, someone started this myth and the popular media keep on repeating this false statement (see the figures). Soon, everyone believes the statement regardless of the evidence. I have not been able to track down the exact source of this myth, and I have never seen any scientific data to support it.
According to the believers of this myth, if we used more of our brain, then we could perform super memory feats and have other fantastic mental abilities - maybe we could even move objects with a single thought. Again, I do not know of any data that would support any of this.


What Does it Mean to Use Only 10% of Your Brain?
What data were used to come up with the number - 10%? Does this mean that you would be just fine if 90% of your brain was removed? If the average human brain weighs 1,400 grams (about 3 lb) and 90% of it was removed, that would leave 140 grams (about 0.3 lb) of brain tissue. That's about the size of a sheep's brain. It is well known that damage to a relatively small area of the brain, such as that caused by a stroke, may cause devastating disabilities. Certain neurological disorders, such as Parkinson's Disease, also affect only specific areas of the brain. The damage caused by these conditions is far less than damage to 90% of the brain.

The Action Potential The Evidence (or lack of it)
Perhaps when people use the 10% brain statement, they mean that only one out of every ten nerve cells is essential or used at any one time? How would such a measurement be made? Even if neurons are not firing action potentials, they may still be receiving signals from other neurons.
Furthermore, from an evolutionary point of view, it is unlikely that larger brains would have developed if there was not an advantage. Certainly there are several pathways that serve similar functions. For example, there are several central pathways that are used for vision. This concept is called "redundancy" and is found throughout the nervous system. Multiple pathways for the same function may be a type of safety mechanism should one of the pathways fail. Still, functional brain imaging studies show that all parts of the brain function. Even during sleep, the brain is active. The brain is still being "used," it is just in a different active state.
Finally, the saying "Use it or Lose It" seems to apply to the nervous system. During development many new synapses are formed. In fact, some synapses are eliminated later on in development. This period of synaptic development and elimination goes on to "fine tune" the wiring of the nervous system. Many studies have shown that if the input to a particular neural system is eliminated, then neurons in this system will not function properly. This has been shown quite dramatically in the visual system: complete loss of vision will occur if visual information is prevented from stimulating the eyes (and brain) early in development. It seems reasonable to suggest that if 90% of the brain was not used, then many neural pathways would degenerate. However, this does not seem to be the case. On the other hand, the brains of young children are quite adaptable. The function of a damaged brain area in a young brain can be taken over by remaining brain tissue. There are incredible examples of such recovery in young children who have had large portions of their brains removed to control seizures. Such miraculous recovery after extensive brain surgery is very unusual in adults.




So next time you hear someone say that they only use 10% of their brain, you can set them straight. Tell them,

"NOT TRUE; We use 100% of our brains."
If you find any news articles or advertisements using the 10% myth, please send them to me: Dr. Eric H. Chudler.

For a continuing discussion of this topic, please see:


Ten Percent and Counting - BrainConnection.com
The Ten-Percent Myth from the Skeptical Inquirer
The Ten-Percent Myth
Higbee, K.L. and Clay, S.L., College students' beliefs in the ten-percent myth, Journal of Psychology, 132:469-476, 1998.
B.L. Beyerstein, Whence Cometh the Myth that We Only Use 10% of Our Brains? in Mind Myths. Exploring Popular Assumptions about the Mind and Brain edited by S. Della Sala, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, pages 3-24, 1999. *This chapter is required reading for anyone who wants more information on the 10% myth.




Did you know?
!
Dr. James W. Kalat, author of the textbook Biological Psychology, has another idea for the origin of the 10% myth. Dr. Kalat points out that neuroscientists in the 1930s knew about the existence of the large number of "local" neurons in the brain, but the only thing they knew about these cells is that they were small. The misunderstanding of the function of local neurons may have led to the 10% myth. (Reference: Kalat, J.W., Biological Psychology, sixth edition, Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., 1998, p. 43.) "

ref: http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/tenper.html

 

[Z...]

It doesn't. I'm confused - what level of understanding about such concepts were you expecting to find at that site?

Well he claims to know alot about the brain and its powers, but if we compare these hypothesis to knowledge that we accuired by now through various sources
they dont really hold

that was my point

 

[Kesdjan]

I found this on the Cassiopaedia article "Human Brain" under the popular misconceptions section:

A less literal interpretation of the statement is valid. It can be reasonably claimed that most people only use a very small fraction of the cognitive potential of their brain, even though all individual brain neurons are busily working. Various cultural inventions enable humans to better utilize their cognitive potential, such as reading, education, problem solving, critical thinking, etc.

 

[joejoeba]

I'd certainly agree to that.

"better utilize"

 

[Charles]

I'd certainly agree to that.
"better utilize"

... "their cognitive potential", which is not about the brain as such but about the processes that are run by that brain.

I would like to go back to a site that Ben has disclosed in this thread and personally utilised the "tool" offered in it. After the initial criticism shared by Deckard, it has been left untouched:

A couple of years ago I was investigating the work of TDA Lingo (deceased) through one of his students, Neil Slade. TDA Lingo worked with the theory that a vast number of dormant brain functions reside in the frontal lobes and can be activated to some extent by certain techniques. Neil himself describes his anecdotal experiences of psi phenomena, astral travel, enhanced intuition etc. as a result of progressing towards what he describes as a 'frontal lobes transcendence', which he equates with the religious or mytical peak experiences described by many cultures. After trying such techniques, which involve using imagery to directly stimulate the amygdalae of the limbic system (the root of the theory lies in the fact that these structures act as a sort of switch between the advanced parts of the brain and the more primitive 'reptile brain' - this being a very simplified description if you happen to know about the frontal lobes), I have had some absolutely astonishing, intense experiences.

Neils website is found at www(dot)neilslade(dot)com, where what he would consider the essential information is provided free.

I have since left this research after becoming entirely consumed with an even more fascinating website, no prizes for guessing which one, but it has left me with the firm impression that we only use a small fraction of our brain's potential. It is the significance and implications of that fact which has since changed for me.

Months ago, I came upon this website, and shared something in the cass-chat forum. So what follows will mostly be a cut and paste from there.

To start with, I think it is quite obvious to see these two arms that are trying to embrace humanity at an ever increasing pace. One arm intimidates, degrades, sets people and groups up against each other, controls and manipulates. The other arm distracts, numbs, diverts, bewilders and brings ... ever-lasting happiness, bliss, and joy.
Although their direct effects seem quite opposite, they both embrace and achieve the same thing which is TOTAL CONTROL of humanity.

While doing a search on "Denver" and "UFO", I came upon a site that really tops it in terms of that second arm.
Ben, that site IS www(dot)neilslade(dot)com.

If you don't immediately see the "tool" provided in that site for the shortcut that it is, please consider the following warning signs.

Some excerpts:

From: http://www(dot)neilslade(dot)com/art/Brain/chap1.html

where our infamous Jose Delgado is used as an advertising item, a credential as it were. Duh?!! Some things keep on amazing me.

"The location of pre-existing neural circuits for intense pleasure
and exceptionally peaceful states of mind in the brains of mammals
and humans was first established in the scientific community by brain
researchers Jose Delgado of Yale University, James Olds and Peter
Milner of the Montreal Neurological Institute, and Dr. Robert Heath
of Tulane University Medical School. The brain's trigger sites for
pleasure and ecstasy include the anterior amygdala and the septal
area."

To learn more about Delgado see: http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/delgado.htm

To continue with http://www(dot)neilslade(dot)com/art/Brain/chap1.html

"Popping" your frontal lobes or Frontal lobes transcendence is
DEFINED as: an extension of other experiences known historically as:
nirvana; satori; samadhi; kensho; enlightenment; born again; and
other "one-with-the-universe" rapturous experiences of which have
been recognized for thousands of years.

"The change you make using your frontal lobes is FOREVER. Clicking
the amygdala forward in laboratory animals (known as kindling) and
also in humans, causes a PERMANENT change in behavior."

From: http://www(dot)neilslade(dot)com/chart.html

"Not sure you're doing it right? Read everything at the rest of this
site for clues and you won't have any problem. You will learn how to
click your amygdala forward and turn on genius levels of creativity,
intelligence, pleasure, and even ESP in 1/10 the amount of time that
students took to learn back in the early days of our brain research.
After 40 total years of research and practical teaching to folks like
you- we now know the shortcuts and what works best."

And a little further down and in very big letters you can read ...

"KABOOOMMM!!!POP!!!"

... and they are talking about the functioning of ones brain !!?
I can't help but wonder whether this was a reference to C's Kabooom Splat!! in one of the sessions.

What's the final outcome going to be of the tool to "kindle ones amygdale"? Pop! Or ... splat?

As an aside, it also provides an "interesting" take on the UFO phenomenon.
http://www(dot)neilslade(dot)com/ufoDVD.html

Also the testimonials of the people who are "popping" (splatting?) their brain are simply amazing ... "ahh, ohhh, mental orgasm, luve YOU, and some pretty high strangeness experiences that the process seems to bring along."
http://www(dot)neilslade(dot)com/Papers/letters.html


In one of our threads,
http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=4009&p=4

Well I have posted many times on this forum about 'attacks' which have been undergoing for several months now. Recently I was thinking about the fact that I had not experienced anything for an unusually long time, and that very night one such event occurred. I have noticed before this correlation with my thoughts, but it is difficult to draw any conclusions from it - although some might suggest that it adds weight to the theory that these experiences are a creation of my mind triggered by something I am unaware of.

What Scio is saying about emotional reaction to 'psychic attack' is exactly the approach I have taken. While the first few events scared the hell out of me, many times in recent months I have simply mentally defied or shrugged away pestering entities, if this is what they are, and they have elicited almost no emotional response from me. I have become somewhat used to this, and it may be one reason that they have decreased in both intensity and frequency. They are no less bizarre, however.

Other posts can be found here:

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=1213

http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=526

I wonder, Ben, whether you have been experiencing these high strangeness's because you have been actively utilising the techniques provided in that "shite".

It was clearly stated in the site that you provided that the technique of "popping ones brain" had outcomes such as experiences of high strangeness. Why have you never shared this little titbit?

Again, it was clearly stated that some pretty weird paranormal like experiences was one of the outcomes of daily practice of popping ones brain.

Also, I am pretty much convinced that this is precisely what drives most people to start exploring with the provided technique. So they could have EXPERIENCES of high strangeness.

Knowledge protects ?
Maybe so, and depending on what is meant with 'knowledge'.

Referring back to those two arms I mentioned at the start of my response, none of them has corazon in it (I think). To which another member added that these two arms compliment each other very "nicely." As people suffer from the conflict, intimidation and degradation of one arm, they are primed to run to the distractions, diversions and bliss of the other. The ultimate good cop/bad copy routine.

 

[Ben]

To answer your questions simply, there was a long delay between my experiences of clicking the amygdala forward and any kind of 'psychic attack' which may have occurred. You see, I wasn't very good at the exercises and I gave them up pretty quickly. I may also have misled you by exaggerating the intensity of the sensations achieved by clicking the amygdala forward. It is Neil's site, and the phenomenon of cloudbusting, which initiated in me the transition from complete materialist to the perspective I have now (mostly based on the information found here, of course).

As I explained, I have since grown beyond the perspective offered by Neil, which I always questioned and suspected was massively incomplete, and I now see how that is this case and its potential for detrimental effects on one's overall Being. It was a lack of knowledge which meant that I failed to truly study the fruits TDA Lingo's research, which involve the avoidance of negative emotions rather than the utilisation of same and do not appear to have lead to any true understanding of the nature of the world. These pleasurable chemical states are as addictive as the artificial results of drugs, but I naively considered that they had an intrinsic value because they are 'natural'. Like I said, I lacked a lot of knowledge then that I have now.

I didn't mention any of this because it was not the purpose for which I provided the link ,nor was I advocating the material at the site, I just thought it was a relevant to the topic of this thread.

 

[Z...]

well I suppose ther is something there,

yesterday while I was skimming through that website I found the part where he says how easy it is to switch on amigdala, just by knowing their location and visualising the proces, so I did it.

I had wierd light sensations all evening , like flashes of different light colours in the corners of my eyes, and even more intense when I close my eyes, i have also experienced succesion of very strange images when my eyes were closed.

Today the effects are diminishing but I can still feel them.
To be honest I didnt particularly like these effects,

charles has raised some very interesting points ...

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

"The brain's trigger sites for pleasure and ecstasy include the anterior amygdala and the septal area."

"Popping" your frontal lobes or Frontal lobes transcendence is DEFINED as: an extension of other experiences known historically as: nirvana; satori; samadhi; kensho; enlightenment; born again; and other "one-with-the-universe" rapturous experiences of which have been recognized for thousands of years.

But is Nirvana the same as Enlightenment? I thought Nirvana was some sort of "spiritual ecstacy" while Enlightenment was basically Knowledge? I know the C's say that we will experience ecstacy once we learn lessons and overcome difficult challenges, but is that the same kind of ecstacy that those who seek Nirvana achieve? It seems that even if "spiritual wisdom" (Knowledge) of some sort IS the true cause of "Nirvana", then neither Buddhists nor the followers of any "path" that depends on blind faith in any doctrines could possibly achieve it, because blind faith in doctrines (and Buddhism has doctrines) is contradictory to seeking knowledge which requires the questioning of everything. This means that the Nirvana they are seeking is NOT the sort that the C's are talking about, but probably closer to the one New Agers are talking about - the blissful disassociation from the world, eliminating any desire for anything, and meditating on the Oneness of the universe. They say "ignorance is bliss" and it seems, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that Buddhists and other "Nirvana seekers" are in fact seeking the Bliss/Ecstacy/Nirvana that comes from ignorance, which is the direct opposite from the Nirvana that may come from overcoming difficult challenges and learning and growing as a BEing.

So while you may be convinced that you are "one with the universe" or a "born-again", and may be very happy with entertaining these thoughts, blissful even - you're not achieving knowledge, you're not helping anyone else, you're not contributing to your own or anyone else's growth and learning, but in fact the opposite, becoming exactly that which you give to life and the universe. And I guess if you think about it, if you eliminate all response-ability from your life/existance, it may really be a sort of "blissful" or "nirvana-like" existance - kinda like my couch, or a brick wall. My couch has no "hate" or "desire" but it doesn't make it "enlightened" either.

 

[anart]

So while you may be convinced that you are "one with the universe" or a "born-again", and may be very happy with entertaining these thoughts, blissful even - you're not achieving knowledge, you're not helping anyone else, you're not contributing to your own or anyone else's growth and learning, but in fact the opposite, becoming exactly that which you give to life and the universe.

You may also be convinced you are a lion or a magician - yes, I too ran across this amygdala information many years ago and it is clearly classic 'shortcut' material - the 'two arms' Charles mentions are active indeed in this world - the idea, at least for me, is to get outside of their reach - and the only way I've found to actually start to do that is with the utilization of knowledge and very hard Work. FWIW

 

[Russ]

A good lesson: you don't get something for nothing, if something is too good to be true, it usually is, and also will usually take more away from you if anything :(

Maybe these feelings of bliss could be related to a placebo effect of some kind? The brain is pretty good at decieving itself AFAIK. One thing that stood out for me was the mentions of "genius" being acheivable with the teqnique, but with no kinds of testimonies that show much genius IMO. Also not interested in any "fake" nirvana, it sounds like a heroin addiction.