Never Alone

Creative Commons License
by DCH Park

Last week we considered the fact that energy and emotion that we share with others creates a recursive loop that effortlessly grows in strength. As each person receives or resists energy transmitted by the other while sending the same energy back to the other, the energy builds. This works with distrust, anger, and hatred as well as it does with openness, joy, and love.

It is a fundamental principle that can be observed in operation everywhere. Wherever there are two or more people interacting there is the potential for this principle to come into play. It is one way to understand the phenomenon of group or cooperative creation – what some call brainstorming. Napoleon Hill called it the Master Mind principle and recognized that it can be a powerful way to bring desired outcomes into your experience.

A successful Master Mind generates far more energy in much less time with much less effort than a lone person working in isolation can. Attitudes of openness and mutual support allow creativity and insight to deepen as the whole group enters a virtuous spiral that can carry them to great heights.

Of course, the same mechanism is also in operation when mutual distrust, antagonism, or one-upmanship is in play. Unfortunately it is currently common for people to find themselves in downward spirals. They often don’t even recognize the nature of the spiral that they are creating together. As this changes, and people realize that they have a choice, these downward spirals naturally become increasingly less prominent features until they virtually disappear.

Beyond this, though, notice that you don’t even need another person with whom to practice such mutual sharing and reinforcement. For example, notice the dynamic that a person shares with a beloved pet. Dogs are particularly well suited for this but just about any mammal and many non-mammals, especially some birds, do it very well, too.

For example, if the person feels agitated or excited, the pet will pick that up and begin to exhibit the same emotion. Then the person may feel it more intensely, emotion building as focus on the interaction sharpens. This serves to reinforce the pet’s behavior, which ramps up, and so on.

Even more interesting, it is not even necessary to have a pet or other animal to practice with. For example, spend some time in the woods, go for a walk in a safe place at night, take in the stars or moon, notice a pretty painting or flower, or sit alone in a quiet room. Notice how the sense of connection and ease of flow increase. After a while, the flow opens to reveal an ever finer structure of joy and love.

This is the nature of existence. All things are acts of joy and love. When we seek to create a new experience for ourselves, the universe or source does not simply bring the thing that we seek to us. It resonates with our desire and becomes the thing we seek. All things – including other people and pets – are made of the same divine essence.

That is why mutual sharing is so powerful. We reflect in however small a way our divine nature in becoming what is asked and shown. How could that be anything but powerful?

This also why, in truth, you don’t need another person to practice with. Another person can help in providing a convenient focus, but you are never far from your own divine nature nor the divine nature of everything. Even the most mundane experience is in essence divine and full of wonder and beauty. Allow your awareness of this beauty, wonder, and joy to be felt. Notice how your appreciation of these things can form the foundation of an upward spiral whose boundaries are potentially limited only by the extents of existence itself.

© 2012, David Park. All Rights Reserved.

Creative Commons License
“Never Alone” by DCH Park is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Flattr this!

Feedback Over Feed-Forward: Awareness and Acceptance

Creative Commons License
by DCH Park

I have noticed over the years that there is a tendency for people to hold on to old ways of seeing and defining things – even of defining and seeing themselves – as they learn about who and what they truly are and begin to relax into themselves.

For example, one person may focus on studying the Law of Attraction and principles of success while holding on to a concern about making enough money to pay bills. Another person may find serenity and relief from stress in meditative practices and yoga and nevertheless struggle with getting the inconsiderate jerk who cuts him off in traffic or the selfish bastard who voted for the wrong candidate to see the light.

It is also not uncommon for some people to struggle with understanding new concepts and ways of being in terms of the old ways of being that didn’t work. After all, why else would someone explore a new philosophy unless the old philosophy felt somehow restrictive, incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise unsatisfying? Even simple curiosity is an expression of a possibility or desire for discovery of something exciting, new, and possibly better.

If that’s the case, why hold on to the lenses and definitions of the old philosophy when trying to understand or evaluate the new philosophy? I remember reading a psychology paper once that focused on presenting and validating a new measurement tool. The new tool, it claimed, was superior to the old tool. The paper’s authors went about constructing elaborate statistical analyses of test results from using the new tool and claimed that the new tool was clearly superior because it yielded results that were statistically equivalent to those from the old tool.

I couldn’t believe it. A new tool is superior because it gives you the same results as the old tool that it’s intended to replace? How can a new tool be new if the yardstick for validating it is the old tool?

By the same token, how can a new concept or philosophy be evaluated from within the paradigms of the old philosophy? By definition, the old philosophy would be unable to make sense of the new paradigm. If it could, it would already contain the new philosophy and thus, there really would not be a new philosophy.

Columbus’ idea that the world was round was a new paradigm that didn’t fit into the world-view of flat-earthers. They couldn’t understand or evaluate Columbus’ idea because it didn’t fit into their pre-existing worldview. They had no way of understanding it except to label it as silly. This is exactly what mainstream society still does with New Age and metaphysical philosophies.

Ironically, even those who try to embrace new philosophies also do these things to some degree. The blind spot that these points of view have in common is that they don’t take themselves into account. In other words, they don’t see themselves as philosophies and paradigms that can be articulated, evaluated, altered, or rejected and replaced as appropriate.

This sort of self reference or self awareness can form a kind of feedback loop that helps to stabilize and strengthen the whole conceptual framework. Without self awareness, the mind can fall into a feed-forward crisis in which its assumed model of the world leads to erroneous outputs that worsen the situation rather than improve it.

This is a natural mistake that the mind is prone to make. Without practice, it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that philosophies and points of view are tools that can be useful in creating a better life and that the tool can always be replaced if a superior way to create a better life comes along. The trap is that the mind begins to see or define itself in terms of the philosophy. It identifies with the world view contained in the philosophy. It’s as if a carpenter were to forget that his hammer is a tool in his hand and see his hammer as his hand.

Dare to take charge of your own perceptions, recognizing that they are your perceptions. You own them. You create them. They are your responsibility. You can change them. They don’t dictate the world. They don’t control you. You are in control.

Just as the carpenter can (remember or re-learn to) lay his hammer down, you can (remember or re-learn to) lay your perceptions down. Until he does, the carpenter would have a hard time petting a dog, caressing a cheek, or washing his face. Until you do, you will struggle with appreciating and exercising the potential of your own creativity.

© 2012, David Park. All Rights Reserved.

Creative Commons License
“Feedback Over Feed-Forward: Awareness and Acceptance” by DCH Park is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Flattr this!

Feedback Over Feedforward – Awareness Over Discipline

Creative Commons License
by DCH Park

At one point during my undergraduate studies at MIT, I took a systems control class. I bring it up here because I find that some insights from that class are helpful in illuminating personal experience.

In the control class, we studied various ways to design and analyze dynamic control systems of various types, ranging from purely mechanical ones to electrical ones (which had no transistors) to electronic ones (which did). Analytically, all of these systems could be modeled and understood using the same principles. Mathematically they were identical in spite of the fact that completely different physical components and forces were in operation in different systems.

There are primarily two different philosophies or approaches to designing control circuits. One is called feedback and the other is called feed-forward. Most of the control systems in use in the world today are feedback systems.

In a feedback control circuit, a portion of the output of the system is fed back into the control circuit inputs. The control circuit combines this feedback with the operator (or other external) control inputs to automatically adjust the system.

For example, if you adjust the speaker volume in your car radio to a certain level, the volume setting is the “operator” or external control setting. As the volume setting is increased, the control circuit sends a signal to the speaker drivers telling them to work harder.

Since it’s a feedback control circuit, a portion of this speaker driver signal is also sent back to the control circuit and mixed with the manual volume setting. Typically, the feedback signal is inverted so that as the volume goes up, the feedback causes the control signal to decrease and if the volume goes down, the control signal increases.

This type of negative feedback control tends to be very stable because it tends to push the output toward a stable center – down if the output gets too high and up if it gets too low. This is why it is used so widely.

In positive feedback control, the feedback is not inverted. Thus, it tends to further amplify the system’s outputs. If the output goes up, positive feedback makes it go higher faster. This is what happens when a microphone is placed too closely to the speaker it drives. The speaker output is picked up by the mic and amplified through the speaker, leading to an unstable feedback loop that mounts continuously, destroying the signal and resulting in screeching.

In a feed-forward control circuit, there is no input that takes the system output to the external world back into the system. Certain assumptions are made about the way in which the system will behave and the ways in which the external world will respond, The (external) control inputs take these assumptions into account and are simply fed in.

As long as the assumptions are accurate, the system behaves as expected, but if the assumptions are off, even just by a small amount, the system can become disastrously unstable. Outputs may become unpredictable or even destroy the system altogether.

This is what happens when a car suddenly loses traction on a patch of ice. The car’s behavior suddenly changes so that the driver’s assumptions about how the car will react are suddenly wrong. Control inputs that are normally safe – holding the wheel straight and pressing on the brakes – are no longer safe. Instead of producing normal results – straightening out the car’s trajectory and slowing down – they do something else – promoting a spin with locked wheels (unless the car is equipped with anti-lock brake control, which all modern commercially produced cars are).

The solution to this problem is to “close the loop,” and make the external outputs of the system a portion of the inputs. In other words, make the feed-forward system into a feedback system by adding a sensor that loops back to the inputs. This is what anti-lock braking systems do.

In exactly the same way, enhancing the feedback control in your body and life can enhance your stability and equanimity. In this case, the key is to develop your facility with awareness. Jon Kabat-Zinn, one of the seminal influences in bringing mindfulness and meditation into the medical establishment mainstream, points out that awareness, like thinking, is an inherent ability that humans possess. However, in this culture, unlike thinking, it is an ability that is not widely prized or even recognized, much less one that many people are trained in using.

Control via thinking alone is a form of feed-forward control In the body, feed-forward control is essentially experienced as a kind of numbness that cuts you off from the external world. Without feedback, there is a tendency to easily slip into a perception that the external world is on the other side of an invisible and inviolable barrier – an impossibly fine and absolutely impregnable curtain that separates you from the external world.

In the body, Hansen’s disease, commonly known as leprosy, is an extreme example of what can happen when feedback is lost and only feed-forward control remains. Hansen’s disease victims lose sensation. Loss of sensation starts in the fingertips and toes and progresses inward. Motor function control is unimpaired.

However, because all sensation is lost, including pain, victims lose the ability to sense when they have damaged themselves. As a result, they inflict repeated trauma to affected tissues and the body begins to erode. Eventually fingers, toes, noses, and more can be lost to physical trauma caused not by the disease, but by the victim upon his or her self because the disease prevents feedback about his or her physical condition.

Hansen’s disease is an extreme example, but the same mechanism is at work in less extreme situations every day. When you feel a headache due to stress or over-work and take an analgesic instead of a break, you are choosing to numb the pain and dampen your natural feedback in favor of a feed-forward control signal to keep working or work harder.

Since feed-forward control is experienced as numbness in the body, it is expressed as discipline. In the absence of sensory connection and emotional immediacy, exertion of will remains as the only means to gain control. It is like being on one side of a wall and trying to control what happens on the other side of the wall by pulling and pushing rods that go through the wall without being able to directly see, hear, or feel what is happening, relying instead on graphical progress reports that are projected on a screen.

Cultivating your awareness is a key to addressing this shortcoming. By becoming more fully aware of the many cues that your body sends you and the depth and richness of your sensory experience of your environment, you strengthen your feedback loop. Your experience of your surroundings and even of yourself shifts. You pierce the barrier that separates you from your external world and feel the world more richly and subtly.

For example, when I wanted to lose weight many years ago, I noticed that it was a struggle as long as I approached it as a discipline. To make matters worse, I was keenly aware of flavor and the sensations of eating, swallowing, and feeling full, which became positive feedback signals that tended to amplify the unhealthy behavior and desire for unhealthy foods.

Once I began to notice other sensations, like the listlessness I felt after a food binge or unhealthy meal and the feeling of tightness and deflation I felt after just one bite of unhealthy food, my relationship with food and weight control began to change significantly. I no longer had to struggle to control something that I could grasp intellectually but not feel. I could cultivate awareness of what was going on in my body and how I felt and healthy choices dropped out of that awareness effortlessly.

Losing weight and eating more healthily were no longer hard. Given greater awareness of my body and how different foods affected my body, making healthy choices became the easiest things to do. Making unhealthy choices became hard because in order to make those choices I would have to ignore what I now so clearly felt.

If you don’t have sensation, you might hit your thumb with a hammer and not even know it. Without strict discipline and rigid attention to specific details, you might keep hammering and actually break your thumb or worse. On the other hand, with your awareness and sensation intact, if hit your thumb with a hammer, you stop pounding the nail because your thumb hurts. Taking care of your thumb becomes the easiest thing to do.

Creative Commons License
“Feedback Over Feedforward – Awareness Over Discipline” by DCH Park is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Flattr this!