Analytical or Intuitive? An easy way to tell....

A relatively simple post today— How can you tell if you are analytical or intuitive in any given situation? By the way, we are always a little bit of both, but often one process dominates in a particular moment.

When we react quickly, intuitively, without thinking, we are responding based on what we have learned through some sort of training or experience.

When we deliberate, take our time, and think things through, we first access the information that is stored in our database of life experience and then use our analytical processes to try to determine the best course of action.

Each process has its place—Depends on the context of that particular moment. There is no recipe, no “right” way—it is all contextual.

Why does this matter? It only matters if your life isn't working the way you want. You might be using the wrong process at the wrong time.

Pay attention.

The Brain's Analytical-Intuitive Dialectic

Life can be confusing and contradictory. Part of the reason is that the brain has many different systems for processing data. The two most obvious and important systems are called the analytical system and the intuitive system. Both systems operate at all times, and one system will override the other in certain contexts.

The analytical system is generally associated with the left-brain. It is logic based. The intuitive system is associated with the right brain, and is holistic, visual-spatial-emotionally based.

The analytical system is slower and the intuitive system is faster. The analytical system deliberates, thinking through things, while the intuitive system leaps to conclusions, almost always without verbal thought. The intuitive process is more about a quick response to a perceived pattern, while the analytical process assembles the parts, the facts, and works logically toward a sensible conclusion.

Example: What would you do if I gave you 1000 dollars, no strings attached? Think about it. Most of us will have some analytical system responses as well as some intuitive system responses to such a question. We can distinguish the two different types of answers pretty easily.

The pragmatic, logical analytical system would figure out what makes the most sense—typical responses are things like “pay bills, invest, save it, get some home repairs done, some needed medical care” etc. On the other hand, what about the intuitive system? The intuitive system decides by feelings, by wants and desires, selfish or unselfish. Typical answers might be things like “buy luxury items for myself or for people I love, travel, donate to my favorite charity, get a nose job, give it to a homeless person, buy a new bicycle, get a great tattoo” etc.

Since the two systems operate simultaneously, at all times, there are naturally going to be conflicts. Your intuitive system might really really really want to do something, and your analytical system keeps saying “that just isn’t logical—it just doesn’t make sense.”

When both systems are working well, they are what I would call reality-based. In OODA loop terms, Observations are clear, and both the Analytical and Intuitive systems operate based on what is happening in the moment, in reality.

Problems arise when one or both of the two systems are stuck rigidly in a pattern that was learned in the past but does not necessarily match the present moment.

For example, in my private practice as a psychologist I work daily with people who are responding intuitively in ways that are no longer functional. Their ‘gut level’ automatic reactions aren’t working for them, and they need to use their analytical thought processes to override and reprogram themselves. On the other hand, invariably, the exact same people will repeatedly use their analytical mind to ignore gut level reactions that are relevant to the present moment.

For those who prefer black or white solutions, this is, at first, perplexing. On the one hand, ‘trust your feelings’ is the advice, on the other hand, ‘use your rational analytical mind to override your irrational feelings’ is the advice. But, it is not a simple either-or choice. It depends on the context.

For example: Many of us will acquire major or minor fears when we are kids. In my own case I became afraid of spiders at an early age. I would react with extreme fear or panic whenever I encountered a spider. In a classic fight-flight response, I would either kill the spider or run. My knee-jerk intuitive reaction was that of full-blown fear- there was no discernible analysis on my part. In my ‘spider moments’, I was pure fear.

Something happened with the spiders that changed things for me. I was probably 9 or 10. I was playing with some friends one day. They were older boys. I looked up to them because I thought they were tough and competent, traits which wanted for myself. I encountered a spider somewhere and had a strong visible fear reaction. My older friends made fun of me. I was embarrassed and I got my feelings hurt. I was also angry at myself—these fellows I looked up to were not afraid of the spider at all, and I was acting terrified! How was I ever going to be a tough competent fellow if I kept freaking out every time I saw a spider?

Something had to change—I was determined not to be embarrassed by my fear in front of my friends anymore. I got out my encyclopedia and started reading about spiders. At first it was hard for me to even look at some of the pictures—they were such scary creatures! But, I was a natural researcher, so my intellectual curiosity was soon hooked on learning about spiders. In just a few minutes of reading, spiders became objects of fascination and curiosity. And, I was strongly relieved when I discovered that there were basically only two spiders in my locale that were of any danger, and even bites form those were rarely fatal. All of those other spiders were harmless, including the one that had scared me when I was with my friends.

I built a strong logical analytical base of pragmatic logical knowledge about spiders. The intuitive fear, however, did not magically go away. I still had the automatic powerful urge to react in panic or fear when I encountered spiders. However, now I had a strong analytical understanding of spiders, and I also had strong social motivation in seeking the approval of the older boys. It took awhile (years, actually) but my reaction to spiders gradually changed to one of calmness (most of the time!)

Thus, we can use our analytical process to override intuitive reactions that no longer serve us.

There is an opposite problem. Sometimes our strong analytical system causes us to ignore our intuitive reactions in a way that does not serve us.

In my private practice I work with a lot of childhood trauma survivors. Many are sexual abuse victims and many also come from homes in which one or both parents were angry, controlling, and physically abusive. Such parents often have rigid rules about all kinds of situations—children who laugh at the wrong time are punished, children who get angry and express it are punished, children who object to chores are punished, children who cry are beaten to make them stop crying, children who don’t like to eat liver or turnips are humiliated, beaten, or shamed—

Starting to get the picture? When we are punished by those who have power over us for our natural, intuitive system reactions, we will learn to use our analytical mind to repress or ignore our intuitive reactions. After all, those intuitive reactions will get us hurt!

Here’s an example: Barry grew up with a dominating, physically and verbally abusive mother. While he felt that she loved him, he understood that if he broke one of her many unspoken rules there would be Hell to pay later- he would get yelled at, slapped, humiliated and punished if he said or did the wrong thing. Sometimes it seemed to Barry that her punishment came out of the blue- he was never sure if he was safe or not.

As most children who survive are prone to do, Barry became an expert at observing the moods of his mother. He learned when to avoid her entirely and when it was perilous to contradict her. In order to act in a manner that was inoffensive to his mother, Barry learned to suppress his intuitive reactions. If his mother said something that angered him or hurt his feelings, Barry learned to show no emotion so that his mother’s rage would not get triggered.

Barry survived it. His mom didn’t kill him, and he didn’t kill himself, so Barry eventually grew up and left home. Somehow he managed to marry a woman who had (surprise!) a problem with rage. But it wasn’t really a problem for Barry—he was already an expert. He knew how to handle that situation; after all, he had been in training for years with his raging mother.

He ended up in rehabilitation for alcoholism a few years later.

His counselors were quick to understand that Barry had become a doormat for angry people, angry women especially—he was so adept at neglecting his intuitive reactions that he had ‘lost touch’ with his feelings.

Barry’s early childhood environment had trained him to be silent. Barry benefited from assertiveness training—he needed some interpersonal skills that allowed him to give voice to his feelings in a way that was neither aggressive nor passive.

When something goes wrong for you, learn to tune in to both streams of data—the analytical and the intuitive. Both are rich sources of information, and both are necessary for our balanced functioning as humans.

More later— this is a very superficial introduction to some very complex issues, but we have to start somewhere.

Attention to Attention, Part 1

To flourish and grow in the many-sided uncertain, and ever-changing world that surrounds us suggests that we must make intuitive within ourselves those many practices we need to meet the exigencies of that world.—John R. Boyd, A Discourse on Winning & Losing

Attention to Attention

Philip Kapleau tells this story in his 1967 book “The Three Pillars of Zen”:

One day a man of the people said to the Zen master Ikkyu: “Master, will you please write for me some maxims of the highest wisdom?”

Ikkyu immediately took his brush and wrote the word “Attention.”

“Is that all?” asked the man. “Will you not add something more?”

Ikkyu then wrote twice running: “Attention. Attention.”

“Well,” remarked the man rather irritably, “I really don’t see much depth or subtlety in what you have just written.”

Then Ikkyu wrote the same word three times running: “Attention. Attention. Attention.”

Half angered, the man declared: “What does that word attention mean anyway?”

And Ikkyu answered, gently: “Attention means attention.”

Nature teaches us that all of our Actions have results. Therefore, to have the best life that you can have, it is imperative that you Act wisely. Your life is a result of your Actions, interacting in a complex flow with everything else like other humans, genetics, cultural traditions, the environment, family, information, etc.

Life rewards optimal adaptation to the existing conditions. Creatures (including people) who can adapt to current conditions will survive on their own terms; those that cannot adapt will decline, become subjugated, or perish. To adapt to current conditions, we have to be able to perceive current conditions clearly. To perceive clearly, our attention, our focus, must be in the best place for the conditions we are experiencing.

The OODA loop process uses the word “Observations” to describe the attentional process in the human being. Observations include all the data that is coming in to the individual. The individual might be consciously aware of some Observations (I see a red car over there) and there will be quite a few Observations that are in the background, or unconscious.

A simple example: If you are daydreaming about how you will spend your lottery winnings if you win the big jackpot and you fail to see the pothole your are walking toward, you might step in it and hurt yourself. Ouch! However, if you can come out of your daydream long enough to see the pothole before you fall in it, you have a good chance of avoiding it. To see it ahead of time, you must have the proper focus.

Some of us can daydream and still maintain enough external focus to see the potholes. Others of us need to drop the daydreaming or we will fall in all the potholes in our path.

What is the optimal focus? It depends on the context of the situation.

When focus is optimal, attention shifts fluidly and appropriately in accordance with the situation. When focus is problematic, the Observation process is not focusing properly on the context at hand. Inferior data from Observations often leads to inferior results. Superior, wiser Observations will yield superior results.

Don't take my word for it, just pay attention and you will see for yourself how it works.

I'll write some more on this later-- As Ikkyu taught us, Attention is perhaps the most important topic to which we should give our attention.

OODA Loop 101 - Cindy goes sailing

Here is an article using some very concrete examples that I wrote explaining personal OODA loop processes for my clients.

You are a flow within a flow, a living changing system interacting with and within multiple living changing system systems. Your system has an always-on guidance system Colonel John Boyd called the OODA loop process.

When some odd noise wakes you up in the middle of the night, it isn’t the noise that woke you up- it was your OODA loop system “deciding” that you needed to wake up. We have to be sedated with powerful chemicals (or severely exhausted) to turn our OODA loops off.

OODA stands for:

Observation- All of the raw perceptual data coming in through the senses.

Orientation- The meaning / sense we make of the information—how we ‘see’ things.

Decision- Conscious and Unconscious decisions we make about what do as a result of the info gained in Orientation.

Action/Reaction- The action we take.

Our OODA loop processes are open, living, learning systems. Everything feeds back and forth into everything else. For example, as we Act, we consciously and unconsciously Observe of the results of our actions, thus we flow forward into another OODA loop.

Example- I am driving down the street in the city.

Observation- Blue Flashing Lights in the distance in the oncoming lanes of traffic, traffic going my direction is starting to slow down ahead of me.

Orientation- My mind has a history of experiences that look similar to this one- I surmise that perhaps there has been an accident or perhaps there is a crime scene up ahead.

Decision- I decide to move to the far right lane but stay on the street I am on. Since I am in the far right lane, it will be easier to bail out onto a side street if I see the traffic coming to a complete standstill.

Action- I move over to the far right lane. The OODA loop process continues.

Observation- Traffic is moving slowly, but moving. In a few moments I see wrecked autos and police on the other side of the street.

Orientation- I predict/think that the wreck will only slow things down, but not block the street totally.

Decision- I decide to stay on this street.

Action- I continue on my path, then I arrive home. Mission accomplished. OODA continues, over and over again.

Often there may be not be time to think. When there is no time to think (or when we do not stop to think), the mind will act according to whatever training (conscious or unconscious) has been installed in the past. When we experience a rapid reaction without thinking it will show us what has been learned that is operating at an unconscious level.

Example-

I am standing on a field at Goodfellow Air Force base in Texas, talking and joking with fellow soldiers. We are assembling to exercise together.

Observation- I hear footsteps running toward me rapidly from behind.

Orientation Process- I turn, see someone running straight at me, closing in quickly – My orientation process somehow deduces that she is going to try to push me over with her outstretched arms and hands.

Decision- There was no time to think. Thus, there was NO CONSCIOUS DECISION. No time for verbal thought. I REACTED (reactions come from our history of all sorts of experiences, good, bad, or otherwise).

Action- I execute a judo move I had learned about 10 years earlier and had not practiced since.

The OODA loop process continues-

Observation- As a result of my action (the judo move), I saw my friend Cindy go sailing over me and land on her back a few feet away. She was ok, fortunately. So was I. We laughed a lot.

The above example illustrates that I still ‘knew’ the judo move I had learned 10 years earlier. My friend Cindy did not know I knew how to do that. Neither did I, for that matter. My OODA loop process simply selected a response from my history—My mind “made me” do something in reaction to my Obervations of Cindy running towards me to push me over.

Cindy tried to push me over as a joke. She was in the Action phase of her own OODA loop process when I Observed her running toward me. My quick and effective OODA loop’s reaction surprised her—Cindy’s OODA loop processes did not adapt in time. The judo worked. Her joke backfired on her.

Welcome to OODA Psych

John Boyd originally studied fighter pilots in combat, trying to understand why the winners were victorious. Boyd hoped to glean some basic principals that could be taught to future pilots or incorporated into the design of future combat aircraft, so he studied the individual mind of the pilot as well as the aerodynamic aspects of the combat aircraft. The scope of Boyd's studies gradually broadened to that of ground warfare between armies. (This is a gross oversimplification—there are a few thousand pages written about Boyd, his life, and his research).

The military has adopted a lot of Boyd's language and principles in revising modern ground warfare strategies. In the civilian sector, Chet Richards and others have popularized the OODA Loop as a tool for developing corporate strategy.

I have been using the OODA loop process to teach my individual clients how the individual mind works while interacting with their personal environment. When we can understand how our individual mind works, and how to change/reprogram it, we can adapt better to reality.

And, to paraphrase Boyd, when we are better able to adapt, we are more likely to be able to survive on our own terms.