I don't have a wordpress login, so I'll reply to your question

“What method of analysis most properly precedes action? “

Here. It seems that this method is determined by a 2×2 matrix of time and anxiety. The shorter the time and the less the anxiety, the more the activity is determined by automatic processes. The greater the anxiety and the more the time given, the more the activity is determined by conscious processes. This is why in tight football games before the fieldgoal, the opposing team may call a timeout: they want to ramp up the kicker's time and anxiety, forcing him to kick with his conscious mind as much as possible. The conscious mind tends to be pretty terrible with decision making, so this is good strategy.

After a professor's comment on an earlier reaction paper [1] I have been trying to figure out what is the evolutionary function of so easily transitioning to poorer-processes cognition. It's a mystery.

Knowledge is unitary, so it makes sense to combine 5GW and Education. I hope you comment as much as possible — I want to learn from your creative insights!

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2006/10/01/identity-reason-and-other-lies.html

The best way I've found to work with intution comes from specific theatre practices, they are literally impossible to adequately write about, the practices must be practiced. One of my mentors was a teaching assistant for Viola Spolin while she was writing her book about improv theatre games, based on the work of Neva Boyd, who got her stuff from the last of the European peasants displaced during the 30s who ended up in Chicago. Spolin's work gave us the entire genre of improv theatre, starting with Chicago's Second City founded by her son. My mentor passed on stuff Viola did not include in her book because it was 'too radical'. But her work still stands and is much used in classrooms and therapy sessions. Viola always groused that she was never given credit for her work and in large part this is true. I remember playing these games as a youngster in Wisconsin decades before I heard about Viola and often wonder about the streak of thinkers this area of the mid-west produces, wonder about how much those ancient European games have to do with it.

My wife and I are right now preparing a workshop-seminar based in part on these games (we both have MFAs in Theatre Arts) because we feel the potential has barely been taped.

Anyway, some of your genetic stuff gives me the willies because it starts to smell like biological determinism ('The Measure of Man' type stuff) but then I see sometimes you are careful to move it away from those old bad ideas. An artful dance that is.

Thanks again for all your comments.

It occurred to me that perhaps the benefit of conscious/linguistic thinking is that it allows individuals to override their “good sense” and more easily be duped into sacrificing themselves for the group. Perhaps this explains why it appears that the brain region dedicated to language is older than the vocal cords (with the implication that language was originally signed with fingers and hands) — it is a method of communication designed to increase hunting and gathering efficiency. But how to test this idea? Hmmm…

“Dolphins (and all ceataceans) only sleep with half a brain at a time so they do not drown”

Well, humans only “sleep” with their conscious brain, so we do not asphyxiate. Do you mind like this?

“The best way I've found to work with intuition comes from specific theatre practices, they are literally impossible to adequately write about, the practices must be practiced.”

Yes, yes, yes.

“My wife and I are right now preparing a workshop-seminar based in part on these games (we both have MFAs in Theatre Arts) because we feel the potential has barely been taped.”

Very cool.

“Anyway, some of your genetic stuff gives me the willies because it starts to smell like biological determinism ('The Measure of Man' type stuff) but then I see sometimes you are careful to move it away from those old bad ideas. An artful dance that is.”

I'm not a fan of the Mismeasure of Man — I attacked it here before [1] — and I admire Rob Kurzban's [2] and Matt Ridley's [3] attacks, too.

Scientifically, there would appear to be three possible determinants of our actions

Genetic Influecne (G). Perhaps no matter what, we will do certain things, because of our genes.
Environmental Influence (E): Perhaps no matter what, we will do certain things, because of our environment.
Genetic-Environmental Interaction (GxE). Perhaps no matter what, we will do certain things, because of how our genes respond to our environment

I'm not aware of any Gists. I know a lot of Environmental determinists. However, I'm an individualist — a GxEr. I'm a big believer in how our unique genes, and our unique environment, effects who we are. No two of us are identical. We are all born special, and we all live special lives. [4]

Thank you for your kind words.

[1] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2006/09/09/synthesizing-stephen-j-gould-s-beloved-punctuated-equilibriu.html
[2] http://human-nature.com/nibbs/02/apd.html
[3] http://human-nature.com/nibbs/02/118.html
[4] http://www.tdaxp.com/archive/2006/09/04/genetic-and-experiential-individuality.html