Thread: The Fallacy of Training Machines
12/05/2005 8:57am, #361
This thread is getting much more clear. After a weekend of research on entrainment as it relates to psychophysiology, I must apologize to Steve Richards, because I was ignorant of his qualification I assumed he was approaching this at a much more general level. The idea that MA training entrains mental pathways in the same way that the psychophysiology research suggests is very interesting. My only question is, can Steve direct me to more research about complex motor skills? All the sources I find tend to relate specifically to visual interpretations and not the gross physical reactions.
12/05/2005 2:54pm, #362
No need for an apology. As JFS has pointed out, there's very little MA research (specifically). Most entrainment regimens utilize one form of 'imagery' method or another. If we start with the fundamental fact that we do not experience the world directly through our senses, but only as a representation encoded in the sensory modalities, then we get to the point where we accept that all perception is mental. If you think about it, when you look 'out' through your eyes, you are really looking at an image created inside your brain, there is no 'out' only a representation of it.
A mentally constructed image (in the imagination) is not even a sensory system generated image, it is qualitatively different, and yet it involves the same areas of the brain. An example is a person asked to imagine a visual scene will show activation of the primary visual cortex, as well as association areas.
Humans are primarily visual processors/representors, so it makes sense that most entrainments utilize visual modeling.
Another factor is whether or not an individual treats their sensory representations in an introverted or extroverted way. Introverted processors act as if an extra barrier existed between them and their sensory experience, extroverted processors treat their 'external' model of the world as if its an extension of themselves. An example would be a top Formula 1 race driver not only treating the car as an extension of himself, but also the whole race track. If you extend your own sense of boundary out into the environment (as modeled) then the environment is less threatening, its all just inside your own head. An introverted processor will feel that the environment is full of actual or potential danger so, his integrity must be protected by a sensory membrane that keeps teh world 'out there'. This may not affect his functionality, but it will color his 'style' of relating to the environment.
I've suggested that the TCMA 'Gate' model is introverted. It offers the gates as membranes thru which things pass. They are not mapped 'onto' the target they stand in-between the protagonists, and may even be doubled up by consideration of both fighters having gates. The Hud Map is overlain onto the traget and is seen as an "extention of intention". The intention is to 'complete' the task by going to the target.
About skilled motion: practitioners would benefit from having a core model of what they intend to achieve, and then 'running the program' internally - matching this up with repeated exposure to modeled events, under an incremental pressure curve.
This way, the internal model becomes refined, it releases processing capacity, and external motor skills become more smoothly grooved.
It is true that: 'the map isn't the territory', but its equally true that the 'map' (in whatever form implicit or explicit) is all we have to work with.
12/05/2005 3:18pm, #363
Do you think one form of perception is superior to another? (Introverted vs Extroverted)
Also, about this "Humans are primarily visual processors/representors, so it makes sense that most entrainments utilize visual modeling." Are you saying that these concepts are unique to visual data? Or that most testing is done on visual stimuli because of its prevalance?
I sometimes roll with my eyes closed and I've met other people that do this. The idea is that it improves your feel for your opponent when you don't get fooled by any false information he is trying to display. I assume this utilizes a different part of the brain than visual entrainments. Are the same conclusions valid?
12/05/2005 3:19pm, #364
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Baltimore, Maryland Area
- H'ung Ga & SPM
Excellent stuff, Steve. Hopefully, a few will take the time and make the effort to really get a firm grip on this thing. A quick read through won't work in such matters. It requires contemplation and exploration with a fair level of honesty ... tends to be where it breaks down for most.
Cherished belief systems have a life of their own and many are willing to go to their grave clutching them tightly. I never had time for or interest in such bullshit. If there was "more" or a "better" whatever ... that's what I worked for and with. Probably more gnostic than I care to admit.
12/05/2005 3:30pm, #365
Originally Posted by WhiteShark
- Join Date
- Jun 2005
- Sinsinnatti Oh Hi Ho
- Recovery(lung surgeries)
Though I do usualy find myself visualizing his or her position based on what I feel . So I guess in a way I am still using the visual parts of my brain .
12/05/2005 3:34pm, #366Originally Posted by WhiteShark
The eye-closure thing is something found in Wing-Chun, either as simply looking away or wearing a blindfold in chi-sau. Its been claimed that chi-sau with a blindfold is difficult - more difficult than sighted chi-sau. It isn't, it is in fact easier. By shuting down the visual system, you enforce probablity computation - the data stream loading is reduced massively. Because chi-sau is a relatively closed loop activity with definite parameters, with a little experience, it becomes routine to do without sighted practice and work NOT as is also cliamed by 'feel' (because feel is senosry-data driven, reactive and slow) but by hypothesis based upon probability, itself built up empirically from repeated exposure to the exercise. Hypothesis processing is fast, and, has the capacity to quamtum-jump ahead to predicted positions, independent of 'feel' thru teh reactive, real-time sensory system (including the proprioceptive sense of spatial position and balance).
For initial entrainment, a visual model (e.g the HUD) is efficient. Later, you must NOT project the overlay, in actual terms, as to do so is to present an internal barrier to the cognitive model that you have built up so arduously thru hrad repeated exposure to pressure. You must develop th capacity to 'devolve' responsibility for the probability modelling process to your now entrained 'battle computer' - let the program run. Nevertheless, to achieve this, you must start with basic entrainment, and for this utilizing a visual sensory model is the most effective.
12/05/2005 3:37pm, #367Originally Posted by JFS USA
'Gnosis' is a true statement in this context, and without question, you have it in abundance.
12/05/2005 3:38pm, #368Originally Posted by Christmas Spirit
12/05/2005 3:44pm, #369
12/05/2005 3:44pm, #370Originally Posted by WhiteShark
It is possible to be predominately introverted and still have the sensory processing side of your personality tuned to extroversion.
On a more objective-empirical stance, I have explored this with my students over the years, and found that extroverted information processing has a better fit with the 'task' than the inroverted variant. Its a 'doing' thing, and really the anmswers come from that.