The reason is that none of these people is using a part of their brain that is asking, "What's next?" — synthesis

Well, no, people think of all sorts of things while driving and don't crash.

It is very similar to when an extraordinary athlete preforms at the highest levels because s/he is, "in the zone." — synthesis

Well, no, it's just ordinary driving. High level driving, life professional racing, requires a lot of training and skill, I imagine.

This is a place where we can access perceptual reality and function at a much higher level. When we revert to our "normal" thinking, we transform perceptual reality into our personal reality and this is where all the distortions come to life. — synthesis

Our subconscious is continually predicting and reacting based on our conditioning, and this can happen in the background, so to speak, freeing us to think whatever we like. It's only when there's a prediction error, like tripping on something while walking, that our attention may shift exclusively to the sacred **perceptual reality**

By doing instead of (over)-thinking, we are able to transcend the mistakes made by human misinterpretation and miscalculation (normal thinking) and live a better life without ever asking, "What's next?" — synthesis

Over-thinking is over-rated!

By doing instead of (over)-thinking, we are able to transcend the mistakes made by human misinterpretation and miscalculation (normal thinking) and live a better life without ever asking, "What's next?" — synthesis

This is nice idea - overthinking or analysis/paralysis is a pet hate of mine - but how do we put it into practice exactly? How do we determine the level of reflection versus action? Or am I overthinking it? :joke:

I do not drive (never have), so I should leave this alone, but fools rush in...

The liquid-like flow of traffic must have something to do with your arriving at the beach in one piece. Freeways, by definition, (are supposed to) have fewer entrances and exits than a typical street resulting in a smooth traffic flow. Until, that is, something happens which disrupts the flow--ice, rain, snow, debris, alcohol, etc.

Something similar happens on a bicycle. Once moving, the rider doesn't have to think about balance, pedaling, and the like until something goes wrong--pot holes, ice, traffic, and the like.

My guess is that tasks like driving, biking--really all sorts of tasks involving multiple-repeated functions are managed non-consciously. Various parts of the brain are processing in/out information related to the task, leaving the frontal cortex sort of free to wander far and wide. Sort of, but not too much.

Drivers have benefitted from numerous engineering improvements over the last 70 years or so, on both highways and freeways: curve banking, drainage, barriers, surface materials, all sorts of things that aren't very prominent. Cars are also better engineered, all because humans are the same old design that formerly traveled exclusively on two feet.

God intervenes in reality on a massive level when we're not looking to inconspicuously prevent as many accidents as possible without revealing its existence. Or "simulation programmers" if you like. The funny thing is, it's impossible to prove or disprove that. You would need to establish the accident rate when things are truly random, and of course we don't know that things are truly random.

Our subconscious is continually predicting and reacting based on our conditioning, and this can happen in the background, so to speak, freeing us to think whatever we like. — praxis

Says who? Nobody has a clue as to how thinking works.

This is nice idea - overthinking or analysis/paralysis is a pet hate of mine - but how do we put it into practice exactly? How do we determine the level of reflection versus action? Or am I overthinking it? :joke: — Tom Storm

It's one of the many benefits of meditation. It appears as if driving (and many other tasks) must be some form of meditative state in order to for our brains to be able to process the amount of information necessary in order to make the precision adjustments necessary.

If you have ever been in a vehicle with a new driver, you well know that over-thinking what you are doing can be disastrous. Here's another example...

Once in a great while we'll all experience a bad driving day. Perhaps something really negative has happened in our lives but we are not in the driving zone and almost get into an accident. After this happens, we fully bring our attention to our driving and what happens?, it's almost like we are new drivers again, making poor judgments and faulty decisions. We have switched to our normal thinking and it does not work very well.

The amount of information our brains can process seems nearly infinite, but only if our intellect remains quiescent. If we kick into analysis mode, our thinking almost grinds to a halt as we must apply all of our biases to what simply is, ending up with (is + us).

And to your question about the level of reflection, all action should be doing. The feedback from doing will tell you everything you need to know. Reflection will simply remove you from understanding what is happening now. Let the past go.

Something similar happens on a bicycle. — Bitter Crank

It happens whenever we need to process a great deal of information in a very short period of time. Our brain go to another level where there is no time for analysis.

You are walking down the sidewalk and all of a sudden you see a four year old chasing after a ball that is heading into the street toward an automobile approaching at a high rate of speed. In a split-second you grab the child's arm saving his life.

We use this ability a great deal and the results are almost always quite positive. It is only when we fall back on our intellectual analysis do we often crash and burn because reality refuses to acquiesce to our demands (and, as well, reality has moved on as we are stuck in the muck of analytical hell).

God intervenes in reality on a massive level when we're not looking to inconspicuously prevent as many accidents as possible without revealing its existence. Or "simulation programmers" if you like. The funny thing is, it's impossible to prove or disprove that. You would need to establish the accident rate when things are truly random, and of course we don't know that things are truly random. — RogueAI

Actually, it's impossible to prove or disprove anything (in an absolute sense). In a relative sense, you can prove or disprove everything (as the woke crowd demonstrates daily).

Well, I can say absolutely that I'm conscious and have a mind and certain subjective experiences. Everything else is pretty much taken on faith.

I am not a dis-believer, only that when you bring The Absolute (God) into the conversation, what can one say?

I am not a dis-believer, only that when you bring The Absolute (God) into the conversation, what can one say?

That's it's possible there's a god that's massively interfering in the world when we're not looking. You can also substitute that with "the simulation is being changed when we're not looking".

One can say a lot of things about that.

That's it's possible there's a god that's massively interfering in the world when we're not looking. — RogueAI

The way I look at it is that there are two basic categories that thinking falls into, the first being those things that people acknowledge they have no understanding about (e.g., speculating about what's on the other side of The Universe, the second being those things that people actually believe they know (or understand).

The difference between the two is that on the first count they are being honest, on the second, they are not.

The only thing that people can (really) understand is that they can not (really) understand anything. Once you let go of having to understand, then you can accept all things as they are...

Our subconscious is continually predicting and reacting based on our conditioning, and this can happen in the background, so to speak, freeing us to think whatever we like.
— praxis

Says who? Nobody has a clue as to how thinking works. — synthesis

Including old Shakyamuni?

Including old Shakyamuni? — praxis

Especially him.

K, if you're as convinced as you seem there's no point in trying to convince you otherwise. :victory:

What are you trying to convince me of?

"Nobody has a clue as to how thinking works."

"Oh, yeah?!"

"Yeah!"

"Yeah?!!"

"YEAH!!!"

:lol:

By doing instead of (over)-thinking, we are able to transcend the mistakes made by human misinterpretation and miscalculation (normal thinking) and live a better life without ever asking, "What's next?" — synthesis

You seem to be omitting the fact that we first must learn how to “do” X. The first time you get behind the wheel of a car you aren’t able to just drive without thinking about driving. You have to consciously think through each step. Anyways, you seem to be describing what’s known as flow states, where individuals seem to lose themselves in a task they find meaningful and rewarding. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s book “Flow” is specifically about the importance these states have on our overall happiness and well-being.

You seem to be omitting the fact that we first must learn how to “do” X. The first time you get behind the wheel of a car you aren’t able to just drive without thinking about driving. You have to consciously think through each step. Anyways, you seem to be describing what’s known as flow states, where individuals seem to lose themselves in a task they find meaningful and rewarding. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s book “Flow” is specifically about the importance these states have on our overall happiness and well-being. — Pinprick

We have to learn how to do pretty much everything, BUT, once we learn the basics, then we can switch from our thinking mind into ?? (call in some sort of meditative state). If we happen to switch back to our thinking mind in the middle of such tasks, all hell breaks loose (as is the case in driving). This happens in everything we do.

Somebody can come up with all kinds of names for it but I believe it is our ability to to see things as they really are, a mode we are forced into because we simply cannot deal with the amount of information coming at us in thinking mode. Practicing meditation is the effort to enter and remain in this mode and enjoy the benefits in everything we do, including the optimization of mental and physical health.

The point of this thread was to introduce an alternative approach to intellectualization. As one who was seriously burned-out from a long and arduous philosophical journey, I came to realize that the burden of having to "figure it out" was a grand illusion, that things were the way there were regardless of my thinking (especially taking into account that even the simplest of things is insurmountably complex for the human intellect to grasp).

So we all end up spinning our wheels in great frustration attempting to execute the impossible task of understand the what, why, how, and when of things that gives rise to the roller coaster ride we call our lives.

Fortunately, it is not necessary to function in this highly ineffectual manner. If we can simply observe and accept (without comment), then we can see things for what they really are and respond with the most appropriate measures.

Perhaps one day humanity will figure it out, but this seems highly improbable, as after all, we can't even fathom why we are here in the first place, so how can we know anything else?

Fortunately, it is not necessary to function in this highly ineffectual manner. If we can simply observe and accept (without comment), then we can see things for what they really are and respond with the most appropriate measures. — synthesis

It's not necessary to think for ourselves, that's true. We can rely on others to see things for what they really are and inform us on how to respond with the most appropriate measures. Not everyone is made to be a follower though.

It's not necessary to think for ourselves, that's true. We can rely on others to see things for what they really are and inform us on how to respond with the most appropriate measures. Not everyone is made to be a follower though. — praxis

You are not understanding. You don't listen to other people (that's the last thing you want to do). By achieving some degree of clarity, you can make decisions based on what's really happening instead of what you "think" is happening.

We can only make decisions based on our thinking. Reacting without thought is not decision making. It's an involentary conditioned responce. We can deliberatly condition ourselves to react in particular ways, but that requires planning etc., i.e., thinking. For example, if you were speeding down the freeway and the car in front of you abruptly slowed down you'd probably hit the brakes without thinking or deciding to hit the brakes. With deliberate practice we can train ourselves to do this as well as possible. That's something that we can chose to do, and that decision would be based in reason.

Deciding something based on a gut feeling or intuition is also thinking in that it involves the subconscious, it's just not well considered, or perhaps it is well considered if deliberate conditioning were involved.

Each driver is making an infinite number of driving decisions and everybody is just a micro-second or two from a lethal mis-judgement. Why do these miscalculations happen so rarely? How is it possible that there's such a great chance that you are going to arrive at the beach in one piece? — synthesis

I'd like to give credit to the first responders to this thread. Sorry if this sounds like a pun. hehe. But they have given good explanations as to why the above is so.

So, to summarize: two things -- engineering (modification and manipulation of our surroundings by our skilled and competent experts); and the discovery that driving has nothing to do with IQ, but coordination of senses and reflexes. This latter is why you'll see people whose right to drive on public roads has been taken away (which is not necessarily due to intoxication).

But there is a third component that is unwritten into the law of driving -- the drivers' trust and faith in the road and transportation stability and trust and faith in other drivers on the road. We just feel this. We take this trust for granted when we get into our car and drive off.

I'd like to give credit to the first responders to this thread. Sorry if this sounds like a pun. hehe. But they have given good explanations as to why the above is so.

So, to summarize: two things -- engineering (modification and manipulation of our surroundings by our skilled and competent experts); and the discovery that driving has nothing to do with IQ, but coordination of senses and reflexes. — Caldwell

Nobody knows how thinking works on any level so I would disagree with their speculation. The only thing we do know is that the amount of information that needs to be processed in incalculable and that this cannot take place if we are using our normal thinking.

And I agree that people do have faith in other drivers (to some extent) but what does that have to do with what we are discussing?

We can only make decisions based on our thinking. Reacting without thought is not decision making. It's an involuntary conditioned response. We can deliberately condition ourselves to react in particular ways, but that requires planning etc., i.e., thinking. For example, if you were speeding down the freeway and the car in front of you abruptly slowed down you'd probably hit the brakes without thinking or deciding to hit the brakes. With deliberate practice we can train ourselves to do this as well as possible. That's something that we can chose to do, and that decision would be based in reason.

Deciding something based on a gut feeling or intuition is also thinking in that it involves the subconscious, it's just not well considered, or perhaps it is well considered if deliberate conditioning were involved. — praxis

That's very nice but nobody knows how thinking works.

You have to go with what we know (which is zero) and speculate on the rest. Again, the idea is that there is a part of the brain that is capable of processing an infinite amount of information without our being able to access it intellectually (thank God!). If you can tap into this, it allows you to see things much closer to the way they actually exist.

Nobody knows how thinking works on any level so I would disagree with their speculation. — synthesis

This is an assertion, which by all intents and purposes, claims to know something about thinking.
So, honestly, I can't agree with the above either. If we can't know how humans think, then civilization would never have happened. You said:

The reason is that none of these people is using a part of their brain that is asking, "What's next?" They are just "doing it." — synthesis

That, to me, is a claim.

And I agree that people do have faith in other drivers (to some extent) but what does that have to do with what we are discussing? — synthesis

A lot!

If we couldn't have faith that it's safe to drive on the freeway and that we will get to our destination safe and sound, we would not even normally try it. Those who love living in high risk situation would enjoy it, I'm sure, but driving is about safety and comfort. You said yourself :

Why do these miscalculations happen so rarely? How is it possible that there's such a great chance that you are going to arrive at the beach in one piece? — synthesis

Over-thinking is over-rated! — praxis

Except that nearly all are radically underthinking and relying on underlying structure and infrastructure. And deluding themselves as to any quality of whatever it is they are doing.

For example, driving at 85 mph is well beyond the capabilities of most drivers, and beyond the capabilities of most cars as found. Tires and tire pressures, for example: who gives that even a thought, as long as they're inflated and not flat. And that there is not carnage on the highways is a credit to miraculous achievements in engineering. Oh, wait! There is carnage on the highways, only held down by that miraculous engineering. Hmm. As to thinking itself, "Please, sir, may I have some more?"

... nobody knows how thinking works.

...there is a part of the brain that... — synthesis

Do you mean to say that only you know how thinking works?