The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: scott.ballard on April 07, 2010, 07:57:48 AM
-
I'm going to try this again because I really want to know how the forum members think about the topic.
Caveat: I am not referring to tactics or training to fight in any way. I am not attacking you or your cohorts in any way shape or form with this topic. If you take it that way, move on. I am looking for what you think. Not for you to have to draw from the findings of those who put in years studying Criminology or Developmental Psychology. Nor is it intended for you to dig through the volumes of data currently available. I have already done a lot of that and I have a pretty good understanding of what the accepted scientific values appear to be. Just have a thought and explain how you got there.
With regards to intellect overcoming instinct, do you feel that you can teach yourself, or be trained, to inhibit your base instincts in favor of an intellectual response?
Do you have an example of how you did this? It doesn't have to be about shooitng, fighting or self defense.
Thank you,
-
Okay, I'll have a go at this...
Yes, training can overcome instinct. You see this on the little league baseball field when youngsters first step up to bat. Their instinct is to flinch and duck. That is overcome by training. In some instances, the reward of getting a hit can be great enough that more training is attempted and greater reward is discovered. Those lads turn into real sluggers.
This same training/reward system can overcome many other natural reactions. Flinching when firing a gun is pretty common at the outset. This is/must be overcome if one is to become a decent marksman. Practice helps.
There are many other illustrations of training overcoming instinct and even overcoming common sense. Look at the number of your friends who remarry after divorce ::)
-
...training can ABSOLUTELY overcome instinct.
In the Kehoe shooting incident several years ago, when the lead started flying, Trooper #2 took a bent kneed, isosceles stance and fired at his target. JUST LIKE HE HAD BEEN TRAINED TO DO ON THE RANGE!!!
I would think that the natural instinct of anyone would be to seek cover (which the trooper was about three feet from at the time) and try to return fire. I hope mine would.
My two cents.
-
Little and Pony league baseball as a catcher.
Instinct tells my pea brain that it's gonna hurt if I take one to the nethers! Training, practice and the KNOWLEDGE that it won't hurt (too badly), helped me to concentrate on the task at hand and made me a better catcher. Did I flinch on a foul tip into the mask? Surely, but only the first few times and then it becomes "instinctual" to focus on what the batter is doing rather than the projectile comming at you at 100+ MPH.
I can't tell whether I flinch when I shoot because I've doing it so long now that if I am, I'm not aware of it. I've had enough confrontational incidents to be aware of what is going on around me so that knowledge and experience MIGHT override the instinctual response.
-
The question I would ask is why would you want to?
Would it be more efficient and effective to train to take advantage of instinct?
I think that was one of the things absorbed from Robs' book and in my mind a he makes a very valid point.
-
The question I would ask is why would you want to?
Would it be more efficient and effective to train to take advantage of instinct?
I think that was one of the things absorbed from Robs' book and in my mind a he makes a very valid point.
Let's say I am driving around the track at about 180mph and I see a wreck begin to form in front of me. My instincts tell me to get off the throttle, slow down and steer away from the crash. Seems logical. Avoid the mess. However, in this case those who have actually been there say to drive right into the wreck because by the time you get there the cars will have moved out of the way.
Intellect is better than instinct in this case.
Why I would want to override instinct is because there are times when I need to be smarter than my genetic ooze has programmed me to be.
Thanks,
-
I believe you can but I also believe cases can be sighted pro and con. Basically it's a wash.
JMHOFWIW
Richard
-
Scott, your instinct is to avoid the wreck. How you go about it is either experience or training.
I do understand your point and am not trying to pick a fight.
Timothy's point about being a catcher is interesting. Are you learning that if you don't move you won't be hurt and that your padding will protect you? Do you become desensitized to the threat and remove the instinct to move, or understand there was no threat.
I can let a inside fast ball go right by me as long as some part of me thinks it's aimed at the catchers mitt and not my head. If I think it’s going to hit me I'm moving.
We do train people to run into burning building, attack under the enemy fire and jump into rough water to rescue folks. After training they know they can survive even thought their little reptile brain says run away
-
Instinct in a physical confrontation is to crouch, focus on the threat and maybe move to cover.
I think training to shoot well while doing the crouch and moving to cover (training with the instinct) is better than training for a 2 handed Weaver stance.
I have seen folks in first time Force on Force Training hold the gun out towards the target and turn their head and body away from the threat while firing blindly.
That is an instinct that needs to be overridden with training...
-
Scott, your instinct is to avoid the wreck. How you go about it is either experience or training.
I do understand your point and am not trying to pick a fight.
Timothy's point about being a catcher is interesting. Are you learning that if you don't move you won't be hurt and that your padding will protect you? Do you become desensitized to the threat and remove the instinct to move, or understand there was no threat.
I can let a inside fast ball go right by me as long as some part of me thinks it's aimed at the catchers mitt and not my head. If I think it’s going to hit me I'm moving.
We do train people to run into burning building, attack under the enemy fire and jump into rough water to rescue folks. After training they know they can survive even thought their little reptile brain says run away
You're not picking a fight. You're proving the point. The application of training or benefitting from experience is using your intellect to over ride what your instincts tell you to do. Over time and through continued exposure you re-affirm and fine tune those skills you have gained through training and experience. You use your intellect to continuously evolve.
-
I would say adapt.
-
I would say adapt.
Evolve;
Biology. to develop by a process of evolution to a different adaptive state or condition: The human species evolved from an ancestor that was probably arboreal.
Isn't it like apples and apples? Evolution is the process of adapting to changing conditions over time.
Just a thought!
-
Timothy,
Species evolve, individuals adapt.
That's about all I remember form my BS in Biology
-
Timothy,
Species evolve, individuals adapt.
That's about all I remember form my BS in Biology
Not to be snarky let me explain.
If your behavior or physical traits will be increase your chance of survival and passing on the trait or genes at a greater rate than others, the species will change or evolve.
-
Not to be snarky let me explain.
If your behavior or physical traits will be increase your chance of survival and passing on the trait or genes at a greater rate than others, the species will change or evolve.
I'll buy that! I hope this question doesn't sound too silly...
So how, over the millenia, do we explain the lessening of hair on primative man. Was it not an evolutionary event, adapting to the warming climate after the last ice age? Only 12K years ago, we were a pretty gruesome species...prior to that, only the paleontologist can imagine what we looked like based on fossil record.
thanks
-
SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guess)
Having learned to use fire and wear clothing, having more hair than the other guy was a not a trait that enhanced survival to breeding age.
IF females found males with less hair more attractive to mate with, then less fuzzy males would pass their genes along at a greater rate ove time.
IF males found females with less body hair more attractive to mate with, the same thing would occur.
I don't know we are not all that less hairy than we were 12,000 years ago. Wearing cloths rubs alot of hair off and we groom alot more.
Hollywood movies and artist renderings are just what folks think humans looked like. Using clay models of skulls it would appear Neanderthal does not look all that different than modern man.
-
Thank you for the replies!!!
Your opinions and thoughts have given me some great new insights.
I will be unable to tend this thread properly due to work travel requirements. Please don't feel I am ignoring it, or you.
I sincerely appreciate your input.
Stay Safe,
-
We train to be able to react without thinking. I've read that it takes from 3,000 to 7,000 repetitions to make a response seem "instinctive." Such learned behavior can feel like it is instinctive (i.e., non-reflective), but it can only be passed on through learning and culture, not genes. (That was Lamarck's mistake.)
I just finished listening to episode 153, and was impressed with the arguments about "chaos," "gates," and dojos. Thank you Michael!
I very much like the idea of incorporating or "training around" natural reflexive actions (e.g., the startle response), because it slows us down and messes us up when we try to train against natural reactions (a la Rob Pincus).
Patrick
-
Intellect can, will and must overide instinct if we are to evolve. Lets forget shooting or crisis management. Lets just look at postings on this board. I see a lot of opinions I strongly disagree with (many because of something provacative I posted, but hey "He started it" ;D). While I argue against them (with the occasional bit of snark ;)), you'll not find a post of mine where I responded in real anger even if I was directly and profanley insulted. This isn't because I am a paragon of virtue or a kind hearted soul. In fact, temperment wise, I think that Tom and I were seperated at birth. The difference is years of academic training that tells you to put emotions aside, never pre-judge a case and try to present a disspasionate argument while ignoring the static. Any lawyer will have been trained the same way.. The same is true of doctors or EMTs. They don't see a bleeding, suffering human in great pain in front of them. They see a series of problems that need to b solved in order to fix the situation. I think thatthe fact that we can put our baser instincts (lust, greed, anger, revenge etc) aside is proof that intellect can, though not infallibly, overcome instinct.
FQ13
-
Emotion and Instinct are the driving force, Intellect is the Driver
-
That's the difference between Conservatives and Liberals / Socialist.
In us emotion is ruled by intellect.
In them there is only emotion.