The Physical Genius

[Dan]

I'd be interested it hear people's reactions to the below (rather long) article, by Malcolm Gladwell - author of the tipping point.

http://www.gladwell.com/1999/1999_08_02_a_genius.htm

I was particularly intrigued by the bits relating Kosslyn's work on imagination and visualisation to "genius"....

[Coach Tran]

Thanks... I am a big fan of his work.

[Dan]

Cheers Bao

In terms of the thesis that part of what makes a "genius" is the superior imagination, do you use visualisation as part of your training?

[KD Jones]

OK, I finally took the time to read this whole thing.

Odd that it was tonight, because I was just working on my visualization with regard to a guitar-playing issue (trying to get some chops back).

The bits about "chunking" and the bit about image generation, maintenance, inspection and transformation are marvelous. We used to talk about "physical genius," using exactly that term, with regard to very young children we watched solve certain kinds of problems as though they were completely mapped out, or as though they'd done them before. This was, I think, a marvelous elucidation of the traits involved.

In my own case, I think it also explains some of the trouble I have with MA. I'm known to be coordinated, I'm not "afraid" (which is NOT to say that I am not prey to fear-reactivity), I'm motivated, and I like to work. But still, others just "get it" in a way I don't. A bit like the neurosurgeon's tennis game in the piece at hand.

So... having done a fair amount of visualiztion work in the past, I think I'm going to start working on SPECIFICALLY these attributes of image (generation/maintenance/inspection/transformation) and see what all of that yields.

Don't know what the method will be... but I am VERY VERY VERY thankful that this article was posted.

Blessings. You did me an enormous favor here.

[Dan]

Hi Bao, KD

I'm glad you guys enjoyed the article. I've enjoyed a lot of stuff on the site, so it's nice to feel like I gave something back.

>>>

There seems to be an apparent inconsistency between Gladwell’s idea that the thing that separates his geniuses from their equally hard-working, enthusiastic and talented peers is imagination, and the RMAX notion (that I have picked up from the flow-fighting forum) that you shouldn’t be visualising opponents in shadow work, or at least that this kind of work takes a lower priority than other practice. On the other hand, there seems to be a lot of creativity going on around here. What’s happening?

A few thoughts of mine…
1) Gladwell is just telling a story about some people he calls geniuses, and he doesn’t have a mortgage on the topic, although I like the idea of recognising creativity and imagination.
2) RMAX to me, seems about developing some general traits – not least of which is character, whereas a lot of so-called geniuses are uber-specialists, with lop-sided personalities to match.
3) RMAX might be addressing imagination and visualisation in some other way, although I’m not sure if any of the products specifically deal with visualisation.

[wadem]

That was a really neat article. I first learned about "chunking" through reading Tony Robbins' first book. It's an interesting and solid concept. Everyone uses chunking in one form or another as part of the learning and doing process. Obviously, some people have an easier time doing this than others — hence the mention of mastery. Sometimes the difference in ability depends on the discipline and the focus the person has on it.

For anyone not familiar, here is a basic definition of "chunking" (as I understand it). When learning or doing anything, the more something is done or performed, the more familiar individual pieces become. At some point, your brain begins to create combinations or patterns of these individual components, so it is no longer Step 1, 2, 3, ... etc., but "Group A" (or whatever thing makes sense to the individual). Eventually, once difficult tasks are boiled down to a series of simple steps.

One of my jujutsu teachers used the term when referring to learning techniques. I happen to learn in a very similar way to what the author was describing. My brain automatically looks for patterns in anything I am trying to learn, whether a technique, a computer program, whatever. Once I understand the "rules" or the underlying process of something, then figuring out the particulars is easy. My thinking is at once linear, and very 3 dimensional at the same time. Part of it may be because I am visual in nature.

In my jujutsu practice a few years ago, I realized that I was no longer concerned with the details of a technique variation, but rather the principles that made it work. Often, I couldn't remember the exact technique we practiced, but I could reproduce an effective version of it on the fly because something "felt" correct. I have also "created" technique variations that I had never tried before, just by combining familiar elements and playing them out in my head. This is not to say that I am a good martial artist — I am actually far from it. Understanding something intellectually and being able to perform are two different things.

When I began playing baseball, I had a real fear of the ball. My dad took a lot of time with me in the backyard to help me become "unafraid" of the ball coming at me. For years I played ball in little league, middle school and high school. I am now 36 and have not played ball in any capacity for about 18 years. However, I am still able to throw with accuracy, and balls flying straight at my head are easily avoided or caught. I think this is because the "procedure" of taking in the information of that oncoming ball and reacting to it has become a simple and familiar pattern that is easy to reproduce.

True masters of their art — be it music, surgery, sports, martial arts, etc. — have "chunked" basic information, movements, concepts, etc. into simpler units that are easier for the brain and body to retrieve. I think that may be what makes the difference in reaction times, grace under pressure, etc. The less complicated things seem to be, the easier they seem to be able to do.

[Coach Tran]

Cheers Bao

In terms of the thesis that part of what makes a "genius" is the superior imagination, do you use visualisation as part of your training?

Dan,

yes, I do use visualization in my training. In my opinion, a genuis is someone who can take his imagination do something with it.

[KD Jones]

There seems to be an apparent inconsistency between Gladwell’s idea that the thing that separates his geniuses from their equally hard-working, enthusiastic and talented peers is imagination, and the RMAX notion (that I have picked up from the flow-fighting forum) that you shouldn’t be visualising opponents in shadow work, or at least that this kind of work takes a lower priority than other practice. On the other hand, there seems to be a lot of creativity going on around here. What’s happening?

A possibility just hit me out of the blue.

Notice that when the good doctor does his "imagining," he's not performing on a dummy "patient" - as we would be when working a heavy bag, other training device, or shadow. In addition, he is working from very sophisticated diagnostics which allow him to know quite well what he'll be dealing with - unlike the situation in a fight.

When Yo-Yo Ma rehearses in his mind, he's not working to perfect a response to an abstract, potential circumstance which may or may not occur, but rather a performance whose paramaters he can largely control, and are very well known to him.

So, the next question is, are there factors in training that can be approched in such a way? I think so. I'm still working out exactly what they are... but in part or in full, I think the by far the most profound possibility are the factors we carry in with us - the abilities trained in Intu-Flow/Warrior Welleness/X-tension, BodyFlow, Flow Fit, etc...

Perhaps, by visualizing (and otherwise sensing) CST practice, it may be possible to deepen the practice, while maintaining Coach Jones' advice to "stimulate not simulate."

I'm sure that the whole of the good Doctor's experience and individual variations leads to something very like flow... when something unexpected occurs or goes wrong, I'll bet he's quick on his feet. Likely, no-one but he would ever notice an error in someone functioning at that level.

Likewise, in music there are variables as well. I remember a story of Wynton Marsalis playing in a jazz club, very low key, not billed. During one of his solos, a LOUD cell phone ring tone went off. Something of an insult, and very jarring. There was a pause, and Marsalis played the exact phrase back. Funny. Ha ha. But then he kept playing it. And then he began to play variations. And then, it had turned, without a seam, back into what he'd been playing before.

He had never boxed with that melody before...

I'm sure Yo-Yo Ma would have some similar (different due to the difference in musical style) response to an unexpected occurence - even if it is "merely" an unexpected interpretation of the music at hand.

So, I think there's a difference between visualization that attempts to plan the unknowable, and visualization that prepares for the unforeseeable.

Since BodyFlow, Intu-Flow (etc. etc. etc.) are taken as means to the end of flow, I think visualisation (along with other senses) may well be appropriate as "stimulation rather than simulation." In the end - though I do not have it yet, at least not as I hope to - I believe flow to be the one thing I would MOST want with me in a fight.


Blessings. (And I hope all that makes some sense...)

[Dan]

Good one KD!

Plenty of food for thought in your post. I had to go off, search up on simualte vs stimualte, think a bit, think some more...

I'm still not sure about how RMAX develops the qualities of imagination and visualisation, but then I haven't had time to look at the psychology parts of fisticuffs yet either. I'm sure finding out will be fun...

Cheers

Dan

[Scott Sonnon]

Visualization and imagination are only tools. They aren't reality. No matter how good your imagination, no matter how detailed your visualization, life doesn't bend to you. It awes you with its mystery.

Always overprepare with a good plan, and always depart from it to meet the needs of the situation. The most useful skills in life are to witness reality unfolding, to embrace the mystery, and to to adapt your preparation to it.

[Coach Jones]

Visualization and imagination are only tools. They aren't reality. No matter how good your imagination, no matter how detailed your visualization, life doesn't bend to you. It awes you with its mystery.

There IS a spoon. :wink: :lol:

[Scott Sonnon]

Exactly, B. Sometimes people get overly enamored with the metaphors of the cinema (such as, the "no spoon" concept), and extrapolate to the micro what cutting edge science witness in the quantum micro. But the fact of the matter is, nothing, no matter how fantastic, short-cuts daily personal practice and systematic progression.