----------------------------





A thought on synaptic pathing in the brain per  "Doer's"   vs   "Thinkers"   less ( Knee-jerk thoughts with conclusions  vs   consideration ), and beyond (action vs contemplation in groups, business, and nations).





------



The brain is a mass of potential synaptic connections. 



Point A is the originated place of a thought, Point B is the actionable outcome (not external/physical outcome; the end; in conjunction with Point A, creates a "conclusion") of the thought*.



Every time a brain uses a thought pathing (e.g., I'm going to eat... a banana), the connectivity from Point A to Point B becomes more direct.




-----




The more direct the connectivity, more efficient the thought.. but it's more than that.


It's less doubt, instantaneous- the thought beomes knee-jerk.  The person does not think about it.  The thought comes closer and closer to being hard-wired.


The mind becomes an instantaneous organ.  The person (in the areas of these thought pathways) becomes a do-er.  They act.  They do not think, they just act.  They get things done.


This is all because of the directness of the connectivity.




-----




On the opposite side of the spectrum is the mass of potential synaptic connections. 


The mass represents an infinite amount of possible connections, i.e, possible thoughts- on the opposite side of the spectrum is unlimited possibilities.



The more (dispersed) the pathway from Point A to Point B, the more "thoughts" (individual Point A to Point B thought blocks) that can enter into the macro thought pathway. The less a brain uses a single pathway, the less direct is the pathway, allowing more potential for (dispersion) of the entire path (macro pathway).





The more a brain resists (refrains from straightforward completion of) the process of going from Point A to Point B, the more expanded the pathway is allowed to be- but other micro pathways need to be available to the brain for them to be possible in the macro pathway**; 





Most micro pathways (thoughts) are interconnected, either directly or indirectly, but the addition of new micro pathways into a macro pathway is much easier when the connection has been previously introduced.  This introduction can be direct (someone telling another: Eisenhower liked the color blue), or "indirect" (someone telling another: When he was a teenager, most of Eisenhower's things were blue), with a scaling degree of directness, from obvious to where the connectivity is practically unseen.  The more direct a connectivity, the easier, and greater the chance that a micro path will be added to a macro path.


(For instance, with a person considering decorating Eisenhower's house, the former statement would be added to the macro thought(s) much easier.)






The more (dispersed) a pathway, the less efficient it is.  Conclusions are slower.  Thoughts are less defined.  The pathway is more prone to be "tied up" in micro pathways.  The less-direct the connectivity of a pathway, the more potential there is to bring in irrelevant micro pathways into a macro. (i.e., to bring in thoughts that have, at best, no value to the conclusion of the macro thought, and at worst, to create a conclusion to the thought that is wholy "incorrect").  (Uncontrolled) (dispersion) can be madness, with a thought pathway bringing in micro pathways that have no actual connection to the macro pathway.





On the "flip-side", the less-direct connectivity of a pathway, the more potential there is to bring in more "insight" into a pathway, or thought-  the more potential to arrive at the "best" conclusion to a pathway.  Put another way, a less-direct pathing of a pathway that involves connectivity with micro pathways that are relevant to the macro pathway brings in the potential for greater understanding and a wiser conclusion to the pathway.




-----




I believe that a (dispersed) state of the brain is our natural state from birth, and as we grow many of our pathways become more direct.




-----




Without too much work one can bring this idea from the brain, into groups, businesses, and nations, as humans tend to recreate themselves in their macro representations (groups, businesses, societies, nations).  Without going too much into it, consider a nation that has used militarism as their fundamental interaction with the "outside world"; to have the nation pursue a path that isn't militarism would be a significantly difficult path (because the pathways would not be built for other "ways"- the only efficient "macro pathway" would be violence.







-------



*A thought can be broken down into many, approaching infinite Point A's and Point B's;  A concrete, recognized thought, built from a multitude of thought (Point A to Point B) building blocks.


I'm going to eat (Point A)... a banana (Point B).


I'm going to (Point A) eat (Point B)   A banana (Point A and Point B)


I (Point A) am (Point B) going (Point A and Point B) to eat (Point A and Point B) a banana (Point A and Point B)


(I can be broken down into many Point A's and B's, same with am, going, to eat, and a banana)





** A person kept in total confinement from birth to acceptable consciousness (if this were possible w/out death), and taught only that they are human (given no other input, verbal or non-verbal, to absorb) (if this were possible) and given a pathway to process (e.g., "What are you?") (pathway is "I am human"), whether they resist the processing of the pathway or not, nothing extra will enter into the pathway- because there is nothing available to be added into it.  At most, there will only be greater potential for other things to be added to the pathway.