PSYC9120: Psychology Fact & Fiction
Entry 1
For many times since I was in elementary, I always hear that there is the left side of the brain and the right side as well, and that the two sides make different contributions to the behaviour of people. Over the years, I learned and believed that the left side was solely for analytical thinking and sequential thinking, while the right side was for creativity, the hearing language, visual, spatial, and the holistic. I thought that either the right side or the left side of the brain works, depending on what a person is doing. After the lectures, I learned that both sides—the left brain and the right brain—function together, as functions are usually distributed across both sides (Keenan4, 2015, sl.3-47). Thus, it is not true that the right brain is the creative brain, and that the left brain is the analytic brain. This was proven in the study in which it was proven that creativity had more to do with frontal lobes than the right brain (Keenan4 2015, sl.3-55). Based on the split brain research, it was found out that it would be very difficult to detect the separated contributions of the two hemispheres, as both work together and make their own contributions that affect the behaviour of the person.
Entry 2
Just yesterday I thought that when it comes to human development, it is the first three years that appear to be most critical for the development of the intellectual abilities. I believed this to be so true, in fact, I believed that the most critical period is from the first year to the fourth year when the experiences usually stick to the child’s mind until they grow up. This I believed was the reason why I still remembered the times when I was around three years old, up to the time when I was four years old. I still remembered the time I cried hard the first time I went to school and I was left alone by my mom. But with what I just learned, it is not true that children who are not stimulated during the first three years would have a sub-optimal intellectual development. This is because the most critical period in human development takes place in the early stages of an organism’s life, when it displays heightened sensitivity to environmental stimuli (Keenan2, 2012, sl.4-4). In fact, if there occurs some problems at this stage when the organism should receive appropriate stimulus, it says that it may be impossible to develop other functions later in life (Keenan2, 2012, sl.4-5).
Entry 3
I have heard about eidetic memory, about an extraordinary memory kill that gives a person an ability to remember the event “as accurate as if the person were still viewing, or hearing, the original object or event” (Keenan3, 2012, sl.5-34). This may be almost impossible for a human being, although studies have suggested there are a rare number of people who are capable of this kind of memory. This was usually seen in children, who appear to see the image as if it is right there in front of them. They remember distinct evidences like where the person was situated, or what the person was wearing. This may be difficult to imagine at this stage of adulthood, since what I recall usually are the words that are being said, or the facial expressions that are evoked. But when it comes to the clothing, it may be difficult to remember the color or style of clothing, especially if they are wearing something as casual as pants and shirt. I think it is easier to remember if the person was wearing a dress, such as a white loose dress or a dashing red gown. But when it comes to ordinary types of clothing like shirts or blouses, it may be difficult to remember accurately.
For this, I do believe the words of Marvin Minsky that eidetic memory is actually “an unfounded myth” (Keenan3, 2012, sl.5-36). I myself do not remember what my parents were wearing when I graduated in kindergarten, especially since there was no picture that would make me remember the event. However, there may be some truth that children who are 5 years old and below do have eidetic memory, unless what they see is something that they were only imagining. It is difficult sometimes to tell whether the things or people that children see are indeed accurate and true, or they were caused only by strong imagination. Still, there are special events that people are able to remember, especially if the event is something that is close to their heart and mind, or if there is a special emotion attached to the past event, which makes them remember the words that were said, as if they were true. I still remember what my dad told me during my high school graduation like I am hearing it again.
Entry 4
Before I thought that knowledge is akin to intelligence, and that being intelligent means knowing a lot of stuff. I read, however, from the definition of Neisser et al. (1996), that intelligence means “ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, and to overcome obstacles by taking thought” (p.77). If this is the case, then intelligence is not just about knowledge but more on I.Q. and the ability to understand and cope with the environment, on what is taking place, and what is needed to survive challenges. It is more of an adaptive tool that allows people to endure what they are going through. Thus, an intelligent person should have resilience, endurance, and flexibility. It has something to do with how a person reasons out than about what they know. If this is the case, then a person may be intelligent if they respond well to problems, however difficult they may seem.
With this, it shows that what I thought intelligence was, is actually a myth. It is not true that knowledge is the same thing as intelligence. Knowledge is an aspect of intelligence, but with intelligence there is more to it than what a person knows. It has something to do with their capacity to adapt to the environment and learn from their experiences. However, if this is the case, then it cannot be said that a child below the age of twelve is intelligent, since a child who is 12 years old has no capacity to understand what is taking place. They still have no capacity to learn widely from experiences, or to adapt to their changing environment. If a child cannot be labeled as intelligent, then how do we label children who has a higher level of knowledge and knows a lot of stuff? From the definition of Neisser et al. (1996), only young adults and adults are capable of being intelligent, as they are the ones who are capable of understanding the environment and what is taking place around them. In the same way, adults who are not able to adapt to their environment are not intelligent, even if they graduated from computer science, so long as they are unable to adapt to experiences.
Entry 5
I have always believed that dreams have symbolic meanings. In fact, when I was in high school, I always bought books that are called “dream dictionaries” that tell the readers about the symbolic meaning of each object seen in one’s dream. It was entertaining to read it actually, knowing that dreaming about a crying baby meant that you are deprived of attention. I always carried that book before, since it was my desire to know and understand what I was dreaming about. This is connected to the statement of Sigmund Freud, who said that most dreams have something to do with the wishes of the person dreaming. It is their deepest desires at the time they were dreaming, way back to the time of childhood. What a person feels and thinks about stays within their consciousness, and is being evoked in dreams through symbolic representations. If this is the case, however, what does it mean when a person dreams about a specific person? Are they symbolic representations as well, and does not refer exactly to the person seen in one’s dream? If I dreamt about seeing and talking to my mother, then what is being represented in my dream? Unless, of course, it is the latent content of the dream, or what the dream is actually about, which focuses only on my mother.
If this is the case, then it is not always constant that dreams refer to symbolic meanings or the use of symbolic representations of a person’s wishes. There are times when what a person dreams about refer to the actual state of what is evoked in a person’s consciousness. It may be a memory that is kept deep within the person’s consciousness of what took place in his/her life during childhood. Still, it may also represent the wishes of the person dreaming, such as his/her wish to speak with her departed mother or father. But I do believe, however, that dreams always have some special meaning in a person’s life. It reveals what is within the heart and mind over a period of time. However, Freud mentioned it is not true that people can always acknowledge their wishes. By this, wishes take the form of symbols to represent our direst wishes, which we cannot consciously acknowledge.
Entry 6
Before I thought that the key to happiness is money and wealth, since I have seen many things in the media that looked good to buy or purchase. There are beautiful clothes, shoes, gadgets, jewelries, and even cars that only the rich and famous are able to buy. I usually hear that what people wanted most was to have as much money as the billionaires. However, in a study it was said that billionaires have as much happiness as the Amish people who have less money (Keenan5, 2015, sl.8-46). This may be difficult to believe, but it was said that lottery winners do express extreme happiness immediately after winning, but return to its normal level a couple of months after winning (Keenan5, 2015, sl.8-46). Thus, it says that the key to happiness is “having enough to survive comfortably” (Keenan5, 2015, sl.8-46). It doesn’t have to be extreme but just enough to supply all the everyday needs.
I think that my old belief was incorrect and that the key to happiness is not really having extreme wealth but having enough money to sustain the everyday needs. With this, it means that happiness is not based on the amount or degree of wealth. Still, why is it that the more money a person has, the happier he/she seem to be? This statement should also be incorrect, if that is the case. It is not the amount or degree of wealth that makes a person happier but having a comfortable life in all aspects: personal, educational, economic, religious, political, social, etc. Based on the lecture, happiness is dispositional and is directly connected to resilience, as those who are more resilient tend to be happier. However, a certain race in East Asia was said to have higher degree of resilience; yet, they do not appear to be happy, as they are not contented and comfortable, especially when it comes economic, educational, political, and social. It is true therefore, that happiness is dispositional and would depend on one’s nature or character whether he/she prefers to be happy. It is not based on the amount of wealth but whether or not they choose to be happy, given the life that they have had. But can one have enough to be fully contented for the rest of his/her life?
References:
Keenan, T. (2012). Consciousness myths. Retrieved April 9, 2016 from [website].
Keenan2, T. (2012). Development myths. Retrieved April 9, 2016 from [website].
Keenan3, T. (2012). Memory myths. Retrieved April 9, 2016 from [website].
Keenan4, T. (2015). Brain myths. Retrieved April 9, 2016 from [website].
Keenan5, T. (2015). Emotion myths. Retrieved April 9, 2016 from [website].
Keenan6, T. (n.d.). Intelligence myths. Retrieved April 9, 2016 from [website].
