©Arlene R. Taylor PhD
Human beings often assume that there is one best way for organization. In truth, each cerebral division likely has its own energy-efficient style for organizing personal space. These styles are not necessarily good or bad and certainly neither right nor wrong. They can be light years apart in style!
In general, society and culture has defined what organizing means. Typically it is the style associated with the Left Posterior Lobes. For many individuals, trying to follow that organizing style places them at odds with their own innate giftedness. This can be especially true in terms of brain energy expenditures and one’s ability to maintain the organizing system long term. Challenges may be further compounded when one organizing style uses pejoratives to describe what works for other styles, or when one person feels less than or inferior to others based on his/her preferred style.
Following are examples of organizational styles correlated with the four cerebral divisions.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
The purpose of this division is to help individuals make decisions quickly and accurately. Individuals who prefer using this cerebral division are usually somewhat objective and analytical about organization of personal space and may:
Their personal space may be described by those with a differing energy advantage as stark or minimalist | The purpose of this division is to assit individuals in anticipating and making changes. Individuals who prefer using this cerebral division are usually somewhat eclectic and spontaneous about organizing their personal space and may:
Their personal space may be described by those who possess a differing energy advantage as disorganized or messy |
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
The purpose of this division is to produce and supply dependably day-to-day needs (e.g., food, housing, clothing, services). Individuals who have a preference for using this cerebral division are usually somewhat structured and rigid about organization of personal space. Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may:
Their personal space may be described by those with a differing energy advantage as compulsively neat (e.g., objects lined up precisely or segregated by type or filed away in literal or virtual folders) or even anal-retentive | The purpose of Right Posterior Lobes is to build trust, harmony, and peaceful foundations. Individuals who have a preference for using this cerebral division are usually somewhat subjective and relational about organization of personal space. Individuals with a brain lead in this division may:
Their personal space may be described by those with a differing energy advantage as busy and cluttered |
NOTE: The word normal tends to mean “typical” or “commonly occurring” but not necessarily healthy, functional, or desirable.
While lifetime best friends usually have a similar brain bent, life partners may possess differing brain lbents. (The brain bents of business partners may be similar or different based on conscious choice or availability.) According to Ned Herrmann, by and large, opposites do attract. That is, right brainers often partner with left brainers, and individuals with a frontal brain lead often partner with those who have a lead in the posterior lobes. Opposites may attract as each brain tries to select for wholeness (e.g., with differing brain leads opposites have more of the requisite brain functions “covered” by one or the other of the partners).
Having said that, outside of a brain that is severely damaged or even “evil,” there may be no ideal partnering combination. There are differing risk-benefit combinations. That is, differing amounts of energy will be required to maintain the relationship. And it is acknowledged that attempting to partner successfully with a brain that is damaged or mentally ill may be difficult, if not impossible.
In life you usually give something up to get something. Failure to understand that principle, and/or blaming and criticizing yourself or others, accomplishes nothing of value. You can select a partner:
Understanding something about brain function can increase your awareness, help you to develop reasonable expectations, and allow you to make conscious informed choices. And you can choose to have fun on the journey. That’s not half bad!
Given that there is a large enough pool of individuals from which to select, following are examples of the way in which individuals may select a partner.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division
|
Males and females who are attracted primarily to individuals of the opposite gender (no one is believed to be 100% in terms of preference) and who have their energy advantage in this division may partner with someone whose brain lead aligns with the diagonal Harmonizing division). These individuals tend to be very directive in the relationship and carry (or assume responsibility for) the left-hemisphere or frontal functions. If the partnering is due to the merging of two families to “keep the business in the family,” sometimes a FL will partner with a FL (at least the first time around). That tends to be more of a functional business partnering (as compared with a more typically romantic relationship) but it often works because both individuals are very goal oriented. | Males who are attracted primarily to individuals of the opposite gender and who have their energy advantage in this division may partner with a female whose brain lead aligns with the diagonal Maintaining division. Females who are attracted primarily to individuals of the opposite gender sometimes follow this pattern, as well, especially in a first partnering, and choose a male with an energy advantage in the Maintaining division. This choice can become problematic if the female perceives that the male is stuck in a rut, too slow to embrace change, or lack spontaneity and loses sights of the beneficial qualities that can be exhibited. For his part, the male may perceive that the female is unstable, way too spontaneous in her choices, and jumps into situations without sufficient forethought. Some females (sometimes initially and usually in a second partnering) choose to partner with another Envisioning male and develops a “best friends as well as partners” relationship. Or she may choose to partner with a male who has a brain lead in the Harmonizing division because she enjoys the nurturing, connecting, and encouraging that a male with this type of brain lead can provide (as long as she never compares him against characteristics of a goal-oriented hard-driving prioritizing male and becomes dissatisfied or tries to push her partner toward the Maintaining division to “take care of all the details”). My observations are that males who are attracted primarily to same-gender individuals (again, no one is believed to be 100% in terms of preference) may partner with an individual who either has an energy advantage in either the Envisioning or the Harmonizing division. |
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Males and females who are attracted primarily to individuals of the opposite gender and who have their energy advantage in this division may partner with individuals whose energy advantage aligns with the diagonal Envisioning division. In a subsequent partnering, they may partner with a double right who has an energy advantage in the Harmonizing Division. | Males and females who are attracted primarily to individuals of the opposite gender may partner with an individual who has an energy advantage in the Prioritizing division. With their emphasis on nurturing, encouraging, and connecting in the relationship, these individuals (Harmonizing) often try to carry (or be responsible for) the Harmonizing division functions. Males who are attracted primarily to individuals of the same gender may partner with a male who either has an energy advantage in either the Envisioning or Harmonizing division. |
When Opposite Brain Leads Attract
When partnering for the first time, brains that are attracted primarily to individuals of the opposite gender typically select for wholeness, and tend to move toward individuals who have their innate energy-advantage in divisions that are energy-exhausting for you. It’s the philosophy that “together we have a whole brain.” Unfortunately, when partners expect each other’s brains to match or be very similar, the individuals can grow apart or even find themselves in crisis.
When Similar Brain Leads Attract
Sometimes a person consciously (or subconsciously) selects an individual who is similar in terms of brain lead. For example, females who have an energy advantage in the Envisioning Division may partner with a right brainer who has an energy advantage in either the Envisioning or the Harmonizing Division. The good news is that, due to similarity in thinking styles, partners can end up as best friends as well as partners. The down side is that both tend to dislike and procrastinate the same type of tasks.
Repartnering
When couples separate because of disparity between innate differences, they often repartner with another individual who has a brain pattern that resembles that of the first partner (with the exception of Envisioners). The external packaging may differ but the brain lead is often amazingly similar. Knowing this, it pays to evaluate one’s current relationship carefully. Some might be worth salvaging.
Ideally, it would be helpful to understand this information early in life and develop skills for collaborating successfully. It could reduce a human tendency to later become disparagingly critical of the very differences that initially were so attractive. Adapting can definitely have a positive or a negative impact on a relationship depending on how/why it is being used and the level of adapting. Genuine intimacy can be achieved only when both individuals are being real and living authentically.
Expectations for Task Completion
In our culture, the female in a typical cross-gender relationship is expected to pick up a good-sized portion of the responsibility for homemaking and parenting, especially in the more traditional models of breadwinner and homemaker. In addition, she is expected to handle the tasks that the male doesn’t enjoy doing. Depending on each person’s innate giftedness, the female may find that she is responsible for tasks that are energy-intensive for her brain. (And in single-parent families where one person is responsible for everything, the same principles of energy expenditure and fatigue apply whenever the required tasks don’t match the individual’s innate giftedness.)
When partners have similar brain leads, although this allows for being best friends as well as partners, the fatigue can actually be accelerated. For example, if both individuals are Envisioners, the female may be expected to complete tasks that utilize functions from the Maintaining division—for herself, her partner, and children, if they exist. These tasks are the most energy-exhausting for her brain as well as for that of her partner. Over time her fatigue can lead to exhaustion, discouragement, and dissatisfaction with the relationship. She may even attribute her fatigue to her partner when, in fact, it may have far more to do with the way in which she is utilizing her brain. Regardless of the thinking-style mix in the relationship or family, if the female tries to be all things to all people, over the long haul her brain will fatigue. Potential for relationship problems can escalate.
Same-gender partners may be more likely to have similar brain bents. Unless both individuals understand the activities that tend to exhaust their brains, one partner will likely end up trying to complete (or feel expected to be responsible for) energy-exhaustive tasks. Over time as the brain becomes fatigued the relationship can fall apart, with one or both partners certain that it has to do with the other individual’s dysfunction, or irritating habits, or lack of commitment, or differing expectations. While any or all of those may be true, in reality, it likely has more to do with how each is using his/her brain.
Again, the bad news is that in our culture one of the partners (often the individual carrying responsibility for the more stereotypical female-type activities) is expected to perform the tasks that the other individual doesn’t enjoy doing. Over time, this can serve to sabotage the relationship. Both individuals would do well to engage in the task-evaluation process and take responsibility for dividing energy-intensive tasks between them as equally as possible.
Energy Required
In your relationship do you feel like you are continually struggling to scale Mt. Everest with few rest stops and no end in sight, or are you loping along through the hills and valleys of life with plenty of energy? Living authentically, understanding brain function, and negotiating tasks with a partner from a position of knowledge, can make all the difference in the world!
Ask, how much energy does it require to develop and/or maintain this partnership? Some relationships will require higher levels of energy-expenditures and, thus, be more exhausting and less rewarding to maintain over time.
In order to maintain a thriving relationship it is critical to identify activities that are energy-exhaustive for each individual. It’s also important to identify expectations (conscious or subconscious) for completion of those tasks. Otherwise one individual may end up completing(or perceive an expectation to complete) the tasks and activities that neither partner enjoys and that both find very energy-exhaustive. Over time this pattern can lead to procrastination, partial completion of tasks, serious relationship problems, and discouragement or depression.
Task Evaluation
When brain bents are similar or derive from adjacent divisions of the cerebrum, it can be helpful to compile a list of all the tasks that both partners believe must be completed in order for the relationship to be successful. Highlight tasks that are energy-exhausting for each person. Create three columns on a separate sheet of paper (see below).
Tasks To Ignore | Tasks to Hire Out or Trade | Tasks to Divide Equally |
Does the task have to be done at all? Can both partners be comfortable without having this task done? If yes, list the task in this column and stop doing it. Now! | Can the task be hired out or traded? If yes, list the task in this column and find someone to hire or with whom to trade. And do it in a timely manner! | Can the task be turned into a joint effortgame? If not, divide must-do tasks equally between partners in order to prevent brain drain. Take responsibility for completing your own tasks! |
Task-evaluation is usually an ongoing process. Human beings are notorious for falling back into old habits of expectation and accountability. To enhance the potential for a successful partnership, each individual must accept personal responsibility and accountability for completing assigned tasks. The relationship can be sabotaged through procrastination or by gradually picking up the other person’s assigned tasks.
Same-Gender Relationships
In terms of identification of brain lead by using the BTSA, all males in same-gender relationships have shown an innate brain lead in either the Frontal Right Lobe or in the Right Posterior Lobes. None have shown an innate brain lead in either division of the left hemisphere.
Insufficient numbers of BTSAs have been completed for the brains of same-gender female partners to be able to draw clear conclusions. With the BTSAs that have been completed, it appears that sometimes opposites attract as a Frontal Left brain lead may partner with a brain lead in the right posterior lobes. Again, the Frontal Right brain lead may partner with an opposite (lead in the left posterior lobes) but may be more likely to partner with another frontal.
Typically, individuals who are Extraverts may be more likely to seek higher office, as are individuals with a brain lead in one of the frontal lobes. Sometimes, however, candidates are recruited and selected by others for a variety of reasons (e.g., the candidate exhibits characteristics that match special interests or perceived needs). Once in office, however, and over time, the candidate often approaches the required activities from the perspective of his/her own innate giftedness.
It can be interesting to conjecture about the innate brain lead of selected United States presidents, the potential reasons that pushed them to do what they did, contributors to situations in which they excelled and others in which they fumbled badly. It doesn’t excuse what some may consider as undesirable behaviors; it can help to point out underlying contributors that may have played a factor in personal choice.
Take former President Clinton, for example. Some of his actions could match the following brain-function descriptions:
Take Hillary on the other hand, (it’s all conjecture, of course, but opposites do attract). Some of her actions could match the following brain-function descriptions:
It can also be interesting to conjecture about individuals who, although not holding a political elected position, made great contributions to the world.
Following are examples of brain-lead conjectures, some resulting from conversations with Benziger and others.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division
|
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may be committed to making timely and logical decisions for others. Examples may include:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may be committed to making visionary innovations. Examples may include:
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may be committed to maintaining the status quo. Examples may include:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may be committed to networking and to maintaining community. Examples may include:
|
NOTE: Anecdotally, Benziger has observed that historically, Republican presidents have tended to be double lefts with a brain lead in one of the divisions of the left cerebral hemisphere. Democrats on the other hand have been more likely to be double rights with a brain lead in one of the divisions of the right hemisphere.
Northern politicians have tended to be better educated than Southern politicians but less gifted at networking. Conversely, southern politicians have tended to be somewhat less well-educated but have often gotten by on relationships (e.g., more gifted at networking and socializing).
Life is full of problems, some little and some big, some relatively easy to solve and others that seem to defy solution. Effective problem solving is a learned skill. Individuals may approach learning and utilizing that skill very differently, however, based on innate brain lead.
Following are examples.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals with an innate energy advantage in this division may:
| Individuals with an innate energy advantage in this division may:
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an innate energy advantage in this division may:
| Individuals with an innate energy advantage in this division may:
|
Refer to Practical Applications: Gender Differences for additional information. For example, some believe that society and culture socialize females to be problem staters and males to be problem fixers. To the extent that is the case, it can socialize individuals to behave in ways that may be unhelpful in terms of successful problem solving.
Quality can be difficult to define and/or may mean something very different and unique to each brain. Some have described quality as the state of having a high degree of excellence. Others have considered it to be some type of superiority. Still others refer to it in terms of being free from deficiencies, defects, or significant variations (and then they try to describe what constitutes the standard for ultimate quality).
Not only that, people differ in their perception of what constitutes quality of care, or education, or products, or upbringing, or you-name-it. They also differ in their perception of what falls outside of a quality-range standard as well as what consequences should accrue for that failure.
And then there is often the discussion about whether the quality determinations are objective or subjective:
Discussing quality is complex, nevertheless, following are examples.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals with an innate energy-advantage in this division may take a logical (inductive/deductive) approach to quality issues and ask:
Should they decide to sue, they might do so to obtain compensation for perceived loss due to quality that fell below their standard | Individuals with an innate energy-advantage in this division may approach quality issues innovatively and ask:
Should they decide to sue, they might do so because of a perceived poor outcome that was due to archaic rules or failure to use “state-of-the art” technology or procedures |
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an innate energy-advantage in this division may take a rational approach to quality issues and ask:
Should they decide to sue, they might do so to make a point (e.g., to prevent a similar reoccurrence for someone else), especially if they believe the situation fell outside the recognized standard of quality or care | Individuals with an innate energy-advantage in this division may approach quality issues somewhat emotionally and ask:
Should they decide to sue, they might do so on behalf of someone else, in order to obtain funds to pay for “comfort resources” due to perceived poor outcome |
Tips to Enhance Perception of Quality
Studies have shown that people often tend to evaluate the quality of an organization or service by their social interactions. As such, it is often possible to enhance their perception of quality. Here are three tips:
Individuals tend to gravitate to somewhat predictable reading choices based on innate giftedness unless they were taught to make different choices, had a limited selection of books, or learned to avoid reading for a variety of reasons (e.g., have reading difficulties, shamed for ability or for subject matter, no opportunity to learn to read).
In general, Introverts are more likely to be voracious readers. Extraverts tend to read when they are interested in the subject matter or when they are reading to obtain needed stimulation. Sometime individuals are not permitted to read what they would prefer to read due to expectations or control exerted by others.
Following are examples.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may gravitate toward reading:
They may research and purchase equipment that helps them read more easily or efficiently | Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may gravitate toward reading:
They may be the first to purchase a new or upgraded electronic reading device |
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may gravitate toward reading:
They may prefer to stick with traditional and concrete book styles (rather than reading via the internet or electronic equipment) | Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may gravitate toward reading:
They may select reading equipment (e.g., hard-copy books, CDs, electronic books) based on what their friends prefer |
The term religion is sometimes used interchangeably with and word faith, although the concept of faith can apply to a trust in a Higher Power or as subscription to specific beliefs regarding the sacred or diving and the practices and institutions associated with those beliefs. As such, the term religion can apply to an almost limitless number of forms in a variety of cultures. Sometimes the word religion is used to designate a specific denomination. In that case it might more properly be described as a religious organization,adherents of which subscribe to and support the exercise of their brand or form of religion. There are many such religious organizations in today’s world including Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Unitarian Universalism, and Spiritism to name just a few.
If people choose to affiliate with a religious organization, they usually do so with one that espouses, or purports to espouse, the theology and belief systems with which the individual identifies. Affiliation is likely to be impacted by training and upbringing, past experiences, cellular memory, expectations, family-of-origin issues, and personal levels of false guilt and unhealthy shame, to name just a few. In addition, affiliation with a religious organization may be accompanied by a personal spiritual journey or not. In other words, spirituality may differ from and occur separately from affiliation with a specific denomination, religious organization, or dogma. In today’s culture, at least in America, there seems to be a move toward a personal spiritual journey, along with a corresponding move away from affiliation with established religious organizations.
Andrew Newberg and Mark Waldman, co-authors of the book How God Changes Your Brain, wrote that Americans are becoming less religious but more spiritual as they embrace images of a universe that is scientific yet mystical. The authors reported study results that appear to indicate clearly that religion and spiritual practices generally have a positive effect on a person’s physical, emotional, and neurological health. Individuals who include these modalities in their lives may exhibit fewer addictive behaviors, exhibit better health overall, and might even live longer than those who live more secular lives. But not always.
Studies have shown that the impact religion depends very much on the perception that adherents have of God. If the individuals view their God as loving, compassionate, supportive, and forgiving, they tended to have a positive view of themselves and of the world around them. If, on the other hand, they viewed their God as unforgiving, vengeful, and even disinterested or dispassionate, this perspective could have deleterious effects on both their physical and mental health.
This latter perspective can activate portions of the brain that are involved in anger, fear, and stress responses. Not only can this ultimately damage portions of the brain and body, but also end up triggering animosity and even violence toward those who ascribe to a different belief system. It likely forms the basis for the position that “My religion is right and your religion is wrong.” Atheists are prone to point out the inconsistency between subscription to a religion that is often supposed to encourage harmony and brotherhood among people and nations and the destructive behaviors and actions that often are perpetuated in the name of that same subscription (starting as far back as the crusades and reaching as far forward as some of the current wars and controversies in today’s world).
Individuals who choose to affiliate with a specific religious organization often gravitate toward specific types of religious activities. This may be based on their own innate preferences as well as factors such as upbringing, expectations, and whether or not the individual is living his/her innate giftedness.
Following are examples to consider.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals who choose to affiliate with established religion and who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division may:
| Individuals who choose to affiliate with established religion and who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division may:
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals who choose to affiliate with established religion and who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division may:
| Individuals who choose to affiliate with established religion and who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division may:
|
A decision to attend or not to attend religious services, or the regularity with which one does this, can be developed through expectation and exposure. In adulthood, however, personal preference can be impacted by brain lead, especially related to whether one’s biochemical energy advantage falls in the left hemisphere or the right hemisphere.
Generally most religious services can fit into one of two broad styles, although there are exceptions. Even those exceptions can often be identified in terms of appeal to individuals with a preference for left-hemisphere activities or right-hemisphere activities.
Following are examples of two common styles of religious services.
Left Cerebral Hemisphere ]If they choose to attend religious services, individuals with an innate energy advantage in one of the two left-hemisphere divisions tend to gravitate toward traditional-style services
They may choose to attend this style of worship service in order to:
| Right Cerebral Hemisphere If they choose to attend religious services, individuals with an innate energy advantage in one of the two right-hemisphere divisions tend to gravitate toward celebration-style services
They may choose to attend this style of service in order to:
|
Whole-Brained Services
Theoretically, it should be possible to craft a religious service style that contained components appealing to attendees—regardless of their innate preferences.
In actuality, this is difficult to do. Left-brainers wouldn’t be caught dead in a typical celebration-style service; right-brainers find it difficult to sustain attendance at a service that is typically traditional in style.
Individuals tend to be more or less comfortable taking risks. And many different factors can come into play in determining the types of behaviors that will be exhibited. Following are some general observations that can offer clues as to the possible underlying brain-function of the individual in terms of gravitation toward or away from risk.
Aside from childhood learning, role-modeling observed, and expectations or coercion, the observations can be divided into two general categories:
Comments below relate primarily to positions of Extraversion and Introversion. Ambiverted behaviors would likely fall somewhere between, all things being equal.
Extraverts Estimated to be
| Ambiverts Estimated to be
| Introverts Estimated to be
|
Tend to be more willing to engage in risk-taking activities May use risk-taking as a way to obtain needed stimulation, variety, excitement, and novelty, as well as to avoid boredom May evaluate risk in advance but may also spontaneously or intuitively embrace the risk May go elsewhere in search of stimulation if level of risk is perceived clearly not to be worth the hoped-for stimulation
| Risk-taking activities tend to be somewhere in the middle between behaviors exhibited by Extraverts versus Introverts
| Tend to be less willing to engage in risk-taking activities, especially spontaneously May carefully evaluate risk-taking in terms of a the positive outcome If pluses clearly outweigh the negatives, may be willing to embrace the risk May withdraw from the group and run the risk of being labeled a fraidy-cat, spoil-sport, or even stuck-up if they don’t believe the risk is worth the hoped-for outcome
|
In addition to the individual’s position on the EAI Continuum, each cerebral division possesses functions that can encourage the brain to move toward or away from risk-taking behaviors. Here are some examples based on the expectation that the individual is living his/her innate giftedness.
Prioritizing Division Individuals with an energy advantage in the Left Frontal Lobe tend to exhibit risk-taking behaviors:
Prefer to take risk only when available data support the action Typically want to be in charge and make the decision about whether or not to take the risk (although can be very definite about not wanting to take the risk)
| Envisioning Division
Individuals with an energy advantage in the Right Frontal Lobe tend to be the most willing to exhibit risk-taking behaviors
Exhibit less fear of new situations so sometimes can leap before looking or even be reckless to show off or make a point (e.g., break the rules) |
Maintaining Division Individuals with an energy advantage in the Left Posterior Division tend to be the most resistant to risk-taking behaviors because that portion of the brain is resistant to change
Prefer to take risk only as a last resort and in small doses | Harmonizing Division
Individuals with an energy advantage in the Right Posterior Division tend to exhibit risk-taking behaviors:
May try to talk others out of taking the risk if the danger appears too high or there is a strong possibility that someone or something will get hurt |
From a brain function perspective, the main purpose of education, formal and informal, is to build skills throughout the brain. The study of different subject matter can help to do that. Think of these skills as internal brain software that can then be utilized as necessary in a variety of ways in life.
One of the laws of cybernetics says that the organism with the most options is likely to be most successful. Study is one way to develop more “options” that, in turn, can help you to be more successful. Students sometimes lament, “I don’t know why I have to study ‘X’ subject. I know I’ll never use it again and it’s a big waste of my time!” My response is, “Even if you don’t use that specific subject again per se, you may need to accomplish some task or activity in life that draws on skills you built when you studied that topic.”
The ease with which you breeze through or struggle with specific classes is impacted by your own unique brain and thinking process preference, along with the energy required. Some classes/subjects will be easier than others and require less energy expenditure. Key tasks required for mastering a specific subject are usually centered in one or two of the cerebral divisions.
Following are examples of school subjects that are directed by or draw heavily on functions in a specific cerebral division.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
|
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
|
|
elf-esteem has to do with how much a person respects, honors, likes, and assigns value to himself/herself. Your personal level of global and/or specific self-esteem is thought to be established by about the age of three based on:
Your level of self-esteem can certainly be changed in adulthood but it takes dedicated work and constant vigilance.
Obviously, life experiences can and do impact one’s level of self-esteem. Personal brain lead can also influence the type of activities that increase one’s perception of personal self-worth or, in their absence, can decrease one’s perception of personal value. Following are examples.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
For individuals with an energy advantage in this division, self-esteem levels tend to rise when they are able to:
Self-esteem levels may fall when the reverse is true | For individuals with an energy advantage in this division, self-esteem levels tend to rise when they are able to:
Self-esteem levels may fall when the reverse is true |
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
For individuals with an energy advantage in this division, self-esteem levels tend to rise when they are able to:
Self-esteem levels may fall when the reverse is true | For individuals with an energy advantage in this division, self-esteem levels tend to rise when they are able to:
Self-esteem levels may fall when the reverse is true |
Many religious and/or spiritual groups include the concept of spiritual gifts (so-called) in their tradition. Some spiritual gifts are outlined in Secripture (e.g., 1st Corinthians 12, Romans 12, Ephesians 4, and 1st Peter 4), while others are included in specific writings espoused or recognized by various religious and/or spiritual groups.
This summary reflects input from conversations with Benziger and others including chaplains.
|
|
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may exhibit one or more of these spiritual gifts from a position of innate ability:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may exhibit one or more of these spiritual gifts from a position of innate ability:
|
|
|
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may exhibit one or more of these spiritual gifts from a position of innate ability:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may exhibit one or more of these spiritual gifts from a position of innate ability:
|
*According to Benziger, each cerebral division houses a wisdom potential that can increase with maturity, skill development, and overall integration of brain function. This differs from “King Solomon’s wisdom,” so called, that is typically associated with functions of the Left Frontal Lobe, or the intuitive flashes of wisdom that is typically associated with functions of the Right Frontal Lobe.
It is recognized that some religious authorities believe that a spiritual gift may be given to an individual because of a need in a specific situation, regardless of the individual’s innate giftedness. My opinion is that almost any brain-function can be utilized as a “spiritual gift” within an appropriate environment.
Theology, religion, and spirituality are terms that are often used synonymously, although they really represent different concepts. Sometimes they overlap with each other and sometimes they do not. Sometimes they even seem to be mutually exclusive. One seminar participant defined them this way:
Spirituality is a concept that can be described separately from affiliation with religion or dogma (although it could be helpful if the study of theology and/or affiliation with religion always enhanced one’s personal spirituality). Unfortunately, research has shown that the impact religion has on people depends very much on how those people view their God. If the individuals view their God as loving, compassionate, supportive, and forgiving, the people tend to have a positive view of themselves and of the world around them. If, on the other hand, they view their God as unforgiving, vengeful, and even disinterested or dispassionate, this perspective can have deleterious effects on both physical and mental health.
The research has shown that this latter perspective can activate portions of the brain that are involved in anger, fear, and stress responses. Not only can this ultimately damage portions of the brain and body, but also end up triggering animosity and even violence to individuals who ascribe to a different belief system. This may form the basis for the position that “My religion is right and your religion is wrong.” Atheists are prone to point out the inconsistency between subscription to a religion that is often supposed to encourage harmony and brotherhood among people and nations and the destructive behaviors and actions that often are perpetuated on other (starting as far back as the crusades and reaching as far forward as some of the current wars and controversies in today’s world).
According to studies by Andrew Newberg and Mark Waldman, co-authors of a book entitled How God Changes Your Brain, Americans are becoming less religious but more spiritual as they embrace images of a universe that is scientific yet mystical. Studies at the University of Pennsylvania Center for Spirituality and the Mind regarding the effects of different spiritual practices (e.g., meditation and prayer) have shown interesting results. For example, individuals who regularly engaged in these spiritual practices exhibited significant improvements in memory, cognition, and compassion. At the same time they reported a reduction in anxiety, depression, irritability, and stress. These benefits were demonstrated even when prayer and meditation were performed in a non-theological context. The authors concluded that meditation and other spiritual practices permanently strengthen neural functioning in specific parts of the brain. In turn, this can help to lower anxiety, enhance social awareness and empathy, and improve cognitive functioning.
Albert Einstein, when he described the similarities between spiritual and scientific epiphanies, reportedly pointed out similarities, stating that human brains seem to have a similar need: to perceive the overwhelming awe and beauty of the universe and to realize a deep sense of connectedness to the world. Spirituality can help evoke this sense of awe, this inspirational meaning in one’s life.
An individual’s personal spiritual journey may be impacted by a whole host of factors including his or her brain’s innate energy advantage. Following are examples to stimulate your thinking.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division tend to be:
| Individuals who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division tend to be:
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division tend to be:
| Individuals who have an energy advantage in this cerebral division tend to be:
|
Stress and stressors represent the quintessential different strokes for different folks. One person’s pleasure is another individual’s poison, as the old saying goes. The term itself refers to the nonspecific response of the body to any demand made upon it. Dr. Hans Selye reportedly borrowed the term from the field of engineering and applied it to health care. Even though the term is used commonly, many people cannot clearly explain what stress is although they can often describe problems they believe result from it.
Stress can be broadly classified into three categories:
The brain is believed to be the first body system to recognize a stressor. Within the brain the hippocampus may be the brain organ most susceptible to stress. Studies from the field of Psychoneuroimmunology (PNI) have shown that what happens in the brain definitely influences what happens in the body. Information about chemical changes in the brain involving neurotransmitters and other informational substances is sent to the immune system, which can be either suppressed or strengthened.
Examples follow of the way in which individual may perceive, respond to, or manage stressors based on innate brain lead.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to perceive the following as stressors:
They may be stressed by being shamed for perceived workaholism or from the lack of good support system. | Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to perceive the following as stressors:
They may be stressed by being shamed for spontaneity and humor, or for their tendency to pursue variety and change, and their penchant for looking at the big picture and/or envisioning years in advance. |
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to perceive the following as stressors:
They may be stressed by being shamed for excessive attention to detail, or for resistance to change | Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to perceive the following as stressors:
They may be stressed by being shamed for oversensitivity, or for excessive emphasis on connection and harmony, or for an inability to establish meaningful connections |
Stress Management Tips
Stress management strategies may be most effective when they tap into a person’s own innate giftedness. That is, some strategies will be easier to implement and will require less energy to utilize. Therefore, they will tend to be more helpful in managing perceived stressors.
Left Frontal Lobe Prioritizing Division | Right Frontal Lobe Envisioning Division |
Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to:
| Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to:
|
Left Posterior Lobes Maintaining Division | Right Posterior Lobes Harmonizing Division |
Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to:
| Individuals who have their brain’s energy advantage in this division tend to:
|
Additional Tips to Consider
Knowing who you are in relation to stress management involves identifying your stressors, stress symptoms, and stress patterns.
As soon as you recognize a stressor, a stress symptom, or a stress pattern, use a combination of activities to interrupt the stress cycle. These can include exercise, meditation, massage, a change of activities, or even humor. Yes! Learn to laugh at some of the stressors.
Consider utilizing Dr. Herbert Benson’s Quieting Reflex (QR), a strategy designed to counteract the first six seconds of the body’s Fight/Flight reaction to a stressful situation by substituting opposite body reactions. There are five steps:
When utilized, the Serenity Prayer, from 12-step-program concepts, is a proven formula for managing stressors more successfully:
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
and the wisdom to know the difference.
Almost anyone can “rebel” if given the right environment or set of circumstances. The triggers for rebelling are often very different for different individuals, as well as the types of rebelling behaviors that are exhibited. Sometimes the triggers are connected with one’s innate brain lead (and factors such as gender, culture, past experience, and family-of-origin can often play a part).
The following observations reflect input during conversations with Dr. Katherine Benziger and KBA licensees.
Frontal Lobes
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may rebel when they perceive:
Their rebelling may involve trying to take charge of the situation, attempting to become the permanent leader of the group or organization, or even using coercion to obtain agreement | Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may rebel when they perceive:
Their rebelling may involve personally checking-out or leaving, or in leading a somewhat spontaneous movement to create change, charismatically and inspiringly rallying the troops to support the change |
Posterior Lobes
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may rebel when they perceive:
Their rebelling may be expressed in joining a group that is advocating for improvement | Individuals with an energy advantage in this division may rebel when they perceive:
Their rebelling may be expressed in rallying to improve conditions for the people they care about (trying for something that will benefit everyone) |
Several individuals may observe the same incident and yet, if called upon to testify in court, present very different testimony based on each person’s innate brain lead.
At present, the American legal system focuses on trying to determine who is right versus who is wrong, who is telling the truth and who is lying. It might be much more helpful if the system, instead, sought for the collective truth based on four different perspectives.
Following is a hypothetical example of testimony provided by four individuals (each with a different brain lead) who witnessed the same incident.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
| The witness focused on and pointed out problems with signage on a portion of the highway, told the judge he should throw the book at the truck driver,and made mention of the fact that the highway patrol had asked for blood-alcohol tests. | The witness speculated on the possible actions of each driver that had resulted in the wreck, readily teared-up when describing the death of the sports car driver, and suggested ways in which the accident could have potentially been avoided. |
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
| The witness reported conversation that had been overheard at the accident site, included details related to the bounded shapes (e.g., the little red car had virtually been flattened by the semi-truck), cited specific driving rules that had been violated, and provided a precise time line of events. | The witness described the relationship of the vehicles to each other (e.g., the sports car had all but disappeared under the truck), cited the injuries of the victims, mentioned the groans emitted by the wounded, and described the weather (e.g., drizzle, accompanied by biting wind) that made things even more uncomfortable for the victims. |
Vacations are often at the top of one’s wish list as a way to reduce stress. And yet vacations can be stressful in their own right. Vacation stress can be categorized in several different ways. For example, as:
Distress or misstress may occur when vacations involve individuals whose preferences differ dramatically. Sometimes just by recognizing and identifying the way in which each individual is likely to approach vacations, travelers can minimize the potential for experiencing negative outcomes. Following are examples to consider.
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to want to accomplish something on vacation and may agree to go if they can accomplish a goal or two in the process. They may:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to want adventure and entertainment on vacation They may:
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to want to plan the vacation in minute detail and then follow the itinerary carefully They may be:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to want to connect with family and friends on vacation They may:
|
All things being equal, individuals tend to approach their everyday work activities based on innate brain bent unless they are forced to use non-preferred skills.
An individual with an innate energy advantage in this division tends to:
| Envisioning Division An individual with an innate energy advantage in this division tends to:
|
An individual with an energy advantage in this division tends to:
|
An individual with an energy advantage in this division tends to:
|
Using the metaphor of a four-room building, think of the four rooms being occupied by groups of workers who are very different in characgteristics and who are ‘turned-on’ by different activities in the workplace. The groups of workers can be identified as the Prioritizers, Envisioners, Maintainers, and Harmonizers.
The Prioritizers tend to get “turned-on” by:
| Envisioning Division The Envisioners tend to get “turned-on” by:
|
The Maintainers tend to get “turned-on” by:
|
The Harmonizers tend to get “turned-on” by:
|
Unless people consciously or habitually make a different choice, or unless they are being coerced to go against what their brain does energy-efficiently, individuals tend to gravitate toward a work style that matches their brain lead.
Examples follow of the preferred work style based on the way in which the brain processes information most energy-efficiently).
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to work quickly and in control. They tend to:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to usually work in starts and fits (e.g., like greased lightening and then needs a break, or needs to do some unrelated activity while the brain continues working on the problem). They tend to:
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to be best at dependably supplying services They tend to:
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to be best at building trust, harmony, and good will They tend to:
|
The Small-Business Owner
Thousands of small businesses start up every year in this country, and thousands fail every year. A mismatch between the owner’s innate giftedness and required key job tasks is a likely contributor. In addition to factors such as the economic climate and the viability of the product/service, business success requires functions from all portions of the cerebrum. The owner/sole proprietor will do some of these tasks well (perhaps from two or even three portions of cerebral tissue) while others will be extremely energy-exhaustive. The challenge involves the fact that the sole proprietor/small business owner often is expected to function in many different roles, wear multiple hats, and either coordinate or actually perform a wide variety of tasks and activities.
Following are examples of the types “hats” that a typical small-business owner must wear.
President— |
|
| —Visionary |
Environmental cleaner— |
|
| —Educator |
Your Achilles’ heel typically involves tasks that are energy intensive for your brain (typically found in the division opposite your innate brain lead). Those tasks are likely to be procrastinated or performed less accurately and completely; they can exhaust both brain and body and negatively impact the financial bottom line. The resulting frustration and fatigue can adversely affect other areas of life as well (e.g., relationships, wellness, addictive/abusive behaviors, burnout). It is usually a wise, long-term business strategy to collaborate with others and/or hire out the most energy-intensive tasks!
To some degree, worship style preferences can be generalized based on a person’s brain lead, although it is understood that many people choose to worship outside a building or body of theology.
In addition, individuals do not always follow their innate preferences. There can be many reasons for this, such as:
Prioritizing Division | Envisioning Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to gravitate toward a hierarchical and somewhat formal worship style
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to gravitate toward an innovative and unusual or non-traditional worship style
|
Maintaining Division | Harmonizing Division |
Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to gravitate toward a typical and traditional worship style
| Individuals with an energy advantage in this division tend to gravitate toward a collegial and somewhat informal worship style
|
Prioritizing Division
Envisioning Division
Maintaining Division
Harmonizing Division