intuition

[Edited to add: This post feels really rambly and incoherent. Reminder to self: This is why my blog is subtitled "thinking out loud". Sometimes ideas come out clean and clear and all in one piece, like that rare time you crack a walnut and the nut comes out whole ... other times, I have to sort of 'pin' my ideas up there and *look* at them before I can decide if that's what I really think or mean to say. So here goes.]

Left brain thinkers don’t understand intuitive thinkers as well as intuitive thinkers understand left brain thinkers.

Is that right? Dunno. Let it sit for a while and *then* see what I think. :-) That’s how an intuitive thinker THINKS: By feel.

***
So I have this friend who says I ‘think too much,’ (actually, he’s only said it once – and I hope he never says it again!)

But anyway, my ‘thought’ on that today is:

What if, right brain thinkers arrive at things circuitously, indirectly and often without engaging any conscious ‘thinking’ whatsoever?

In other words, we *appear* to have these miraculous bursts of insight or ‘intuition’.

But really it’s not that at all – it’s just that we accumulate ‘knowledge’ differently.

For example, the very *same* friend who says I ‘think too much’ has *also* said, “You assimilate things very rapidly.”

Big smile! :-)

Yes, he’s right, I *do* assimilate things rapidly.

Which means: Things ‘hit’ me harder than people who assimilate things *less* rapidly.

Like, a particular piece of ‘information’ might hit a more impervious person’s mind a million times (yes, I exaggerate) before it actually penetrates (their thick skull – ooh, mean!) or, “sinks in”.

Whereas, with *me*, I ‘grasp’ individual bits of information fairly quickly, but it may take me longer to fit them into the overall picture.

And the other thing is, that kind of 'quickness' can be a two-edged sword.

For example, if I want to figure something out really fast, sometimes my brain will operate at lightning speed, almost faster that *I* can keep up with.

But other times that same 'lightning' absorption will mean a kind of hyper-sensitivity, in that I'm 'picking up' things that other seem not to notice.

So, some small and seemingly insignificant piece of 'information' will entirely escape one person, while *I*, on the other hand will be 'resonating' from this bit of 'data'. I'm not able (or seem not to be able) to 'block out' seemingly 'irrelevant' information the way a left-brainer does - it's almost as if *all* data is equally important to the right brain, and it sorts through priorities as it accumulates significant enough quantities to make a decision.

Not able to complete this thought just now, feels too tangly.

***
And also, here’s *another* way in which I think the ‘linear’ and the ‘circular’ or ‘meandering’ thinker differ: The meanderer (or, right brain thinker, as I believe myself to be) tends to sort of ‘accumulate’ a big pile of *stuff*, call it facts, information, ideas, what have you.

And then, like a steaming pile of fermenting, moldy compost, the idea *arises*, almost (apparently? or, to all appearances?) ‘spontaneously’. Just like a leftover weed seed might sprout in that selfsame pile of manure.

Whereas the linear thinker can only *see* or *perceive* one outcome, one path, one route, one possibility, and therefore makes his decisions quickly and easily, the meanderer tends to wander from one idea to the next, picking something up and putting it down, asking questions, gathering (apparently) ‘random’ information because, hey, you never know what might come in handy, right?

And out of the pile of apparently unrelated, sometimes useless-seeming ‘information’, suddenly the ‘solution’ or answer materializes (or so it seems), just as a plant may seem to magically appear out of an untended pile of dirt.

***
So. Have I downloaded all the current stack of ideas on this subject yet? Seems like something’s eluding me. Guess I’ll post this much and see if I can spot the escapee.

***
Oh.

So, the whole *point* of this was, to point out to my 'friend' that, hey, when I (a right-brain thinker) have to explain one of my fabulous flashes of intuitive brilliance to *you*, a left-brain thinker, I HAVE to hyper-engage (or 'overthink') with *my* left brain in order to put something that is BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS to *me* into language that *you* will understand.

Capisce?

Tortoise and hare.

***
This might explain why I'm so fond of metaphors - they capture the brilliance of the intuitive flash, while still (often, usually?) containing enough 'fact' to convey my meaning to the left-brain thinker.

I think.

In other words, the 'leap' that the intuitive thinker makes *doesn't make any sense* to the linear, left-brain thinker, because *he's* got to go at it one step at a time.

Whereas, for the *intuitive* thinker, the sudden leap happens *instantaneously*, and the steps that led up to it are [argh, blooger (not blogger :-) *ate* a fragment here] e' in this competition.

Wandering further and further afield, still not sure I've managed to make my 'point' yet. Gah.