The difference

Robot model theorists conceive thoughts to be neuroelectric impulses which, like the binary coded electrical impulses in a computer circuit, derive their various meanings by travelling along specific “wires” or nerve fiber pathways. However, this hard-wired mechanistic conception unfortunately leads to a physicalistic view of the mind, conscious experience being conceived as inextricably bound to the physical architecture of the brain. The feeling tone model, on the other hand, conceives the meaning of thoughts to be intrinsic to the thoughts themselves, the information content of a thought being embodied in its specific feeling tone code or neuroelectric waveform shape. Like their feeling tone relatives, thoughts are on the move too. Thus mental information is portable and free to move throughout the brain.

According to this new view, the brain may be conceived as a kind of sophisticated loom, one which is suited to the weaving of mental fabrics.(2, 3) However, this is a very unusual loom. For, these feeling tone tapestries have the unique ability of themselves being able to run the controls of the loom. Thus the fabric is able to weave itself in a self-determining fashion! Because of this self-referential process, the mind is capable of independent evolution to states of complexity far exceeding that of its biological matrix, the brain.

The brain/mind relation in many ways resembles the mother/child, womb/embryo relation. The brain provides a unique environment within which that living entity the mind is spawned. Unlike embryonic development, however, there are no pre-existent chromosome blueprints. Rather, the “genes which shape the mental personality are continuously created on-the-spot, these spontaneous birth events being our creative insights and ideas.

It goes without saying that such a model of mental phenomena suggests an “approach to education quite different from that currently practiced in schools”. According to this approach, understanding is best accomplished through a process of facilitation, rather than through rote instruction. Teaching is not a programming process, the feeding of information into computer-like brains. Rather, it is an agrarian process — the acquisition of knowledge being likened to the raising of crops. The teacher’s purpose is to provide sunlight, fertilizer, and water, and an environment free of predators in which sensitivity, caring, and curiosity are free to develop. The learning which ensues must be viewed as a birth process, one which must not be rushed. Confusion results if material is delivered at a pace faster than the student can assimilate, since the evoked thoughts require sufficient time to take full root in the student’s personal feeling tone fabric that he is perpetually weaving.

*NOTE Click on the word Rote and the word Facilitation and watch how one word (rote) is very limited and mechanical as that in a robot. Then Watch the life of words that totally expand knowledge that come out of the word (facilitation) and you can see the way we were raised in school Is that of the parrot fashion. Can you see the difference? Think of rote as being programmed like a computer and learned by heart until the heart has lost its ability to feel until it feels directly attacked. But Facilitation learning is all about feeling life and fully connected. This is the difference of physical vs spiritual understanding.

More here