Cold Medium in 10 Technologies

The lockdowns imposed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic have disrupted our daily routines and forced us to confront the reality of isolation and social distancing. For many people, this has been a difficult and challenging time, but for some, it has provided an opportunity for self-reflection and creative exploration. One such individual is myself. During the lockdown, I have discovered a new appreciation for engaging with music and media in different ways, and this has been a positive and transformative experience.

In the past, I found myself constantly consuming media in the form of hot mediums such as television, YouTube, and streaming services like Netflix. However, over time, I began to realize that these platforms had reached their shelf life and were no longer providing me with the same level of satisfaction or engagement. I began to crave something new and different, and I found this in the form of cooler mediums such as turntables and streams, as well as my own creative pursuits.

I have always been an avid reader, but during the lockdown, I found myself delving even deeper into literature, exploring new authors and genres. I also picked up my guitar and began strumming more often, letting my mind wander and getting lost in the music. And, of course, I turned to social media platforms like Twitter, where I found myself engaging with others in new and exciting ways.

These changes in my media consumption habits have not only been a welcome distraction from the stresses of the pandemic but have also allowed me to tap into my own creativity and explore new avenues of self-expression. I am no longer content to simply consume media that is handed to me by others. Instead, I am actively seeking out new and interesting ways to engage with the world around me.

Marshall McLuhan was a Canadian philosopher, writer, and communication theorist who gained worldwide recognition for his groundbreaking work on media and its effects on human society. One of his most significant contributions to this field was the concept of “hot” and “cold” mediums.

According to McLuhan, a medium can be classified as “hot” if it is high in definition and low in participation. In contrast, a medium is considered “cold” if it is low in definition and high in participation. A hot medium, such as a television, demands a high level of attention and provides a complete sensory experience that requires little interpretation or participation from the viewer. In contrast, a cold medium, such as a book, requires active interpretation and participation from the reader to create a complete sensory experience.

McLuhan’s theories on hot and cold mediums had significant implications for our understanding of media and its impact on human society. He argued that hot mediums tend to create a sense of uniformity and passivity in society, while cold mediums encourage participation, interaction, and critical thinking. In this sense, cold mediums can be seen as more democratic, as they require a higher level of engagement and participation from the user.

One of the key characteristics of cold mediums is their ability to be inclusive and participatory. McLuhan argued that cold mediums, such as the telephone or the internet, allow for greater interaction and exchange of ideas between individuals, leading to a more democratic and participatory society. In contrast, hot mediums, such as television or radio, tend to create a more passive and homogeneous society, where individuals are more likely to consume information than to actively participate in its creation or dissemination.

Furthermore, McLuhan believed that cold mediums encourage greater creativity and innovation. In his view, the low definition of cold mediums requires the user to fill in the gaps and create their own meaning, leading to a more active and creative engagement with the medium. In contrast, hot mediums provide a complete and highly structured sensory experience, leaving little room for interpretation or creativity.

In conclusion, Marshall McLuhan’s theory of hot and cold mediums has had a profound impact on our understanding of media and its role in shaping human society. His work has highlighted the importance of participatory and interactive media in promoting democracy, creativity, and innovation. As we continue to develop new technologies and media, it is essential to consider the implications of hot and cold mediums for our society and our individual experiences.

Next a list of ten technologies listed can be considered a cold medium:

1. Augmented Reality (AR) – AR is considered a cold medium because it requires active participation and engagement from the user to interpret and integrate the digital information into the real world.
2. Virtual Reality (VR) – VR is a cold medium because it creates a fully immersive environment that demands active engagement from the user to interact with and navigate.
3. Haptic Feedback – Haptic feedback is a cold medium because it involves physical sensations that are less intense than those experienced in the real world, and therefore require more active interpretation by the user to understand and respond to.
4. Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) – BCIs are considered a cold medium because they involve a direct interface between the user’s brain and a digital device, requiring conscious interpretation and control by the user.
5. Artificial Intelligence (AI) – AI is a cold medium because it involves the simulation of human-like intelligence and decision-making, but does not engage the senses or require active participation from the user.
6. Blockchain – Blockchain is considered a cold medium because it creates decentralized, secure systems for exchanging data and transactions that do not require active participation from the user once they are set up.
7. Internet of Things (IoT) – IoT is a cold medium because it involves the connection of everyday objects and devices to the internet, but does not necessarily require active participation or engagement from the user once they are connected.
8. 3D Printing – 3D printing is considered a cold medium because it involves the creation of physical objects from digital designs, which do not necessarily engage the senses or require active interpretation by the user once the design is created.
9. Quantum Computing – Quantum computing is a cold medium because it involves the processing of information using quantum-mechanical phenomena, but does not necessarily engage the senses or require active participation from the user once the system is set up.
10. Nanotechnology – Nanotechnology is considered a cold medium because it involves the manipulation of matter at the nanoscale, which is too small to be directly perceived by the senses, and does not necessarily require active interpretation or participation from the user once the materials or devices are created.

The collapse of the electric medium that has shaped our postwar consensus has significant implications for our sense of identity and the way we engage with the world around us. As we move towards a new era of media and communication, it is important to consider how we can adapt and evolve our identities to meet the challenges of this changing landscape.

One possible approach is exit through exaptation. This concept involves taking existing features or functions and repurposing them in new and unexpected ways. By doing so, we can create novel solutions and pathways that were not possible before. This approach allows us to break free from the constraints of the old medium and explore new avenues of creativity and innovation.

Of course, it remains to be seen whether these changes will coalesce into a new form of media or art. However, I believe that the potential is there. If someone can find a way to combine these different mediums and approaches into something truly innovative and inspiring, the future is theirs for the taking.

In the meantime, I am content to continue exploring and experimenting with different forms of media and creative expression. I believe that the surest bet is to turn all of this into an art form and to attach ourselves to the objects and atmosphere around us. We must resist the urge to always seek out the familiar and known, and instead embrace the unknown and explore the uncharted territories of our own creativity.

In closing, I am reminded of the Brian Eno prompt, “Think desires and convert to sources.” This is a powerful reminder that we must tap into our own desires and passions in order to create something truly original and inspiring. By doing so, we can unlock new levels of creativity and innovation and chart a course towards a brighter and more fulfilling future.

The development of behavioral technologies intended for military-grade persuasion in cyber-operations has its roots in a particular perspective on human beings. This perspective views individuals as manipulable subjects rather than rational agents, which is at odds with the way they should be viewed in democratic societies. As a result, the use of these technologies raises important ethical and moral questions about the nature of democracy, human freedom, and individual autonomy.

Behavioral technologies are designed to influence and manipulate the behavior of individuals, and they often rely on the exploitation of cognitive biases and psychological vulnerabilities. In the context of cyber-operations, these technologies are used to target individuals with personalized content and messaging, often with the goal of changing their attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors. The development of such technologies is based on the assumption that individuals can be easily influenced and manipulated, and that their behavior can be predicted and controlled through the use of targeted interventions.

This perspective on human beings is at odds with the way they should be viewed in democratic societies. In democratic societies, individuals are viewed as rational agents who are capable of making their own decisions and choices, and who have the freedom to express their views and opinions without fear of coercion or manipulation. Democracy requires the active participation of citizens, who are expected to be informed and engaged in the political process. The use of behavioral technologies in cyber-operations undermines this ideal by treating individuals as passive subjects to be manipulated rather than as active citizens with agency and autonomy.

Moreover, the use of behavioral technologies raises important ethical and moral questions about the nature of freedom and individual autonomy. The ability to influence and manipulate individuals’ behavior can be seen as a form of coercion that violates their autonomy and freedom. In a democratic society, individuals are entitled to make their own choices and decisions, even if those choices or decisions are not in line with the preferences of those in power. The use of behavioral technologies to influence and manipulate individuals’ behavior can be seen as a violation of this fundamental principle, as it seeks to undermine individuals’ agency and autonomy.

In conclusion, the development of behavioral technologies intended for military-grade persuasion in cyber-operations is rooted in a specific perspective on human beings, one that is at odds with the way they should be viewed in democratic societies. The use of these technologies raises important ethical and moral questions about the nature of democracy, human freedom, and individual autonomy. As such, it is important to carefully consider the implications of these technologies and to ensure that they are used in ways that respect individuals’ autonomy and agency, and that do not undermine the principles of democracy.

The problem with Incrementalism: Unless the trick is to dabble incrementalism as an infinite series 1 + 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + … where “…” means keep going. What is supposed to add up is 2 ends up in the Zeno’s paradox, the arrow sneaks on his victim, Achilles sneaks up on the tortoise It is how you can do infinitely many things in a finite time. Do the first thing; do the second thing one minute later; do the third thing half a minute after that; then the fourth thing and so on. After a while you’ve done infinitely many things but you still didn’t get to 2 You did a lot of other stuff but you didn’t get to 2. Some futures are harmless, others are not. How do you tell? I have no answer but I’d use a heuristic that if your concept does not lead to red flags and contradictions, then it’s safe to use, but if it does, then it isn’t.

Here are 10 historical examples where incrementalism failed to achieve success over time:

1. The Civil Rights Movement in the United States: Despite incremental progress, the movement faced significant setbacks and backlash, and it wasn’t until more radical and confrontational tactics were employed that significant changes were made.
2. The War on Poverty in the United States: Despite incremental efforts to alleviate poverty through programs such as food stamps and Medicare, poverty rates remained relatively unchanged, and the program has been criticized for not addressing the root causes of poverty.
3. The British policy of appeasement in the lead-up to World War II: Despite incremental concessions to Nazi Germany, Hitler continued his aggressive expansionist policies, leading to the outbreak of war.
4. The Kyoto Protocol on climate change: Despite incremental reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by participating countries, global emissions continued to rise, and the agreement ultimately failed to meet its targets.
5. The United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals: Despite incremental progress towards reducing poverty and improving access to education and healthcare, many of the goals were not met by the 2015 deadline.
6. The gradual abolition of slavery in the United States: Despite incremental measures such as the Fugitive Slave Act and the Emancipation Proclamation, the institution of slavery was not fully abolished until the end of the Civil War.
7. The War on Drugs in the United States: Despite incremental efforts to reduce drug use and trafficking through increased law enforcement and mandatory minimum sentencing, drug use and trafficking rates remained high, and the policy has been criticized for its disproportionate impact on communities of color.
8. The United Nations’ efforts to prevent genocide in Rwanda: Despite incremental warnings and attempts to intervene, the international community failed to prevent the genocide that took place in 1994.
9. The Chinese policy of gradual economic reform in the 1960s and 1970s: Despite incremental efforts to liberalize the economy, economic growth remained stagnant until more radical reforms were implemented in the late 1970s.
10. The American policy of containment during the Cold War: Despite incremental efforts to contain Soviet influence through military alliances and economic aid, the policy ultimately failed to prevent the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The phrase “Government as the Entertainment division of the military-industrial complex” is a play on a quote from musician Frank Zappa, who said, “Politics is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex.” Zappa was known for his satirical and critical views of American politics and society, and this quote is often cited as an example of his commentary on the relationship between government and the military-industrial complex.

The phrase “military-industrial complex” was first coined by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address to the nation in 1961. He warned of the dangers posed by the close relationship between the military and the defense industry, and the potential for them to exert undue influence over government policy. Over the years, this relationship has only grown stronger, and it has become increasingly clear that the government serves as the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex.

The military-industrial complex is a term used to describe the relationship between the government, the military, and the defense industry. This relationship is characterized by the close cooperation between these entities, with the government providing the military with funding and support, and the defense industry supplying the military with weapons and other equipment. This relationship has been responsible for some of the most significant technological advances in history, but it has also given rise to concerns about the influence of the defense industry on government policy.

One of the most significant ways in which the government serves as the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex is through the use of propaganda. Propaganda is a tool used by governments to shape public opinion and influence behavior. In the context of the military-industrial complex, propaganda is used to promote war and military spending. Governments use the media to create a narrative that justifies military action, portraying it as a necessary response to a threat or an act of self-defense. The government also uses propaganda to promote military spending, framing it as an investment in national security and economic growth.

Another way in which the government serves as the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex is through the promotion of military culture. The military is often portrayed in popular culture as heroic and glamorous, with films, TV shows, and video games depicting soldiers as brave warriors who are willing to sacrifice everything for their country. This portrayal of the military creates a sense of patriotism and nationalism, which in turn helps to justify military action and military spending. It also encourages young people to join the military, creating a steady supply of new recruits for the armed forces.

Finally, the government serves as the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex by creating a spectacle of war. War is often portrayed as an exciting and dramatic event, with the media providing constant coverage of battles, bombings, and other military action. This coverage creates a sense of drama and excitement around war, making it seem like a thrilling adventure rather than a tragic and devastating event. This spectacle of war creates a sense of detachment from the reality of war, making it easier for the government to justify military action and military spending.

In conclusion, the government serves as the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex by using propaganda to promote war and military spending, promoting military culture through popular culture, and creating a spectacle of war that glamorizes and justifies military action. This relationship between the government, the military, and the defense industry has been responsible for some of the most significant technological advances in history, but it has also given rise to concerns about the influence of the defense industry on government policy. It is important for the public to be aware of this relationship and to be critical of the government’s actions in promoting war and military spending.

The relationship between China and the rest of the world has always been a complex one, fraught with tension and conflict. Whether it is the ongoing trade war, disputes over territorial claims, or concerns about human rights violations, there seem to be no easy solutions to the challenges posed by China’s rise as a global power. However, as much as we may want to point fingers and assign blame, the reality is that the situation with China can never be resolved without disaster unless we first deal with the China in ourselves.

What do we mean by the “China in ourselves”? Simply put, we mean that many of the issues we see in our relationship with China are rooted in our own fears, biases, and insecurities. We are quick to judge China’s human rights record or economic policies, but we are often blind to our own faults and shortcomings. We may be critical of China’s lack of transparency, but we ourselves may be guilty of the same when it comes to our own actions and policies.

This is not to say that China is blameless or that we should ignore the very real challenges posed by its rise as a global power. However, it is to say that we cannot simply blame China for all our problems without examining our own role in creating them. We need to acknowledge that many of the issues we face with China are not just geopolitical or economic, but also cultural and psychological.

As we consider the current situation with China, it becomes clear that our addiction to cheap goods is not just a matter of personal consumption habits, but a systemic issue that perpetuates and reinforces inequality. We cannot hope to resolve the challenges we face with China without first dealing with the China in ourselves.

This addiction to cheap goods is not limited to physical products like clothes and gadgets, but extends to a global system that prioritizes profit margins and convenience over people and the planet. The demand for low-cost goods is often met by exploitative labor practices, environmental degradation, and other forms of social injustice. In turn, this creates a cycle of inequality that harms millions of people around the world.

To break this cycle, we must first acknowledge the true cost of our consumption habits. We must recognize that the price we pay for goods and services does not always reflect the true cost of production, and that marginalized and vulnerable communities are often the most affected by this system. We must take responsibility for our own role in perpetuating this cycle of inequality and be willing to pay a fair price for the things we consume.

However, simply paying a fair price is not enough. We must also address the root causes of inequality and work towards a more equitable and just global economy. This requires confronting issues like wealth concentration, resource depletion, and social injustice head-on. It may mean making changes in policy and consumer behavior, and rethinking the way we value the goods and services we consume.

Ultimately, the issue of cheap stuff is a symptom of a much deeper problem in our global economy. If we want to resolve the challenges we face with China and create a more just world, we must be willing to confront this systemic issue and work towards solutions that prioritize people and the planet over profit margins and convenience. Only then can we truly address the China in ourselves and build a better future for all.

For example, we may fear China’s growing influence and power because it threatens our own sense of identity and superiority. We may be biased against China because of stereotypes or misperceptions we have about its people and culture. We may be insecure about our own ability to compete with China economically or technologically, leading us to resort to protectionist measures or cyberattacks.

To deal with the China in ourselves, we need to first acknowledge and confront these fears, biases, and insecurities. We need to be willing to engage in honest and open dialogue with China, rather than resorting to name-calling, sanctions, or military posturing. We need to be willing to learn about and appreciate Chinese culture, rather than dismissing it as “foreign” or “strange”. We need to be willing to work with China as a partner, rather than treating it as an adversary or enemy.

In doing so, we may find that many of the issues we face with China are not as insurmountable as we once thought. We may find that we have more in common with China than we realized, and that by working together we can achieve more than we ever could alone. We may find that by dealing with the China in ourselves, we can build a more peaceful, prosperous, and harmonious world for all.

In problem-solving, the importance of framing the issue at hand cannot be overstated. A well-constructed frame can guide and direct the search for solutions, leading to more efficient and effective problem-solving. However, a frame is only useful if it is being generated and intelligently analyzed faster than options are expiring. In other words, the speed at which the frame is being generated and analyzed must keep pace with the urgency of the situation.

The failure to refactor a problem at a pre-technical level can also compromise the solution. Refactoring is the process of restructuring and simplifying code to improve its readability and maintainability. In problem-solving, refactoring involves breaking down a problem into its constituent parts, analyzing it from different angles, and simplifying it to make it more manageable. This process can be crucial in identifying the root cause of a problem and developing effective solutions.

NASA’s development of the space pen is a classic example of the failure to refactor a problem at a pre-technical level. In the early days of space exploration, NASA faced the problem of writing in zero gravity. They invested millions of dollars in developing a space pen that could write in zero gravity conditions. The Russians, on the other hand, simply used pencils. This illustrates the importance of refactoring a problem at a pre-technical level, rather than jumping straight into developing a technical solution. By breaking down the problem and analyzing it from different angles, it may become apparent that a simple, non-technical solution is the best approach.

Another example of the importance of framing and refactoring can be seen in the field of medicine. Doctors must frame a patient’s symptoms and medical history to diagnose and treat their ailments. Without a clear frame, doctors may miss important clues or misdiagnose a patient’s condition. Refactoring is also important in medicine, as doctors must break down complex medical issues into their constituent parts to understand them fully and develop effective treatments.

In conclusion, the importance of framing and refactoring cannot be overstated in problem-solving. A well-constructed frame can guide and direct the search for solutions, while refactoring can help identify the root cause of a problem and develop effective solutions. The failure to refactor a problem at a pre-technical level can compromise the solution, as illustrated by NASA’s development of the space pen. By understanding the importance of framing and refactoring, we can become better problem solvers and achieve more efficient and effective solutions.

1. Healthcare: In healthcare, physicians and researchers often face complex medical problems that require careful analysis to identify the root cause. For example, a patient may be experiencing chronic pain, and the initial response may be to prescribe pain medication or surgery. However, by refactoring the problem at a pre-technical level, the physician may identify that the real issue is a lack of physical activity or poor diet. By addressing these root causes, the physician can develop more effective treatments that lead to better health outcomes. This approach is known as lifestyle medicine.
2. Environmentalism: In environmentalism, activists often face challenges in ensuring that their efforts are effective in reducing carbon emissions and protecting natural habitats. Rather than immediately turning to new technologies or policy changes, activists can refactor the problem at a pre-technical level by examining the root causes of environmental degradation. For example, they may identify that the real issue is the overconsumption of natural resources or lack of education about sustainability. By addressing these root causes, activists can develop more effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and protect natural habitats.
3. Software Development: In software development, engineers often face challenges in ensuring that

1. Music: In jazz improvisation, musicians often deactivate the prefrontal cortex, allowing for more creative and spontaneous expression. By refactoring the problem of traditional musical structures and rules, jazz musicians can push the boundaries of what is possible and create innovative new music.
2. Art: The Cubist movement in art refactored the problem of realistic representation in painting. Rather than simply copying the visual world, Cubist artists like Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque broke down objects and forms into geometric shapes and fragmented perspectives. This allowed for a new way of looking at the world, and influenced many other movements in modern art.
3. Science: The discovery of penicillin by Alexander Fleming was a result of refactoring the problem of bacterial infections. Rather than immediately searching for new drugs or treatments, Fleming identified that the real issue was the ability of bacteria to resist conventional antibiotics. By studying the growth patterns of bacteria, he was able to discover the antibacterial properties of penicillin, leading to a major breakthrough in modern medicine.
4. Literature: The Beat Generation in literature refactored the problem of traditional narrative structures in storytelling. Rather than following conventional plot lines and character development, Beat writers like Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg embraced spontaneity, improvisation, and stream-of-consciousness writing. This led to a new form of literature that challenged conventional norms and influenced many other writers and artists in the years to come.

The outsider effect is a phenomenon that suggests that individuals who are unfamiliar with a particular field may be better suited to finding innovative and creative solutions to problems within that field. This is because people who are not constrained by the conventional ways of thinking in a specific discipline can approach problems with a fresh perspective, free from the biases and assumptions of those who are deeply embedded in the field.

For instance, a chemist may have a very narrow and specialized understanding of how molecules behave and interact with each other. However, a molecular biologist, who has a broader understanding of biological systems, might be able to use this knowledge to identify novel chemical reactions that could be used to create new drugs or therapies.

Similarly, a molecular biologist might have a limited view of the properties of chemicals and how they can be manipulated, but a chemist might be able to bring new insights and ideas to the table, leading to innovative solutions in molecular biology.

People who are experts in a given field have a host of ideas that people in other fields do not have access to, but which ideas are nonetheless capable being applied to those fields. Breakthroughs often arrive when we apply old solutions to new situations.

The outsider effect, therefore, suggests that cross-disciplinary collaboration and exposure to new perspectives can be an effective way to stimulate innovation and creativity in problem-solving. By bringing together individuals from different fields, it is possible to create a diverse team with a broad range of skills, knowledge, and perspectives, which can lead to breakthroughs that might not be possible with a more narrow, specialized approach.

COMPOUNDING AND TRANSPOSING

Compounding and transposing are two powerful concepts that have been instrumental in driving innovation and progress in various fields. Compounding refers to the process of combining multiple ideas or concepts to create something new and unique. Transposing, on the other hand, involves taking an idea from one domain or field and applying it to another, seemingly unrelated domain.

Gutenberg, for instance, transformed his knowledge of winepresses, which he had used in his previous work as a goldsmith, into an idea for a printing machine. By combining the concepts of movable type and the winepress, Gutenberg was able to create a printing press that could produce large numbers of books quickly and efficiently.

Similarly, the Wright brothers used their knowledge about bicycles to invent the airplane. They applied the principles of balance, control, and stability from their experience with bicycles to the design and construction of their flying machine, ultimately leading to the world’s first successful powered flight.

Google is another great example of compounding and transposing. The search algorithm behind Google applies the ranking method for academic citations. By taking this idea from the field of academic research, Google was able to create a search engine that could analyze and rank websites based on their relevance and authority.

Overall, compounding and transposing are powerful tools that can be used to create innovative and groundbreaking solutions to problems. By combining and reapplying knowledge from different domains, individuals can approach problems with fresh perspectives and creative solutions that might not have been possible with a more narrow, specialized approach.

INSIDERS

Insiders in any field tend to develop a deep understanding and expertise in their respective domains. While this is important, it can also lead to a narrow and conventional way of thinking. Over time, insiders may become so entrenched in their established ways of thinking that they fail to consider new ideas or approaches.

This phenomenon is known as the curse of knowledge or the expert’s curse, and it can be detrimental to progress and innovation. Insiders may become too comfortable with their knowledge and experience, leading to stagnation in their thinking and work. This can result in a lack of creativity and a tendency to repeat the same ideas or solutions, leading to a lack of progress and advancement.

Furthermore, insiders may be more prone to groupthink, which is the tendency for individuals to conform to the ideas and opinions of a group. This can further reinforce the conventional thinking and prevent individuals from challenging the status quo or thinking outside the box.

On the other hand, outsiders may not be constrained by these conventional ways of thinking and can bring new and innovative perspectives to a problem. They may be able to see things that insiders may have overlooked or take an approach that insiders may not have considered.

Therefore, it is important for insiders to continually challenge their thinking and seek out new perspectives. This can be achieved by collaborating with individuals from other fields, attending conferences and workshops outside of their own field, or simply taking a step back and questioning their assumptions and biases.

In conclusion, while insiders have valuable expertise in their respective fields, they can also be susceptible to conventional thinking and groupthink. It is crucial for insiders to be aware of these limitations and to seek out new perspectives to drive innovation and progress.

Our brains are incredibly complex, with different regions responsible for different functions. One of the most fascinating aspects of the brain is the way in which it can be trained to focus and refine our work, while also allowing for moments of insight and creativity. According to research, these two capacities emanate from different parts of the brain, with the prefrontal cortex playing a key role in our ability to focus and refine our work, and the right hemisphere being responsible for our capacity for insight.

The prefrontal cortex is often referred to as the brain’s CEO, as it is responsible for executive functions such as decision-making, planning, and problem-solving. It is also the part of the brain that allows us to focus our attention on a particular task, which is crucial for achieving success in any field. This ability to focus and refine our work is what separates the best from the rest, and it is what allows individuals to achieve greatness in their chosen fields.

On the other hand, our capacity for insight, which is often associated with creativity and innovation, originates in the right hemisphere of the brain. This is the part of the brain that allows us to make connections between seemingly unrelated ideas and to see things from a different perspective. It is the wellspring of our creativity, and it allows us to come up with novel solutions to complex problems.

Interestingly, while these two capacities emanate from different parts of the brain, they are not mutually exclusive. In fact, research has shown that one way to get better results is to shut down the mechanism that acts as a check on the flow of thoughts from the prefrontal cortex. This mechanism, known as the Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex (DLPFC), is responsible for inhibiting certain thoughts and behaviors, which can be helpful in certain situations, such as ensuring that we don’t say or do the wrong thing. However, this inhibition can also prevent us from thinking creatively and outside of the box.

To overcome this inhibition, improv actors warm up with exercises that shut down the DLPFC, allowing them to be more creative and spontaneous in their performances. Similarly, jazz players are able to ‘deactivate’ this part of the brain before improvising, allowing them to play more freely and creatively.

In conclusion, our capacity to focus and refine our work originates in the prefrontal cortex, while our capacity for insight and creativity emanates from the right hemisphere of the brain. These two capacities are not mutually exclusive, and finding ways to shut down the inhibitory mechanism of the DLPFC can allow us to access our creativity more readily. By understanding how our brains work and finding ways to optimize their performance, we can achieve greater success in our chosen fields and live more fulfilling lives.