I am hope others may see benefits of redefining stress as mental frictions

[mayfieldga]

   I have been using a learning theory I developed years ago.  I am hoping others may also see its benefits for themselves, for others, and for society in general.  I feel it has many applications for society.  I redefined average stress as mental friction that take up space within some amount of allotted mental energy.  I feel it shows more correctly how our individual environments greatly affect our abilities, learning, motivation to learn, and also our mental/emotional health.
  Try to picture an upright rectangle representing our full ability or full mental energy.  Then begin drawing from the bottom, narrowly spaced, horizontal lines to represent layers of small and some large layers of mental frictions our minds may be working on consciously and below the surface or subconsciously.  The space we have left represents our leftover ability to think, learn, and grow mentally and emotionally.  The length of this space also represents our length of reflection time or time to think more deeply to consider long-term rewards or consequences for a course of action.  This shows just how our individual environments greatly affect our ability to think and learn.  Persons with high layers of mental frictions will have to work harder to receive the same mental reward for mental work expended.  Ask yourself, which makes more sense, are we just genetically more or less able or do our individual environments greatly affect our ability to think, learn, and develop skills.  For our own good, we need to recognize how our individual environments greatly affect ability and how we can more permanently reduce mental frictions to continually improve thinking, learning, and mental/emotional health.
   This tool provides a way to permanently reduce layers of mental frictions.  We need to do more than just solve a problem creating a mental friction.  We need to look at the elements in our lives that create those mental frictions or problems and our values that may be creating those problems.  Then, we can begin to understand a little more each day how the elements of our circumstances and problems are creating mental frictions as they come up.  Then with a small change in a weight or value we are placing on something in our lives and developing a mental principle or rule in a certain area of our life we can then resolve and more permanently remove that layer of mental friction.  By slowly understanding how layers of mental frictions are created, we can then learn to approach those elements in our lives more correctly to keep like mental frictions from occurring in the future.  This enables “all of us” to more permanently reduce layers of mental frictions that hurt our ability to think and learn.  The Savant is able to perform mathematical or musical feats because theoretically, the mind is dysfunctional in many areas and is delivering extra mental energy to other areas like math or music.  Since we as so-called, normal human beings are affected adversely by layers of mental frictions in other areas of the mind, which function normally, our abilities in such areas are by comparison, impeded. 
   With each more permanently removed layer of mental friction we will continually improve thinking, learning, and extend reflection time (think more deeply, with more complexity, and more correctly).  Remember, to more permanently reduce layers of mental frictions we need to change the principle or value that created that mental friction, “not just solve that problem” to prevent similar mental frictions from occurring. 
   The box on page 6 shows how layers of mental frictions hurt ability to think and learn.  The space left shows our leftover ability for thinking, learning, and performing mental work.  The more space we have, the more we are able to think with more complexity or improve abstract thinking.  The top of the chart shows how high layers of mental frictions can create psychological suffering that may create escapes such as drug/alcohol abuse, violence, and suicide.  The vertical line on the top left represents our length of reflection time.  A shorter reflection time and psychological suffering can lead to many harmful escapes that would not occur had there been lower layers of mental frictions before that situational stress had occurred.  By more permanently lowering layers of mental frictions, we can prevent many deadly forms of escape and increase our reflection time or time we take to think, plan, and make decisions.
      As for psychological suffering and escapes: as a person accumulates “high” layers of mental frictions, he begins to experience two bad things; he experiences psychological suffering and his reflection time shortens - His desires, goals, enjoyments, and methods of problem solving become more simplistic, short-term, and less thought-out.  The psychological suffering and much shorter reflection time create a powerful need for relief.  This condition makes drug/alcohol abuse, the catharsis of violence, and suicide more appealing in view of the immediate, temporary reward or release from layers of mental frictions such escapes provide.  By helping students and adults maintain lower layers of mental frictions, we can help prevent this psychological suffering.  This skill can be more enhanced with training.  By teaching this skill, we will greatly improve deeper thinking and reflection skills for students and adults to develop and accumulate more complex information over time.  Teaching this skill is also extremely important for creating the intrinsic reward in students needed to stimulate more independent learning by students outside the classroom.  We cannot teach students all they need to know inside the classroom.  Again, we need to provide these tools for students to accumulate from both home and the classroom all of the necessary knowledge and skills they need to compete in the information age.  By teaching this skill we can also reduce the psychological suffering that leads to many harmful escapes.  Too bad this wonderful technique is not being used in school today.

A second tool I feel is related to a variable in learning is the dynamics of approaching mental work correctly.
As our pace and intensity in approaching mental work exceeds our immediate knowledge and experience, we create much greater mental friction and further impede our ability to think and learn.  This hurts both short and long-term motivation in mental areas for students by reducing mental reward received for mental work expended.   This also shortens our length of reflection time (ability to think more deeply).
   When approaching mental work, situations, problems, or academics we should begin slowly and simply reflect on the information we have.  This will create a small base area of knowledge with notches to add more information.  As we slowly add more information, our base area of knowledge will increase naturally and the number of notches to add more information will multiply, thus naturally expanding our pace and intensity of learning.  If we applied our present myth or teachings regarding mental work and applied a lot of mental energy, we would waste energy trying to place a lot of information onto just a few notches.  In this way, we can see how incorrect pace and intensity kills both short and long-term motivation in mental areas.  By trying too hard, we are overwhelming our minds with information before understanding and usefulness is established.  This is another reason why the myth of permanence in ability to learn continues, because only slight improvement occurs with hard work.
   High layers of mental frictions also “cause” students to approach mental work in an incorrect way or try too hard.  If we were to have a point of perfect stability then the dynamics of approaching mental work (academics and other learning material) would be approached in a more perfect dynamic way: the child will more naturally approach new mental work more slowly at first.  As a person gains knowledge and skills in an area, his pace and intensity will increase naturally with equal enjoyment of learning.  With more mental friction or less stability, that added instability disrupts or causes the child use the energy from the mental frictions in his life to try too hard or apply too much effort. 

I am hoping these variables may be used by society, schools, and psychologists to help provide much greater hope for students and adults.  This theory can be researched.

It fulfills the theory diagram and can be researched using initial bio-feedback readings to create a baseline of average, mental frictions along with other self & observer evaluations for confidence, hope, esteem, motivation, academics, etc.  Then using my cognitive tools, subjects can then be re-tested over time with other initial bio-feedback readings and other self & observer evaluations.  There should be lower initial readings from biofeedback along with improved readings for subsequent self & observer evaluations. 

[voodoo scientist]

Your hypothesis is that increased competence and personal enjoyment follows a sustained reduction in stress? Well, it's been a week since you posted - won't be long before Stockholm calls, now, so don't let that phone out of your sight (Curiously, this model has actually been shown to hold up until the extreme of the low stress end, where you start seeing drops again - basically, it appears that you need to maintain at least some stress to be at your peak). Edit: It is really more correct to say that decreased competence and personal enjoyment follows a sustained increase in stress, come to think of it.

The second hypothesis, that sufficiently fast and efficient cognition can substitute for hard work, is simply not correct. All studies show that practice and hard work cannot be substituted for by purely cognitive means. Aside from the obvious and considerable gains from trial and error, practice changes the physical way the brain communicates when dealing with a specific problem. When beginning on a new type of problem, the mind will engage almost the entire brain, almost as if it's doing a trial-and-error run to see what will work best. With practice, the activated area is then reduced massively as the brain learns where exactly to deal with the given problem. By contrast, pure cognition can increase the efficiency with which the whole brain processes this new problem, but it will not bring about the massive reduction in activated brain mass that practice will.

In a learning environment such as the one described (which sounds academic), 'practice' will improve reading speed, comprehension, ability to chunk, working memory, processing speed and anything else that is involved in the process far beyond what can be done in the same time by cognitive means. Frankly, it is perfectly possible to progress in most things without hard work, but it is the most effective way - personally, I think it's because that it's a neuronal system's most basic reaction to stimuli that fit no existing schemas, and the most integrated, but I have no real proof of that. What you describe is, however, a useful learning tool when you are not working hard (either at the time or at all), because it allows more efficient "post-processing."

[mayfieldga]

from person reply - Your hypothesis is that increased competence and personal enjoyment follows a sustained reduction in stress? Well, it's been a week since you posted - won't be long before Stockholm calls, now, so don't let that phone out of your sight (Curiously, this model has actually been shown to hold up until the extreme of the low stress end, where you start seeing drops again - basically, it appears that you need to maintain at least some stress to be at your peak). Edit: It is really more correct to say that decreased competence and personal enjoyment follows a sustained increase in stress, come to think of it.

from mayfieldga: you did not understand my definition of stress.  I see mental stress as layers of mental frictions.  you need to first see that definition before you can understand my learning theory.  When you are able to see mental frictions as layers that impede learning and not just energy used, you can see the possibilities of my learning theory.  My site can be read from http://learningtheory.homestead.com/Theory.html   - Little Four year olds are able to learn more easily because they have accumulated few mental frictions in their figurative upright rectangle representing full mental energy.  As we get older, we accumulate more layers of mental frictions that further impede or take up more mental energy.  So here we are talking about ability to learn more easily with less effort expended for mental reward received.  I am not sure where you got the phrase personal enjoyment I can only think somehow you interpreted mental reward received or more ease of learning connected with motivation to learn.  There is a part of adequate lowered mental frictions necessary to maintain better mental/emotional health.  In my learning theory, as layers of mental frictions accumulate sufficiently this can create both psychological suffering and shorter reflection time.  Please look at residual layers in learning theory file.  By maintaining sufficient lower layers of mental frictions this helps maintain better mental emotional health or less psychological suffering and extended reflection time.  Both are necessary to enjoy life more and think more clearly.

 from person reply - The second hypothesis, that sufficiently fast and efficient cognition can substitute for hard work, is simply not correct.

from mayfieldga - This is not anything like I said.  I said that as pace an intensity exceeds our immediate knowledge an experience, we create more mental frictions or exacerbate the problem of learning.  The key is learning how slow down for newer mental work.  Read learning theory on site.  This will help.  My idea of pace and intensity properly understood is to learn how to use the dynamics of approaching mental work more correctly to allow knowledge and experience to create increase in pace over time.  This is the key to increasing more properly long-term motivation to learn or mental reward received for mental work expended.  This makes sense when we are talking about the accumulation of learning with sustained motivation over time.

from reply person - In a learning environment such as the one described (which sounds academic), 'practice' will improve reading speed, comprehension, ability to chunk, working memory, processing speed and anything else that is involved in the process far beyond what can be done in the same time by cognitive means. Frankly, it is perfectly possible to progress in most things without hard work, but it is the most effective way - personally, I think it's because that it's a neuronal system's most basic reaction to stimuli that fit no existing schemas, and the most integrated, but I have no real proof of that. What you describe is, however, a useful learning tool when you are not working hard (either at the time or at all), because it allows more efficient "post-processing."

from mayfieldga - I am trying to make sense of this reply.  Practice does nothing but help to improve proficiency in already learned areas.  As for reading and reading improvement.  Please read my article on reading on my site.  It shows how reading is a very abstract skill that requires more mental energy or lower average stress, for we are using so much mental energy to visualize, organize information, (for learning to read) decoding new words using phonics and one's very social vocabulary.  This requires going slowly at first also and allowing knowledge and experience to create more pace naturally.  Again, we are talking about learning to read and enjoying the reading and learning process over time.  I feel somehow you have misunderstood my post.  Please read my learning theory and be sure to use my revised definition of stress, dynamics of pace and intensity, and its connection with improved mental reward received for mental work expended, more awareness from more available mental energy and better mental/emotional health due to more insight, no psychological suffering, and lengthened reflection time.

[voodoo scientist]

From the document theory_handour_r.docx: (Please note that while I'm referencing only snippets for brevity's sake, I've read and understood the full document)

The false teaching of fixed intelligences and abilities has made students and adults feel inferior in different areas.  By teaching this harmful belief, we are placing jagged pieces of metal and broken bottles in the hallways to cut and maim our students.

There is no such teaching. Noone in their right mind today would tell you that intelligence is fixed. Partially hereditary, yes - fixed, no.

Second tool: the myth of hard work is beneficial only when performing old work (skills already mastered), not in performing new mental work (skills in process of being learned).

This is factually incorrect. Practice is demonstrably the best way to learn how to do something new, as well as the best way to improve once the basics have been learned. A single attempt at riding a bike will teach a child more about bike riding than any amount of hours of bike riding theory, and this holds for everything - the primary limit being the instructor's ability to design appropriate problems to solve (whether the instructor is human or computer).

This can apply to almost anything that can be conceived of as a problem to be solved or task to be performed, including "learning" in itself, which I assume is the effect you are attributing to the act of removing mental blocks. Additionally, the notion of mental blocks is not easily reconciled with current neuropsychological understanding, the abridged version of which asserts that the brain/mind is a biological learning and problem solving machine that grows and improves on built-in functionality with practice, rather than unlocking esoteric abilities with practice.

True academic knowledge and skills accumulate over time through intrinsic reward and enjoying the long-term process of learning.  This long-term learning requires more stability, knowledge, and support from others to maintain that learning and motivation to learn.  Hopefully my theory will provide a means to achieve some of this need, even when it is lacking at home or in that person’s individual environment.

Didactic research often seeks to optimize the learning environment for students' "intrinsic motivation," their inherent desire to learn. Minimizing student stress is known to achieve this, but this does not imply the existence of any mental blocks.

The attitude of hard work when performing a new mental work actually impedes learning and long-term motivation to learn or desire to acquire more knowledge and skills.  As our pace and intensity in approaching mental work exceeds our immediate knowledge and experience, we create much greater mental friction and further impede our ability to think and learn.  This hurts both short and long-term motivation in mental areas for students by reducing mental reward received for mental work expended.   This also shortens our length of reflection time (ability to think more deeply).

Again, this is simply factually incorrect: hard work is an excellent way to learn. The notion that hard work somehow impedes learning is a dangerous and irresponsible position to take without hard evidence for a special educations teacher. I certainly hope you keep your personal theories and your practice separate.

By trying too hard, we are overwhelming our minds with information before understanding and usefulness is established.  This is another reason why the myth of permanence in ability to learn continues, because only slight improvement occurs with hard work.

There is potentially some truth to this, but the "learning limit" of the mind is much higher than the wording makes it come off as. Even the least gifted student can put in four hours of concentrated learning a day without accumulating stress.

I'm leaving your theory of the "Male Crisis" alone because you didn't mention it in the thread and frankly, I find it somewhat intellectually insulting.

In conclusion, your theory is not a theory. It cannot be falsified because it makes no measurable assertations, and cannot be used because it doesn't describe a methodology, only vague overall goals. Additionally, it is incompatible with existing mental and physiological models and makes no attempt to reconcile them. Edit: Guessing removed.

[mayfieldga]

I find your reply very difficult to understand in terms of knowledge base reasoning.  It appears to lack the reason or given and take of a knowledge based person.  There are many persons who do understand and appreciate the writing.  I also know of many persons who do not appear to understand my learning theory for one reason for another. 

[voodoo scientist]

I, too, understand and appreciate the writing. You're an eloquent writer, really, and the material was both enjoyable and straight forward to read - there's no issue with the writing itself. You seem to be having trouble with the fact that I'm using my understanding of your writings to point out the discrepancies between what your document states its aim and nature to be, and the information it actually conveys when read.

I also understand it can be difficult when you spend a great deal of time developing something like this when it is faced with criticism that is not easily dismissed or refuted, but that's the way science works. Your ideas (and they are just ideas right now) will never be a theory if you simply assume that anyone who criticizes lacks the proper knowledge to understand the inherent correctness of your ideas when confronted - nevermind the sheer arrogance of taking such a position.

[mayfieldga]

No the replies were purposely vague, without regard for the listener.  They were designed to gain some immediate feeling regardless of the meaning.  When there was a misunderstanding, the later replies were not acted upon.  A person truly interested psychology is not that sort.  They really have others interest and in this case society's interest at heart.  This learning theory when understood, does help release all persons from gardner's  model of learning and provides all of us with variables to improve thinking, learning, and mental/emotional health.  Even without understanding, "given an ounce of goodness and consideration, there could be worked out understanding that will help everyone.  This is the difference between a writer of social psychology interested in the work and someone interested in some immediate reward for themselves.