Tag Archives: communication


In the future, the most important credential your child will need is a “P.r.e-K” [the Preliminary Requirements for Every type of Knowledge]. Without it, even a “Ph.d” won’t land someone a secure “J.o.b.” Even potential love-mates will want to know if you hold a “P.r.e-K” ~ because everything you’ll need for emotionally healthy relationships will also be covered by this “degree”, which will simultaneously function as a decree for navigating all the aspects and prospects of life in general.
To establish the features, traits and parameters of this future decree and degree of life, we first need to contend with the “Marshmallow Man” – the imminently famous person who created the “marshmallow test” (Walter Mischel), PLUS we need to confront the author of the prominent resource of the “7 types of intelligence” (Frames of Mind, Multiple Intelligences by Howard Gardner). But first let’s give credit where credit is due.
Both of these brilliant pieces of work have opened people’s understandings of two general areas of human brain potential. The “Marshmallow Man” has distinctly identified the trait of “Delayed Gratification” as an essential asset for success both in careers and relationships. The “7 intelligences” author has presented us with a better understanding of how to navigate the world of learning.
The “7 types of intelligence” ought to have been titled; The 7 tools of knowledge development” These “tools” being defined as “intelligence quotients” are actually the various senses that work in various ways (depending on a child’s unique abilities) to explore, interact and transport knowledge and information to the brain. That’s what sensory tools do. “Intelligence Quotients” are “Emotional”, “Intellectual” and “Willful” — in other words “E.Q.” and “I.Q.” and “W.Q.” — these are the TYPES of intelligences that humans possess and capable of developing and operating. They ought to be more properly defined as “Emotional Intelligence Quotient”, “Intellectual Intelligence Quotient” and “Willful Intelligence Quotient”. These three ‘intelligence quotients constitute the full spectrum of brain potential, which all ought to be fully developed, and cohesively connected, for the sake of activating and utilizing 100% of our brain’s potential.
The first primordial and basic intelligence quotient is of course the emotional intelligence quotient. It is the basis for the other two intelligence quotients that are aided by the “7” tools of learning and knowledge development — although technically and effectively, there are really 60 of these sensory learning tools (but that is another subject we can get into another time).
The primordial intelligence quotient of emotional knowledge development brings us to the “Marshmallow test” and its creator. The Marshmallow test has properly identified children’s abilities to delay gratification, and be a better learner for a lifetime. However, the “Marshmallow Man” has failed to do the job of explaining to folks that the ability to “delay gratification” is based on experiencing “instant gratification” in the first three years of life. The “delayed gratification” feature does indeed first reveal itself during the preschool stage (hence, the famous marshmallow test), for a simple reason: the preschool stage is the first phase in life wherein we are capable of doing, or at least able to imitate and pretend performing all of the same capabilities that an adult can do.
The only ability a preschooler is incapable of is precognitive decision-making in the complex formats that adults are supposed to be able to do – but preschoolers are definitely capable of exploring and understanding all of the aspects that go into making decisions, and can indeed do so based on already acquired learning experiences.
Okay, maybe that’s starting to get too technical. The important thing to understand here is that “delayed gratification” had nothing to do with a “have” or “have-not” inborn genetic trait — in the same way that people tend to believe that ‘common sense’ is an inborn disposition or personality trait. Both “delayed gratification” and “common sense”, which are inextricably linked, are rooted in the emotional knowledge of “instant gratification” that would have been properly experienced during the first three years of life at the hands of parents and caretakers. In other words, if you are still wondering about letting your babies just cry themselves to sleep (as well as a few other aspects of infant care), stop wondering and worrying. Attending to your crying infant is NOT, I repeat NOT “spoiling” your child’s nature or behavior tendencies — it is ensuring the precursory “instant gratification” essentials that precede learning, practicing and mastering the qualities of “delayed gratification”.
Identifying the lack of “instant gratification” through the marshmallow test of “delayed gratification” is precisely why intervention methods work and stick for a lifetime, when they are remedied at the preschool stage. Nevertheless, the time taken to remedy this fundamental trait for a successful life would be better spent doing a whole lot of basic cognitive and intuitive development at the preschool stage – instead of fixing and therefore delaying other developments that can also ONLY take place during the preschool stage.
There are more than enough tests and pieces of evidence that support the realization that the “emotional intelligence quotient” is the rigorous basis for success in both work and relationships that will take place in the future and last a lifetime, most of which we spend as “adults”. Having an “MBA” or a “Ph.d” doesn’t magically turn back the clock and formidably re-constitute or establish “common sense” and “delayed gratification”. The core elemental structure of “instant gratification” preceding “delayed gratification” is needed to make sense of all the knowledge that can be competently applied with all the knowledge and information acquired through the degrees and credentials of education and lifetime learning.
Ultimately “delayed gratification” is an overall “knowledge app” that will be needed to execute sensible skills in everything. The “emotional intelligence quotient” of knowledge that ought to be fully nurtured during the infancy stage, will properly prepare babies and toddlers to learn the full spectrum of basic “intellectual intelligence” during the preschool stage. Together, as these “intelligence quotients” unite – intuitively – as one seamless function during the preschool phase of brain development, then the stage is set for instituting the core elements of the “willful intelligence quotient” that will take place predominantly during the “teen” years of brain development.
It is during these teen years that your children will have the proper head start to develop and master the traits of “willful intelligence” (or the fuller and final development of the frontal areas of the brain) that conduct and execute the real skills of “delayed gratification” — which manifest as; sensible-precognitive decision-making, intuitive reasoning, innovative thinking, computational-quantum processing, judgment, the ability to hypothesize and theorize, use advanced critical thinking in EVERYTHING they do, plan, intend, create, feel, and think.
Without the compassionate experiences of “instant gratification”, that line the memory banks of our minds during early infancy, thereby fully optimizing all of our emotions with a full value of emotionally intelligent predilections, then any wealth of accumulated knowledge is subject to deflate in an instant. In other words, we can retain what we’ve learned consciously, but unconsciously the sensibility of putting knowledge to use and connecting it with other useful points of knowledge and information just sets it somewhere between difficult-to-impossible. The point of accumulated knowledge and information is to make as many sensible “clicks” as we can between all points of acquired knowledge-experiences.
A proper preliminary “P.r.e-K” degree makes it possible to learn intuitively throughout a lifetime and retain knowledge imperviously so that any new field of knowledge can be imminently applied in unlimited innovative ways. Without this proper sequence of “intelligence development stages”, then the steps missed will indeed make life and continual learning a struggle. As much as we praise the virtues of “delayed gratification”, we must now begin to acknowledge the virtues of “instant gratification” as a required first step, and prerequisite of “delayed gratification”.


Conversations – T. Wolfe’s “catch-22” vs. C. Woolf’s “catch-22”

If memory serves me correctly, in typical Tom Wolfe style, he points out the ridiculous, in this instance, the case in which people must face the circus of trying to get a job without the job experience, meanwhile one would need a job in order to get any job or work experience.  What we are pointing out here at Cognitivology is the matter of improving human development by using more of our brains while we need to use more of our brains in order to better develop our humanity.
Einstein has said that “problems can never be solved by the same level of awareness that created them” — so we are going to be in a catch-22 situation until we can come up with a solution that uses a higher sense of awareness, which is why we propose that creating a higher sense of awareness is going to be best achieved by cultivating fresh new young minds with the ability to use more of their brains from the get-go, so to speak.  
My Mama is constantly reminding me to write about the Cognitivology theme in ways that folks will understand what I’m getting at.  My ever conscientious co-author is always advising me to use common experiences of everyday life to describe the efforts of Cognitivology so that people might identify with our theme.  
Yesterday I had what was nearly an ugly confrontation with a fellow in a supermarket, so I’ve put all of these aforementioned elements together, I think, to come up with an explanation that exposes the ridiculously difficult challenge that all of us are subjected to under the thousands-of-years-old model of limited brain development that we must deal with everyday.  
But before I explain this conversation, or rather this confrontation, I should answer a question that I am constantly asked when I freely engage complete strangers into a discussion about Cognitivology in my own attempts to spread its ideas — and that question is, “what motivated you to do this sort of work”? Well, it’s very simple and I must confess, I’ve never honestly answered it, so I’m going to do it here.  
The truth is that I hate the fact that we humans are using only about 20% of our brains’ potential.  I feel extremely irritated by this condition and am reminded daily that although I’m constantly working to bring awareness to this condition we all suffer and do what I can to change this condition, I am as equally subject to it as everyone else and therefore none the better or worse than anyone else.
To divulge this frustration, I recount this encounter in the supermarket.  I was looking for an item, found a store attendant who had been conversing with another customer, who I mistakenly thought was another store worker. When I’d lingered long enough, I interjected by saying, “sorry, could you just tell me where the rice is”? For this interruption, I was interfaced by the customer, mistaken by me as a co-worker, with an abrupt “excuse me, I’d like to finish my sentence”, followed by my saying, “I’m sorry I hardly wanted it to seem as though I’d been eavesdropping on your conversation”. To this, the man responded with how rude I was being and then a command that I should lower the tone and volume of my voice.  In return, I now said, “Well, I’m sorry, but I spend a lot of my time teaching children and working with the elderly who are hard of hearing, and this is a normal tone of voice for me, it’s just an occupational hazard”. At this point, the man responded, “so what does that mean, that you are better than me, I’m a retired…”
The store attended was quick thinking enough to point me in the right direction for which I took my cue to remain consistent with my commitment to behave and think in accordance with higher brain potential, which is based on the brain’s natural system to process thoughts and emotions through the values of compassion and optimism – which is how the brain means to integrate thoughts and emotions as one harmonious process.  
So here’s the ugly truth — what did I really want to say and how did I really want to behave?  Like this — “hey Mister, I don’t have time to explain quantum processing to emotionally illiterate men over the age of 30, did I say I talk loud because I think I’m better than everyone else? – no, you made that irrelevant reference, I said I talk loud because of my occupations, but mostly I just talk loud because it’s a stupid compulsion of mine, and while you have the right to tell me that I’m being rude, it’s too bad for you that it is only I that can decide how to use my voice.”  
For those of you wondering what in the world quantum processing is, it is, essentially, the ability to use relevant and obvious information, in this case, I gave him the reasons why I’d had the habit of using my voice loudly, but he assumed according to his own reasons that my loud and perturbing voice was different than what I clearly stated, and he has every right to assume away.  But, that I thought I might be better than anyone else was the furthest thing from my mind and just nowhere in the radar of my feelings or thoughts – so it was plainly and simply a lack of quantum processing on his part.  
Furthermore, in my experience, people who usually say that sort of comment, especially when the person they are conversing with has said nothing of the sort, is usually someone who thinks that he (or she) is better than others, or has been severely reminded in their early development that he or she is inferior to others.  It is a topic that is obviously always on his mind.  Okay, to conclude this whole story, the point is once again, I believe that most people most of the time are trying to be better human beings and that we are constantly barraged with this catch-22 situation of getting caught in the net of limited brain potential. It is an exasperating situation that is exacerbated on a daily basis.  
The contributions we make range from the individual level of being more conscientious to the worldwide level where people have the influence and resources to tackle say, world hunger or green planet solutions for the future.  But whether on the individual level in the supermarket or on the larger scale of tackling major world problems, the limits of human relationships that depend on human development, which is synonymous with human BRAIN development is going to continue being a catch-22, and as a race, as a species, we are in denial of this fact.  
These ongoing and never-ending problems of world hunger, child abuse, warfare and the like will only cease when humans change, and we can really only change humanity if child development, that is, child BRAIN development is put at the forefront of human progress — because human progress and human development is human BRAIN development and human brain development is CHILD BRAIN development.  There’s never going to be any way around that.
The infrastructures of human existence can only improve when we improve the ways that we think, which are based on the ways that we feel, because the human brain is an emotionally developed brain.  The Theory of Relativity for Human Brain Development is attainable, in fact it’s already here and it can create as much progress for human development as Einstein’s Theory of Relativity has done for the Space-Age, Technology and Quantum Physics.  
Of course, this emotional brain development theory rests on a rigorous definition for Emotional Cognition, which has been rigorously unveiled by Cognitivology. But it remains to be acknowledged by mainstream Cognitive Theorists, as well as the Neuroscience field. So, as I end today’s blog, I do so completely violating the advice I’ve been given — make it comprehensible, make it short, etc, etc,…  
So here’s to another long blog, which brings us to the final catch-22, because probably, like most blogs, this will hardly, if ever be read at all. Nevertheless, it will save me some of the frustration of explaining quantum knowledge calculations that our brains should be intuitively developed enough to process, and maybe, just maybe, I can parade around like a blissfully happy human being that wants to treat others with the compassion and optimism they deserve without having to explain myself, and if people really want to know what’s really going on in my head, then I can point them in the direction of my blog. The End, ’til next time. 

Praise for ‘Education Week’

Praise for “Education Week’s” article by Stephen Sawchuk regarding President Obama’s proposal on upgrading the importance of preschool education.
In particular, writes S. Sawchuk ~
“Research indicates that children’s cognitive and social development are linked to the quality of interaction with preschool teachers, regardless of their educational levels. Such findings have spawned interest in frameworks that describe effective practices in such interactions, and can serve as the basis for professional development and coaching”
This is the best information that could have been pointed out by anyone examining the quality of Early Education and the interactions that should be going on between Teachers-Parents-Aides and anyone else involved in the care and cognitive development of Preschoolers.
So, what qualifies quality interaction for social, cognitive and emotional development in preschoolers?
Many abide by certain philosophies, cultural influences and upbringing or parental styles, but the criteria for interactive qualities that ensure the best for preschoolers emotional, cognitive and social development must be drawn out, or derived by the brain’s natural requisites for preschool brain development.
So what is the brain doing during preschool and what is the brain ultimately preparing for? This is the question that needs to be raised for qualifying a framework for preschool development.
Preschool Teaching Expertise requires a simultaneous combination of:
-Open-ended instructions
-Guiding children’s freedom to Explore
-Natural Science as the basis of all classifications of Knowledge
-ALL of the Fundamental Principles of Mathematics – describing the basics of all classifications of knowledge and all interrelated functions of Early Cognitive Development
-Non-negated language/communication/guidance reflecting open-ended possibilities supporting the Brain’s developmental system to acquire infinite knowledge through Compassion and Optimism
-Foresight guidance and enforcing the knowledge of advantageous possibilities with a focus on eliminating hindsight guidance or reinforcing through consequences / consequential knowledge (Because the human brain is ultimately, by adulthood, designed to exercise foresight and intuition, and the intuitive inclination to use foresight is intuitively established during the preschool stage).
-HUGS must also be re-implemented into the order of appropriate preschool brain development – –
Preschool teachers can hardly do their job appropriately if they are banned from hugging their students. Affection is an extremely important part of human brain development, because the human brain is an emotionally developed brain. Also, if Preschool students are going to develop as they should through free exploratory learning, then Teachers are also going to need to have Creative Freedom in their Teaching Practices.
[This also means that any close-ended formats of “teaching” must go, and this specifically includes close-ended literacy development, homework, ditto sheets / following inside the lines and inside the box lessons and teaching practices at the preschool level.]
The name of the Educational Game for Preschool Brain development is Creativity as a cognitive process during this stage of natural intuitive development – the key words being ‘creative’, ‘cognitive’ and ‘intuitive’. These three aspects are as one aspect to the preschool brain and the only time in life when they will be merged and poised to function as one.
This united feature of preschool cognitive brain development ensures that the basic building blocks for quality critical thinking, common sense, out-of-the-box thinking and compassionate, interactive working relationships can meld together to produce innovative thinking in all areas of human existence.
This approach also solves problems, resolves issues and even dissolves unnecessary resolving of a variety of difficulties that would never arise because young brains are being cultivated or configured to operate more in accordance with natural potential.

Neuroplasticity; challenging the synapse and neurotransmitter “pruning” theory in the early stages of development. PART 2

The logical explanation for the advent of neuroscience would mean, indeed conclude
that we are pioneering and embarking upon the process of unleashing the latent 80% of
brain potential. To initially understand how to unleash that 80%, we must understand the
preschool brain – rather we must understand the basic construction of our brain’s
information operating system, which is synonymous with the preschool brain.
There are a few cognitive and evolutionary assumptions, or rather presumptions that
need to be cleared up about neuroplasticity, and the brain in general. The first thing is
that, we humans are born with underdeveloped brains, meaning our synapses and
neurotransmitters are still mostly or entirely unconnected, whereas animals are born with
fully developed brains – meaning all or most of their neurotransmitters and synapses are
already connected, and they seem to use most or close to 100% of their brains’ potential –
compared with humans who acquire or use only about 20% of the brain’s potential.
Recently, some psychologists and neuroscientists have proposed the idea that we do
indeed actually use 100% of brain potential but that we are only using about 20% at a
time – at any given moment. That may sound relieving to many folks, however if we
look at all of the basic elements of brain potential, we realize that there are too many
disparities in human existence that fall short of functioning according to the properties of
compassion and optimism, which define the brain’s system for operating knowledge and
As mentioned, Neuroscientists are still baffled by the tug of war between the back of
the brain and the front of the brain, this conundrum hardly sums up or defines 100%
cooperation, let alone 100% of brain potential. The clues that would summarize the
cooperative properties and functions between the back of the brain and the front of the
brain are indeed there to be uncovered and discovered, but it depends on a matter of re-
defining what the common denominators are between these two areas of the brain. This
cooperation is rigorously defined by Cognitivology® and any Neuroscientist is welcome
to validate or invalidate these definitions.
The evolution of human cognitive brain development tells the story of how our
brains have evolved from the back to the front and Neuroscience does explain how each
individual brain develops from back to front during the years of brain development –
plus, how the brain is capable of continual learning, re-mapping and improving during
the adult years of life.
Neurons perform an important role in the brain’s ability to process and transmit
information within the brain’s network of neurotransmitters and synapses. We are born
with billions or even trillions of these and somewhere in early development after infancy,
but before the preschooler stage a massive trimming down, or “pruning” of these
neurotransmitters takes place. This happens because we only keep what we use, these
neurotransmitters become “specialized” and since nature naturally conserves, then our
brains dispense or dispose of those parts that we have missed using.
However, this “conservation” premise is a poor assumption, even from the
perspective of evolution or conservation or natural adaptability. The reason to debunk
this presumption is that most natural selection theories propose that natural processes are
modified in accordance with necessity, usage, and environmental influences. If the
principles of natural selection were applicable to the pruning of neurotransmitters, it
would seem more logical for the human brain to dispense with the over-production of
neurotransmitters generation after generation for each and every individual. The more
logical conclusion is that even though some of these neurotransmitters would actually be
pruned, it makes more sense that we are meant to use the majority of them.
The point is that a newer presumption for a new age of thinking would compel us to
consider that the massive pruning is consistent with the 20% scale, or ratio of brain
potential that we’ve become accustomed to activating and using. We might also consider
that if we were revising our definition of synapse and neurotransmitter pruning from the
perspective of Particle Physics and String Theory, we can presume that we are processing
knowledge and information predominantly from a physical-3-D standpoint and that other
inherent structures of the brain need the original bulk of neurotransmitters to process
knowledge and information beyond the physical-3-D realm of energy and matter.
The bottom line is that unless we give most of these neurotransmitters and synapses
a chance to connect to our extrasensory senses how will we know what more our minds
and brains are capable of doing?
So yes, neuroplasticity tosses out the old theory that adults are unable to produce
new neurons or learn new information, or that they are unable to break free from their old
ways of thinking. But the question still remains – why toss away all of those original
neurons and neurotransmitters if we are meant to continually produce neurons and be
capable of re-mapping older patterns of knowledge with newer patterns of knowledge?
Why dispose of billions of neurons in early development only to gain a few thousand or
million in adulthood?
Our free will is equally limited to processing choices, as our brain is limited to
processing knowledge and information. The more brain potential we unleash, the more
free will can be unleashed to also serve its function in conjunction with human
development, creativity, discipline, responsibility, optimism, behavior, compassion,
ethics, consciousness and intelligence. What this tells us is that we must begin asking
new and unasked questions if we are ever to figure out the mysteries of latent human
brain potential.

Neuroplasticity; challenging the synapse and neurotransmitter “pruning” theory in the early stages of development. Part 1

What is the definition of Neuroplasticity? Basically it is the human brain’s – that is
the adult human brain’s ability – to re-map and re-configure the connections between
synapses ~ the information/type of information that is passed around the brain’s
intelligence network, a neuro-net, comprising its billions of synapses and
neurotransmitters. It is the modem of the human brain where all knowledge and
information gets processed.
New evidence even points out that adults can and do develop new neurons, but how
many new neurons, what would we use them for and, incidentally, what is a
connection anyway? A synapse-neurotransmitter connection is just one microscopic
point that information about your thoughts and feelings are passed around in your head.
Your head meaning that there are billions of these microscopic synapse-neurotransmitter
points that make up a whole network of information connecting – and for the real 411,
each information thinking pattern was originally designed as an information feeling
Neuro-scientists sometimes forget to inform the general public about this
connection between feelings and thoughts and how this connection is far more relative to
neuroplasticity than they are willing to explain. But in order to understand this
connection, one must understand the processes and developmental properties of the
preschool learning-feeling-thinking brain – and the preschool brain makes zero
distinctions between learning, feeling and thinking. It’s just that for sophisticated neuro-
scientists to be dabbling in the learning-feeling-thinking processes of the preschool brain,
it just conflicts with their sense of scholarly-ness.
This is precisely the reason why Neuro-scientists are befuddled by the discourse
and struggle between the back of the brain and the front of the brain, because the
potential harmonious connection between the back of the brain and the front of the brain
is primordially decided during the preschool stage when the middle part of the brain, or
the mediating part of the brain comprising the left and right sides, which more or less
houses the brain’s neuro-net, is formulating its major connectivity network that will
eventually connect to the front of the brain and the general higher thinking cortex parts of
the brain.
The higher thinking ‘cortex’ parts of the brain develop their most refining abilities
and properties for complex intelligent thinking beginning in the teen years and stretching
out until the early to mid-20’s – when the brain finalizes its total development, but hardly
the end of learning. Learning is a lifetime process and the years of brain development
help us set up this lifetime learning process. But the foundation of the brain’s structure,
the basement level, so to speak – just like the foundation that will hold a building in place
– this foundation is what is set up during the preschool stage. It is far more major than
even Neuro-scientists can give it credit for.
When folks in general agree upon the notion that the early years make-up the
foundation for all of life’s tendencies – whether inadvertently or knowingly, what they
are saying is that the first major set-up of the brain’s information processing center is
being constructed.
The first set-up of this information network, or information processing center is the
first major connection set-up between synapses and neurotransmitters. Synapses and
neurotransmitters connect information as associative partners and associative groups so
that information has a network to pass information around in patterns that make sense and
that can be worked to apply to our abilities. This first major network is made during the
preschool stage. These first major associative connections of this network, that is, these
first initial connections are the hardest to change, break and re-design into new
associative connections between what we think and feel.
But there are ways to ensure that these initial first time connections never get in the
way of how we feel and think and how we use our abilities, there’s a way to ensure that
we never even have to work so hard to change these original basic connections, because
these first connections can be made in such a way that they just go ahead and form new
patterns of thinking and feeling the moment we decide to feel and think differently. It is
hard to change these initial-first-formed patterns and associations because they were
made when thinking and feeling had absolutely no distinction or difference whatsoever.
When you are learning as a preschooler you are feeling-thinking-learning. They
are impossibly inseparable. This basic tenet or structure in the way we use our brain’s
neuro-net as adults is completely overlooked in the adult self-improvement world. Until
the adult self-improvement world reconciles with this basic fact, the adult self-
improvement world will just keep going around in circles and recycling the mere 20% of
brain potential that we have been using for thousands of years.

We will bring you Part 2 next week…. Please, if any of this subject is interesting visit our website: http://www.naturaullypreschool.com and we can also be found at http://www.teacherspayteachers.com/Store/The-Preschoolers-Gooroo

Helping Neuroscientists keep up with the Neuroscience.

Neuroscientists are still baffled by how the “back of the brain and the front of the brain can make peace” in the words of senior science writer Jeffrey Kluger, written in an article in the March 2012 TIME magazine issue. There is simply NO REASON in the world as to why Neuroscientists struggle to reconcile the interconnectedness of the human brain’s total potential. The path toward understanding this constrast that seems so mysterious is simple – it merely requires understanding the preschool brain, but heaven forbid Neuroscientists should humble their hackles to explore this undeniable factor in the process of finding the solution to getting the “back of the brain to make peace with the front of the brain”. In other words, if the front of the brain and the back of the brain were two countries trying to find peace and reconciliation between their differences, then the preschool stage would be the ideal and very capable ‘U.N.’
For the immediate present, we are presenting an interlude here before we move on to the promised topic of how ‘free will is inextricably linked to human development, human intelligence and human behavior’. People like to point to many causes for any number of particular types of problems that humanity experiences – – – However, as mentioned much earlier, the problem behind all human problems is a problem of insufficient brain development – that mere 20% we’ve tapped into, which does little to ensure that the battlefield between the front of the brain and the back of the brain is replaced with a peaceful and very constructive purpose.
It’s a simple concept, if a butterfly emerged from its coccoon before its wings were fully developed, it may fly and it may even defeat the odds, but it will struggle unnecessarily and it will be at odds with its full potential. This is very parallel to human development. The preschool stage is the stage where the wings of human potential are developed and in order to fully spread those wings a full potential of the traits and features of preschool development must be fostered.
According to the researchers who are in possession of the leftovers of Einstein’s brain, Einstein’s gliel cells were different than the average brains cells of the same sort. Also, apparantly his brain was functioning like that of a young adult more than that of a person his own age. Additionally, his frontal parietal lobe was larger than the average person. Okay folks, this is hardly a difficult equation to calculate…. The young adult thinking brain, the wiring and activity of the gliel cell neurons, and the larger than usual parietal frontal lobe area are typical of intuitive intelligence. This is not mysteriously magical. It is simply a mind that works intuitively – an intuitive mind in charge of the brain rather than the other way around. The foundation for the development of an intuitive mind is entirely dependent upon the intuitive development of the basic building blocks of preschool cognitive development – and every process of preschool cognitive development is an intuitive development process. What does that mean? It means that every child has the opportunity to become even smarter than Einstein when we pay very close attention to the importance of the preschool stage of the human intuitive mind-brain connection which is established during and only during the preschool stage. It is only slightly complex, but it is definitely uncomplicated, and using the compatible lingo that fully activates this preschool mind-brain-behavior-intuitive-intelligence connection is a property and process that must be acknowledged by the Neuroscience community and in general by educational administrations.