Buying In - (Page 56) 56 rob walker ment, but a central theme of much cognitive study. Where the interpreter can fail us is when it is confronted with “giant data sets or meaningless ones,” Gazzaniga explains. “When the variables are enormous, or when we insist on imposing logical structure on nonsense. We see connections where there are none.” Although our brains are good at processing a lot of information, they are not perfect. As Wilson put it, “We often unconsciously bend new information to fit our preconceptions.” When that happens, rational thinking gets replaced by rationale thinking. And rationale thinking is, quite often, precisely the thing that, without our ever quite knowing it, unlocks the Desire Code. To illustrate his point about the interpreter’s insistence on what I’m calling rationale thinking—finding patterns and meanings where they do not exist—Gazzaniga suggests a rather crushing party game. You set up your victim by claiming that you have in mind a particular sequence of numbers, arranged in a particular pattern; you want to see if he can figure it out. He should start guessing numbers, and you’ll guide him toward the proper “rule” you have in mind by saying “yes” or “no.” So the poor sap starts guessing. But in fact you have no set of numbers in mind, and you simply answer randomly until, at the end, you say “yes” to four guesses in a row. Then you ask the now triumphant subject to explain the system or theory he followed to crack your secret code. At this point, the victim will invariably advance some theory that purports to explain the pattern. “Everyone has one!” Gazzaniga marvels. After you’ve revealed that the secret is there is no secret, he adds, “The guest, usually mortified, will not talk to you for a month.” No surprise! Who wants to be outed as a rationale thinker,
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.