The Neurotic's Guide to Avoiding Enlightenment: How the Left-Brain Plays Unending Games of Self-Improvement by Chris Niebauer

The Neurotic's Guide to Avoiding Enlightenment: How the Left-Brain Plays Unending Games of Self-Improvement Reviews

• 
  Raymond Mathiesen

  Deep thoughts about the self and self-improvement…
  
  Even a quick look at the self-help shelf at any bookstore will quickly reveal that the industry is booming and that most of us seem to have a secret desire to ‘be a better person’. We search for that magic formula which will give us enlightenment, hopefully the quicker the better. But is enlightenment, as we understand it, really achievable? If we did have a better life what would it be like? Would it be very different from our current life? Even more, what if we found that this ‘self’, which we are so bent on improving, turned out not to really exist, to be a myth, an unreliable creation of our own brain? Can modern neuroscience throw any light on this subject, and if so do you have to be an expert to understand it? If you are confused already get ready to have many of your ideas challenged by Chris Niebauer’s thought provoking book The Neurotics Guide To Avoiding Enlightenment: How The Left-brain Plays Unending Games Of Self-improvement.
  
  Many self-help books are written from a New Age / Eastern Mysticism perspective and in a way Niebauer’s book fits into this category. Niebauer is strongly influenced both by the mid twentieth century author Alan Watts and the contemporary writer Eckhart Tolle. Watts wrote on a variety of Eastern Religions including Zen, Hinduism and Taoism and Tolle is greatly influenced by Buddhism. To describe the book as being purely of this ilk, however, would be greatly misleading. Also, to describe The Neurotics Guide simply as a self-help book, would be equally deceptive. Certainly there are mind-exercises and meditation techniques included which the reader may find helps them achieve a new mind-state, and which gives them a new approach to life, but this is very much a book of theory / philosophy which concentrates on challenging our standard ideas about ourselves and our lives. Niebauer is indeed “a college professor specializing in cognitive neuropsychology” (Preface) and the book has a heavy neuroscience content. In essence Niebauer is attempting to give Eastern Mysticism a neuroscience framework, taking it from the world of pure ideas and giving it a firm background in science.
  
  As the reader may by now be guessing this is not really a beginner’s book. Some understanding of both Eastern Mysticism and psychology would be useful. Niebauer’s ideas are unorthodox and very challenging, and need to be thought about quite a bit. The first chapter, for example, may be a struggle to understand, but Niebauer’s ideas become easier to appreciate if you stay with the book and keep reading. By the end you may not agree with everything Niebauer says, but you will certainly have been forced to think through much of what you believe about yourself and the world.
  
  Despite the emphasis on theory, the book does not use technical terms or give lengthy, in depth scientific discussions. There are illustrative examples from Niebauer’s real life and that of his family. These examples help to make the text more personal and easier for the average reader to relate to.
  
  As the subtitle suggests a great deal of this book has to do with the left-brain. This is the hemisphere which is dominant, that is, which is most prominent in our thinking. It is pattern seeking and sees the world in terms of categories. It divides the world into nouns, that is stable ‘things’. All this is fine except that much of the world is process, which is to say that things change, indeed often are in considerable flux. Thus we tend to think of ourselves as a permanent ‘picture’. We tell stories from our history which illustrate ’who we are’, when in fact we are a changing entity. This idea is very much in agreement with narrative psychology (Dan P. McAdams. The Stories We Live By: Personal Myths And The Making Of The Self:__ New York: The Guilford Press, c1993). Taking another example, we tend to see enlightenment as a ‘thing’ which can be achieved, a permanent state in which our old self ends and a new self comes. That is we see enlightenment as the ceasing of one stable thing and the beginning of another. As Niebauer points out our left-brain will never cease operating, even if we become much more aware of our right-brain, process oriented, expanded awareness, therefore enlightenment is a continuing process of change, of seeing the world in a new way.
  
  Much of the book centers on the discovery that, in the absence of solid data, the left brain confabulates, that is, invents perfectly reasonable sounding, yet untrue, explanations for why the world appears as it does. That is when we have little information we see ‘patterns’ which don’t exist, at least not in the way we believe they do. This discovery comes from split brain patients. These are people who, usually because they suffer from extreme epilepsy, have had their corpus callosum cut. The corpus callosum allows the left and right hemispheres to communicate. It does not take much to remember an occasion in which we have ‘jumped to conclusions’. At the time we are sure of our ideas, but later we come to doubt because we find information otherwise or because we see that we actually have no evidence. The end result of these findings is of course that we should be much less certain of ourselves. This is an idea Alan W. Watts proposes in his book The Wisdom Of Insecurity (New York: Vintage Books, c1951).
  
  Niebauer proposes two main solutions to our problems in life. The first is that we be aware of life, observing ourselves, and the things that happen to us, from a distance. This allows us to truly observe, rather than jump to conclusions. It also allows us to distance ourselves from the emotional drama of our lives. We observe “I am upset’, but by the act of extended observation we are one step from our unsettledness. This of course is what is known in Buddhism as mindfulness. Niebauer’s second solution is to approach life with a playful attitude. We take ourselves less seriously and do not know with the certainty which our left brain wants to assure us that we have. Once again we are distanced from the drama of life.
  
  Of course the three paragraphs above only just touch on the topics discussed in Niebauer’s book which range from as specific and real as what can be done about anxiety, to as broad and esoteric as what part of the self survives after death. While the book is not long there is much in it, and the reader may prefer to only read one chapter a day in order to give the author due consideration.
  
  One point of criticism is that all of Niebauer’s evidence comes from brain damaged patients and optical illusions. These are not circumstances in which the ‘normal’ aspects of life apply. This leads us to wonder how much these circumstances occur in ‘ordinary’ life. It is not that we doubt what Niebauers is saying, but we wonder how often the circumstances occur. How often do we, for example, jump to conclusions? Niebauer would have it that we do this frequently, but is that so. A little more evidence on this point would be useful. But even if we disagree on the frequency Niebauer’s book is still certainly an eye opener.
  
  The Neurotics Guide To Avoiding Enlightenment is certainly a book that will challenge most readers and give them much to think about. We all tend to be reasonably certain that we ‘know ourselves’ and understand the world, but Chris Niebauer definitely makes us wonder just how much we really do. Niebauer doubts that we can ever fully escape ourselves and become ‘enlightened’ as we so desire, but he does hold that we can be more aware. If you are interested in Eastern Philosophy you will certainly find this book different from most on that subject which you own. If you are interested in knowing more about how the brain works you will also be intrigued by this volume. I am happy to rate this book as four stars out of five.
  
• 
  Dennis Littrell

  Entertaining and—yes—enlightening!
  
  The title of this book is something of a joke. On one level the book is an elaboration on Michael Gazzaniga’s discovery in the 1970s that the verbal left brain “interprets” what the right brain experiences as well as rationalizes or denies any cognitive dissidence that might occur. The left brain tells the story; sometimes the story is true, sometimes it isn’t. I am reminded of the title of another popular psychology book recently published entitled, “Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me)” by Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson. The subtitle of that book is “Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts.” Here Slippery Rock University psychology Professor Chris Niebauer is concerned with the flip side of their thesis, namely the “mistakes” of self-improvement and enlightenment or rather the impossibility of self-improvement and enlightenment.
  
  On another level this book is a kind of tongue-in-cheek dissertation on the Buddhist idea of no-self, although Niebauer uses the term “ego” instead of self. We get a clear hint about Niebauer’s satirical intent from the drawing on the cover of a not exactly serene Buddha with his left eye comically popped open as he sits in meditation. The subtitle of the book, “How the Left-brain Plays Unending Games of Self-improvement,” highlights the fact that you can’t be something or somebody you aren’t. If you practice some form of self-improvement and you improve, well you were that person anyway and couldn’t have done otherwise. Niebauer’s real thesis is there is no such thing as free-will. There is no self; instead we are a collection of neurons and brain modules and flesh, blood and bone that act like swarm intelligence. We think we make decisions but in fact the brain modules come to a swarm consensus and act. We imagine that “we,” whoever we might be, made a decision and acted.
  Another way to express the subtitle is to realize that what we do most of the time in our lives is rationalize, deny and pretend while imagining that we are acting. Another way of saying this is “We don’t do; we are done.”
  
  The point about avoiding enlightenment and any kind of self-improvement is part of the joke. To repeat: how can you improve yourself in any way if you do not have free will? Indeed how can you improve yourself when there is no self to improve? And furthermore how can you improve yourself when brain modules are initiating the action, and improvement and enlightenment are illusions. This, by the way, is a very Zen kind of position. No philosophizing, no intellectualizing, no sutras to study and glean. Instead drank water, light fire, cook rice.
  
  In reading the book there is a bit of jargon and some technical vocabulary to get used to such as “law of opposition,” “pattern perceiver,” “left-brain interpreter,” “neural representation,” etc. But Niebauer writes well and concretely for the most part (although he needs to work on the typos, missing words and missing apostrophes). I come from part of the tradition that he presents, that of Zen Buddhism, yoga and Taoism, and I’m familiar with the kind of terminology used there but not with that of contemporary psychology which is what Niebauer uses extensively. Instead of his “egoic” self, in Buddhism there is just self, or actually no-self. In yoga there is atman and anatman.
  
  I wonder if part of the reason for some of the obscurity and cuteness of Niebauer’s expression is due to the disagreeable fact that few people including the institutions of society want to believe that there is no responsible self and that we do not have free will. It’s the kind of awkward truth that is socially and political incorrect since society demands that people be held responsible for their actions.
  
  Now I happened to agree with most of what Niebauer has to say although I express these ideas in a different and more straight-forward way in my book, “The World Is Not as We Think It Is,” which naturally I recommend. I also write more tersely than Niebauer although perhaps not as cleverly. Niebauer is writing a symphony on a theme while I’m just interested in the theme.
  
  A strange thing is that I almost didn’t read this book. I’m glad I did because it is paradoxically enlightening (despite Professor Niebauer’s best efforts!). He reinforced something that I learned some years ago that has given me comfort with, and insight into, the human condition. His “no improvement” mantra strongly suggests that we accept ourselves and reality as they are and live as much as possible in the here and now.
  
  His sometimes inexact expression (at least to my mind) is what at first put me off. Here are four examples of what I mean:
  
  One page one he asserts that the “me” that we are all familiar with doesn’t exist in “the way we were taught it does.” He adds, “Rather, there is only the thought that it exists.”
  
  But I don’t think this is correct. Something more than the thought does exist. What doesn’t exist is our mistaken idea of the self; however something does exist that we see as the self, and that entity is made of atoms of various elements configured into something we call a human being which of course is part of a larger community and so on.
  
  On page two he writes, “…nothing is really scary or problematic if you are in the now.” This makes sense only if we could actually exist in the now, that is in no time. Of course nothing could be scary or problematic since nothing could be discerned at all! In the eternal now there is no movement, no neurons firing, not even the movement of photons of light.
  
  What really threw me off was his “law of invincible opposition.” He doesn’t define it but he gives many examples of the law at work. When you try not to worry, you worry more; nice people turn out to be nasty, and vice-versa; “if you are a jerk the world loves you. Love the world and one way or another, it will crucify you.” (p. 7) I think this “law” is far from universal and is indeed false for most people.
  
  In another example he asks on page 49 “whether the images in a movie are in the film or rather on the screen…” and answers …”neither, they only exist when an awareness is watching…” However the images actually do exist independent of an observer. Their patterns of light and darkness can affect molecules in the air however minutely. What he should be saying I believe is that the interpretation of the light patterns toward some kind of recognizable meaning such as people walking on a beach or trains being blown up, etc. is in the mind of the observer.
  
  This way of writing is probably just hurried or perhaps Niebauer is being cute. I can remind him that the left- brain interpreter is just an artificial abstraction, but that would not mean that it doesn’t refer to something real. What is real is the behavior of the neurons and modules in the left brain that direct us toward certain behaviors while avoiding others. Call it what you will. I call it left-brain module swarm intelligence (or sometimes lack thereof).
  
  Some other issues and insights:
  
  
  “Categorized” means in the context of this book and in Niebauer’s thought the opposite of a continuously, inter-connected reality. Realizing that everything is “one” is the opposite of seeing “categories” or differentiations. Categories are parts. They are things. They are nouns. Reality, which we can never experience directly, is infinitely connected. Reality is an event. Reality is a verb. We only experience a representation of reality as presented by our senses processed by our brains and nervous system.
  
  In the chapter entitled “Myths as Grand Patterns across Time,” Niebauer talks about living in the moment without thinking about the past or the future. He notes, “Unless you are in physical pain, it is likely that your response will be nothing is wrong…There is nothing to fix, nothing to work on nothing to attain, no grail to search for and no place to go.” He adds, “In this practice we can experience the stillness of things being fine as they are.” (p. 59)
  
  This is true, although not so easy to attain; in fact, what I find especially interesting is the fact that earlier in the book Niebauer writes that he failed at meditation or “didn’t get anything out of it” (p. 2) not realizing that the stillness of living in the moment is what meditation is all about, and in experiencing the pure moment without fear or pain or any kind of urgency, one experiences the bliss. The trick is to actually be aware of what you are experiencing and to stay in the moment.
  
  Here’s a nice one: Niebauer mentions a “jerk” in front of you “going too slow.” (Precursor to road rage?) Then he asks, “Can you see it is just the universe dancing?” Ah, yes, we all need to just see the pure perception without any complaining, which brings me to this thought: Reading the chapter entitled “A Day Without Complaints” might lead to some good personal psychology, no complaining—maybe even self-improvement and enlightenment!
  
  --Dennis Littrell, author of “The World Is Not as We Think It Is”
  
• 
  Adam Senex

  Hmm!
  
  Intriguing book much of which resonates with my frustrating efforts for personal progress. It would some relaxed indifference and acceptance of the need to do nothing are the way. Hmm! Or not.
• 
  John Stephen

  An insight into the left-brain pattern (mis)perceiver and how it turns a good part of our experience into something it’s not. Also speaks to the futility of transcending ego by pointing out that’s efforts to escape an imaginary prison inevitably create a more secure prison.
• 
  Victoria Brinius

  This was an interesting book for me because the author knows all about neuropsychology, and it is what he has his PhD in. He knows what the left side of the brain is capable of, and well as what it is not capable of. The author used pictures and patterns to explain his opinions, and some were quite interesting. Especially the mind "games". I also liked that the last chapter is called "There is no Conclusion". In a letter that the author sent me with the book he states "......the book is filled with ambiguities that may slow (or frustrate) the mind". That is what made the book worth the read. The author makes you think the way you should while reading this book. It was interesting to think of things outside of categorical thinking, especially to explore conscience this way. I recommend that you take the time to sit and read this book so you can take the visual "tests". I am giving this book a 4/5. I was given a copy to review from the author through Book Review Buzz, however all opinions are my own.