304 A Programmer’s Guide to the Mind
a gnat? In this book I am interpreting everything in terms of mental
processing. This is my elephant—or is it my gnat? Other people often see
my research on the mind as being highly specialized, whereas in contrast I
view it as being quite general. Who is right, they or I? I suggest that the
evaluation of competing theories is in some ways a case of Darwinian
evolution, a matter of „survival of the fittest‟: The organism which survives
is that which is most fitted to its environment. For instance, I suggest that a
universal theory based upon screws, bolts and bits of metal can be rejected
quite easily, because the world does not consist of screws, bolts and pieces
of metal. Rather, these comprise only a small fraction of existence.
Therefore, in most situations, this theory would not be „suited to the
environment.‟
In contrast, I suggest that a general theory based upon the functioning
of the human mind is general, because it applies to every situation in which
people think, know, act, or respond—in other words, to all of human
existence. Therefore, I suggest that it is at least an elephant, and not a gnat.
However, if this theory of the mind is to be universal—if it is to overcome
the other „elephants‟—then it must be shown to be suited to the
environment of those other „elephants.‟ So far, we have only applied our
theory of the mind to human thought. Can it be extended beyond this? Can
it also explain the reactions of other living species? Is it consistent with
natural law and the workings of the physical universe? And if necessary,
could it be expanded to include any possible non-physical „spiritual‟
world?
Now that is a tall order. For now, all I can say is that it may be possible.
Initial forays into other fields of understanding suggest that there are
consistencies. In terms of fractal thinking, it appears that the general
principles which we have discovered about the mind also show up as
features elsewhere.
One common misconception in separating gnats from elephants is the
idea of rating the generality of a certain theory by the number of
researchers working in that area, the number of seminars given on the topic,
or the number of books written about the subject. However, it is not the
number of people which is important in rating a concept, but rather the
significance of their ideas. A television ad may focus the attention of
millions of people on a new brand of toilet paper, but this does not turn the
product into a general theory. The world does not revolve around toilet
paper, despite the fact that we may wish that it did whenever we are caught
without.
Teacher Generality and Subconscious Thought
Now that we have some understanding about Teacher thinking, I need
to clear up a possible confusion. We are looking at how Teacher thought
operates. However, the Teacher person who reads this explanation may