Do we have a say in the subconscious defining of our world?

Rosborne, that's non-problematical, or at least it doesn't address the Lamarkian issue wherein experiences affect the GENETIC structure of the experiencer such that his offspring will receive biologically the benefits of that experience. My father was a violinist, as was his father--and I as well. But my father and I had to learn everything we are able to do by practice and study. My grandfather passed no knowledge to my father nor did my father to me by means of genetic transmission.

I think you may be wrong on that one, JL, but who the hell am I to say?

Correct. I didn't mean to imply any gentic mechanism.

But the genetically predisposed structure of the brain isn't all that's in play here. Experiences directly affect the structure of the brain as it grows.

Human brains grow neural connections like crazy within the first two years of life (and more slowly afterward). Once the base pathways are established those which are being used (depending on experiential stimulus) become more robust, and tend to be the default pathways used in otherwise balanced states. Those that are being used less tend to wither electrically. Eventually the brain is left with 'preferred' pathways which reflect our foundational thought process. Most of this resulting neural structure is not genetic. Only the original bulk of neural possibilities was genetic.

Conceptually it always reminds me of the Cosmic Microwave Background maps, where these vague clumps of hot/cold density eventually crystalized into finer tendrils of galactic superclusters and hyperthreads.

This has been interesting reading.

Here is a link I found about PTSD showing how reactions are sometimes changed by trauma, especially in children.

http://www.helpguide.org/mental/post_traumatic_stress_disorder_symptoms_treatment.htm

Cyracuz wrote:

... hope that works...

I'm reading this as - 'Is the problem physical (the brain) or mental (subconscious)?' I think it can be both but it is up to the individual to come to know, if indeed they want to.

The comments have reminded me of what Psychologists call 'Learned Helplessness'(see Link) and of how some anti-depressants are used to break the hard-wiring of neurons.

Link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness

My own experience of experimenting with similar drugs to those used in anti-depressants, definitely caused me to think differently about life in general. Whether this was to do with the drugs forcing an alternative sense of perception (forcing rewiring) or to do with the drugs allowing me to consider an alternative to my hard wiring (which I later chose to rewire myself) is unknown to me. Maybe the risk of using the drug informed my subconscious of what length I would go to to experience change, which inspired change of perception...? I'm not sure, but I AM sure I chose to take a risk and feel lucky for the outcome (I'm generally a control freak).

The subconscious is unkown territory even to the individual so I make the point of not commenting on that directly. As a Creative Arts Therapist I personally use the arts (expression) as a means to develop my client's intuition (which I believe is the bridge between tacit (subconscious) and explicit knowing).

The objectification of subjective material (possibly subconscious) gives ideas a context/plaform for existential change. Perspective creates perception but there has to be an intention to create, which is very similar to letting go or taking a risk, lateral thinking maybe. I think a lot of answers appear when the question no longer matters so much.

I'd like to share a quote by develomental psychologist Robert Coles, which I find speaks to the interplay between the mental and physical, tacit and expicit:

"Hearing themselves teach you, through their own narration, the patients will learn the lessons a good instructor learns only when he becomes a willing student, eager to be taught."