New Information on How Things Just Keep Electrifying or Needs To Want To Learn More.

             Kafka Improves Learning

• "The idea is that when you're exposed to a meaning threat –– something that fundamentally does not make sense –– your brain is going to respond by looking for some other kind of structure within your environment," said Travis Proulx, a postdoctoral researcher

I think that this quote is really interesting to me because I never thought that the brain would actually change it's structure to understand something that doesn't make sense.

The research had been taken on Sep. 16, 2009.

 Reading a book by Franz Kafka –– or watching a film by director David Lynch –– could make you smarter.

I believe that any book you read would make you smarter because people expand their knowledge when they read.                                                                                

• What exactly in the book would make you smarter?
• Would it be the concept of the book or just the subject?

"Meaning, according to Proulx, is an expected association within one's environment. Fire, for example, is associated with extreme heat, and putting your hand in a flame and finding it icy cold would constitute a threat to that meaning. "It would be very disturbing to you because it wouldn't make sense," he said.

So by the fire being cold it would not make sense to people so how would their minds look for some other kind of structure within he or she's environment?

The key to our study is that our participants were surprised by the series of unexpected events, and they had no way to make sense of them. Hence, they strived to make sense of something else."

Reading this last paragraph makes me really get the whole experiment. But while I was reading the article I was fumbled and wondering how would reading that certain book would make you smarter. And was wondering if some people were just more interested and more affected than other people within the experimented groups. Cause some people may read something horrifying and won't really show as much affect while it may affect others in a whole different way making their stomach's turn. I understand the conclusion of the experiment and it makes sense. The surprising conjecture how the brain is constantly astonishing the world within each study/ experiment.

                   The Myth of Multitasking

    Dave Crenshaw argues that the most common kind of multitasking doesn't boost productivity it slows you down.

'switch tasking' refocusing back and forth between them loosing time and progress in the switch.

Doing something individually is better, because you are just focused on one thing.

   Merely I consider that doing 2 things at the same period of time isn't loosing instance. I feel like that's a good way to keep yourself on your toes and keeping people active.