Brain Food for Pioneering Spirits: Is thinking the same as understanding? Dr. Yasemin Yazan, Marc, Jürgen and Sonja dig into memory stores, energy budgets in the brain, and Jürgen’s three-stage model — blockage, taking note, understanding — while working out just how much a full night’s sleep, or an empty stomach, really shapes what we’re capable of grasping…
Note: This session was recorded live in German as part of the Deep Talk Club, so the video above is German-language audio only. What follows is an English translation of the conversation, lightly edited for readability — the back-and-forth between the moderator and participants is preserved, but the original timestamps and speaker names have been left out.
A very good morning to you, dear ones. Today we continue with thinking and understanding. We want to look at how thinking and understanding actually relate to each other. We could also speak of a kind of black box, so to speak — something comes in, then this thinking process takes place, but thinking doesn’t necessarily mean understanding right away. We had that example recently with the knot in the head, which made it very clear that thinking doesn’t necessarily mean we’ve already understood it too, so to speak, that we can, for example, apply it. And so it’s exciting again to really take a look here at how thinking and understanding actually relate to each other. And maybe to pick up various aspects here too, possibly examples too, to better follow what’s actually happening here, what understanding is. And maybe upfront, at this point, that precisely in this regard, even though there are many scientific findings, there are still relatively many question marks present, so it certainly can’t be completely conclusively clarified today either, but at least to try to approach it here, and see what we can gather, or what we can maybe try to derive ourselves. And so thinking and understanding is today’s topic. How do thinking and understanding relate, that’s the question we want to engage with. You’re all really, really warmly invited to join and share various thoughts on this, and maybe bring in examples we can work our way along. We have a recording running in the background, and accordingly, anyone who joins is automatically agreeing that the whole thing will also be published. Then we have three small room rules. A profile picture where you’re clearly recognizable, last name, and at least one sentence in the bio. Anyone who doesn’t want that for whatever reason can of course also gladly use the chat. And then I’d like to see who joins first this morning. A very good morning, dear Marc. What do you say about the topic?
Good morning to the group. Two things. First, I’d like to thank you for explicitly emphasizing again that this topic is so complex and that we can’t answer it conclusively. And specifically for the reason that I find there’s nothing worse — when I see it in some rooms, and I really don’t want to appear as an expert, because I’m absolutely not one, and definitely not on this topic, because I don’t have a scientific background. But that makes it easier for me to still bring in my thoughts and my experience anyway. And the first thing — I always try, no matter what topics you have, dear Yasemin, I always try to look quite pragmatically at what the added value of such a topic is. If it’s too scientific, then I really have a knot in my head and I switch off, because then I don’t know what that gives me for the day. I’m investing an hour of my lifetime after all, and have to consider, after the hour, do I feel better or not. And that’s why I’d like to start with something related to the topic, so Jürgen doesn’t roll his eyes — already at the definition, I’m staying on topic. I’ll just start with this: understanding is something different from hearing, and I hear a lot of things, but I haven’t understood them, and that’s the biggest challenge of communication for me. We saw that this week, that when two people talk to each other and the other person thinks, they’re listening to me — well, that would already be nice if they think, they’re listening to me, that’s already a great sign — but if they think, they understand me, then the following happens to me: the other person talks and thinks, they understand me, and we think, what are they even telling me, I can’t follow, what do they even want from me, and then the communication falls apart, and that was a waste of lifetime, because two people talked to each other, but ultimately they just moved their mouths and the effect is zero. And that’s why, for me, the definition is: understanding is not hearing, that’s something completely different, and yes, I have many knots in my head, and that will happen to other people too with more complex topics, and for the one who’s speaking, so for the communicator, it’s become really, really important for me to keep making myself aware, also in sales, also for my company: does the other person understand me now? Do they really understand me, or are they just listening? And even with the simplest things, even with really, really simple things, I notice that people don’t always understand. That’s on me — then I haven’t expressed myself clearly enough. They listened to me, but they didn’t understand me. Sorry.
Yes, thank you so, so much, and let’s also transfer this distinction here, or apply the same question, so to speak, to thinking and understanding. Are thinking and understanding the same thing? Because you just said understanding and hearing aren’t the same thing. But what about thinking and understanding? Because if we pick up this example again with the knot in the head, then thinking doesn’t necessarily have to have understood, maybe as a resultant quantity. Is it a resultant quantity, the understanding, following on from thinking?
So I do prepare for the room too, because the topic is so complex that I’d use the wrong words. And these preparations I found for myself, I can follow them. That’s why they’ve settled in for me now as knowledge. I’d say that understanding belongs to thinking, a sub-process, but that it’s something different, because thinking is the processing of information. Through that I can produce ideas or form thoughts, and I can make it conscious or unconscious, and understanding is then having a clear notion of what it means, and I can classify it in a bigger context. And I admit, I brought another example for you all, where I have a knot in my head again, which I won’t solve either. I was a really, really bad student, and it became clear to me yesterday, Yasemin, why that was also the case, among other things. I long thought I was dumber than others. I simply didn’t understand things. I really had huge knots in my head, simply, and it became clear to me why: because I imagine everything visually. And one of my main, my favorite subjects was chemistry. And I felt like an absolute failure in chemistry. And I specifically looked something up, because I can’t give this from memory, since I really have no clue about chemistry. And the knot in my head with chemistry is still there. An example for you all: the atomic nucleus is 10,000 to 100,000 times smaller than the electron shell. So the atomic nucleus is 10,000 to 100,000 times smaller than the electron shell. I already can’t even imagine an electron shell, and then the nucleus is supposed to be 100,000 times smaller still, and yet — here comes the “yet” — 99.9 percent of the total mass is in the nucleus of the atom. I’d learn that differently today. This knowledge about how the head functions, that maybe I don’t necessarily have to understand things, but that there are maybe also areas where I simply have to accept knowledge, can apply it, but not understand it. But my brain always wants to imagine everything, and I’d per se be bad in all subjects where exactly this imaginative power is needed, and that’s chemistry, and that’s geography or earth science. When it comes to the topic of the universe and infinity, size of the stars, I switch off. My synapses are overwhelmed there, and I’d approach that differently today. I’d simply accept it and wouldn’t say, you have to be able to imagine this visually now. I wouldn’t even try anymore to get into this understanding process, but that’s exciting. And if Yasemin tells me that an atomic nucleus is 100,000 times smaller than the shell, then I simply accept that and look at where the knowledge takes me, what I can do with it. I wouldn’t try anymore to imagine it, because this imagining, this wanting-to-understand also leads to you not being able to follow the communication at all anymore, and ultimately also to the feeling remaining with the listeners, in this case with me, that you feel really, really dumber than the rest of the audience, but I openly admit that. My brain simply can’t imagine certain things. But that hasn’t stopped me from still leading a happy and perfect life.
Yes wonderful, thank you so much. That reminds me in this context, I think I mentioned it at some point too, if I’m not mistaken, or I mentioned it elsewhere, I don’t know exactly anymore. There’s a documentary on Netflix, by the way, called “A Trip to Infinity.” I can highly recommend it, by the way. It’s about explanations for why one engages with this infinity, and how that’s derived at all, why there’s actually infinity at all, also in mathematics for example. And I find it’s explained really well. Maybe that helps here or there too in the sense of this imaginative power. Wonderful. Jürgen, a very good morning. What do you say to the topic?
Good morning, dear Yasemin. Good morning, Marc, and everyone else in the room. I’m picking up a remark you made in the previous moderation, that you said or asked, does it work without understanding, if I recapitulate that correctly, or does thinking basically have to lead to understanding. And as some in this room know, I like to approach things via the terms and via the antagonist of the respective term, in this case our “thinking.” But this time, fortunately I’ve had a lot of time to reflect for this topic, you’d already mentioned that it’s highly complex, I approached it with a different approach that I also often use, and tried to order understanding into a hierarchy, a hierarchy called thinking. And I arrived at three stages, in ascending, in quotation marks, quality. I’d like to briefly tell and present those to you. And I’ll try to do a bit of the Marc thing, which I always appreciate very much about him, that he tries to bring an example taken from life to make it understandable. I’ve identified three stages, up to understanding, in the space of the thinking process, for myself, and these three stages are called: the first stage is the blockage, the second stage is the taking-note, and the third stage is then the understanding. And blocking is, for me, a typical case where we also spontaneously notice for ourselves, I’m not capable of clear thought right now. That can be caused by stress or by pronounced situations, in which our mind pushes us into an emergency status and consciously excludes this thinking, in the sense of securing existence, which you address very often. The interesting thing about blocking, just a small side note, is that this blocking isn’t necessarily only dependent on the stimulus that acts on us from outside, which I simply decide, I don’t perceive that now, I don’t register it, I push it away, but that you can even provoke or learn this blockage through quite conscious training. Keyword for that, just emergency paramedics, soldiers for example. The second stage, this taking-note, registering something, another word for it, is for me, if you will, the default of thinking, the standard, the standard application. You consciously notice that something is happening. But what doesn’t happen is a deeper cause-effect analysis, so this questioning “why.” A stimulus arrives and I don’t question why. I only notice, something’s coming, and I perceive it, categorize it, classify it, and file it away. Possibly I file it away to access it later via memory. And then there’s no, let’s say, subsequent consequence toward a concrete action either, transferring thinking into acting. And then comes the third stage, understanding. And that’s, for me, the essential distinction from the two aforementioned potential statuses of thinking, that here a deeper penetration, a conscious, critical thinking and an analysis is triggered. And there we’re basically at the connection to our previous topic, reflection. I explicitly emphasize, critical thinking and analysis go into counter-speech, not simply absorbing the stimulus, but questioning it, in this respect not questioning its existence, but where it comes from and why, and what it can lead to, namely in my subsequent action. And that’s, for me, at my current state, level of knowledge, with the engagement of what is understanding and what is comprehension, so a kind of crutch, precisely through these three delimiting terms, to arrive at an aha-experience and say, yes, I’ve understood. Then, when you go into this depth and also undertake an anticipation of the later action, then I’ve understood. I hope I’ve been able to express myself somewhat clearly, and thank you for listening so long, dear ones.
Yes wonderful, thank you so, so much. Two questions arise for me from this, which I’d like to direct first to you, Jürgen, and then we can gladly bring in Marc again too in the sense of cross-connections, he certainly has thoughts too. On one hand, especially at the talk the day before yesterday, I also had this “how does learning actually even work” again. So how do we store things in our memory, in the various memory stores, so to speak, or how does our brain partly decide whether anything even gets in there or not. And we talked about that, I’ll just summarize it briefly, so that those in the room who weren’t at the talk can also classify and follow this. There are basically various memory stores, and we take in through the senses, hear, see, smell, taste, feel,
and through that learning processes take place at all. That means, signals are converted into electrical impulses via our senses and sent to the respective region in the brain. And during this transmission they basically pass through three memory stores. And these three memory stores, you’ve certainly heard of them, ultra-short-term memory, working memory, previously also known as short-term memory, and long-term memory. And on one hand, this doesn’t just take place in this order or something, even though it’s still sometimes represented incorrectly in textbooks today, but it’s basically an interaction that takes place. That means, an exchange takes place between these various three memory stores, and the information is also passed back and forth. And when these senses are converted and then arrive in this ultra-short-term memory, that’s the first place they arrive, then encoding takes place there, so to speak. That means, it also gets stored, and here it’s decided relatively quickly, in very short time, whether the whole thing gets passed on at all or not. And this time is 0.5 to 2 seconds, and aspects that come in here that don’t seem important to me — so the brain asks itself two questions. First, existence security: does this threaten me, and do I need it in any form? And the second, usually that’s answered with no, unless I have a misinterpretation, in quotation marks, and it’s something foreign that I can’t classify or so, then that can be interpreted as a threat and lead to fear. But usually we don’t have situations in everyday life that are actually life-threatening. That’s why the brain then asks the second question. And the second question is, what use does this have for me? If I see a use in it, then I’m ready to learn and pass on what came in, so to speak, into the working memory, and there it gets further processed, and so on. We don’t need to look at the further levels in detail now. But basically, in this first ultra-short-term memory, where it first hits, so to speak, it’s decided what happens with these signals. And you just said, when you presented that, I file it away possibly, to access it later, but basically haven’t necessarily processed the whole thing yet in this sense, and I’d like to ask, how does that fit together? So can it even be that I store something there that I don’t — so there must already have been some processing in some way that at least gives me a signal that it’s something important or relevant, that brings me a use, otherwise I wouldn’t file it away at all. That’s the first question I’d like to ask you, and maybe let’s look at that first and then we can pick up the second aspect. Jürgen, would you like to add to that?
Yes, mind you, I’m an interested layman, dear Yasemin. The question you’re asking, I was at your presentation and I remember this passage very well, with the differentiation of the individual memory stages. That fits, I think, according to my understanding, actually quite well. This is my interpretation now, that the ultra-short-term memory identifies the stimulus. Basically, the primitive stage of perception. I first have to perceive at all that something is approaching me, that happens. And then I’m of the opinion that in this ultra-short-term memory a categorization already happens. A categorization with regard to, do I process it further or do I reject it? And in the case that I process it further — and here I’m really going onto thin ice, because I’m not a specialist — but I can well imagine that the term itself points to it, working memory, that this transferred, this transferred perception, in this working result gets a further specification with regard to possible connections with others, possibly with experiences, with similarly positioned emotions, or however the perception was, that this happens in this working memory and thus, for me, carries the stamp, is worth filing. To then — and for me the filing, according to my primitive understanding, is then this long-term memory. Because in this long-term memory I need somewhere the possibility, after corresponding tagging or identification, have I experienced this before or was this there before, that must happen. And what I addressed earlier, let me say this briefly, the example, which I didn’t follow through, that I wanted to give taken from life for these three stages, that was actually: you write a new book, dear Yasemin, and you submit it to a library, for inclusion in a library. And through that it runs, for me, this stage, that your work, hardly credibly, gets rejected from the outset as not admissible. And at the taking-note stage, the librarian does exactly that, categorizing the title, assigning it to a corresponding group, a potential readership, and putting it into an archive for retrieval, into a long-term archive. And so I find this great, this bridge you built to these three kinds of memory, which maybe corroborates this three-stage-ness, or made it more transparent for me than I had it five minutes ago. I hope I answered your question.
Oh wonderful. Yes, let me build on that again. So we actually already have the first categorization in the ultra-short-term memory. That means, the categorization happens according to something like, is it interesting or uninteresting, exciting, boring. So that means, and here it already becomes clear that an exchange immediately takes place, so to speak, between the various memory stores. Because I’m allowed now, what comes in there, so to speak, the brain compares that in the working memory. Do I have connecting points here? Can I possibly do something with it? Also the interpretation, in quotation marks, could that be somehow interesting for me? Could I do something with it? Could that bring me a use? And through this first categorization that takes place, then basically immediately, so within two seconds, the decision is made whether this information gets passed on, and whether it’s worth it, in quotation marks, what came in there, to process it in some form and then also file it. And when that comes into the long-term store, then basically learning has taken place. Then we have a learning process. That means, a structural change also takes place in the brain. That’s also really important. And this structural change we’re talking about, those are then these neural networks that develop here, so to speak, these individual strands get longer and connections can also be established. And since it’s something new, in quotation marks, and we’re talking about a new learning process in this context, it’s such that this can also be broken down again within 24 hours. That means, this would give an indication, or a hint, that it’s then not stored there forever, detached and somehow, but it gets directly connected with strands that are already there, where I can dock in. And if I don’t do anything with it within 24 hours, even though this structural change first took place, but it’s something new that came in there, then this strand that was built up also gets broken down again. And all the more important that something happens here within 24 hours. And maybe an example for that too, to make this vivid again. Sometimes we hear certain things and think, wow, super exciting, great, and so on, we’re happy about it. And that actually gets stored, so to speak, with us, because we have the feeling, this gives me something. And then we don’t do anything with it for a while. We’re out of training or whatever, or we heard it in some context. And then time passes. And then at some point we remember it again, so to speak, then we notice, oh, this is somehow, I’ve heard this before. And then it was stored in long-term memory, but the strand has, so to speak, become shorter again. But it’s quite obvious that it was stored, because only what was stored in long-term memory is then also capable of being remembered again, so to speak. So I recognize it again — I wouldn’t remember it at all otherwise. The moment I can remember it, it’s clear that it was stored in the long-term store too, so to speak. We can leave that as is for now and let it sink in. Now the second aspect again that I’d like to pick up. You also brought up the word reflection in this context. I know we want to pick that up again only at the end, this sequence and this order, reflection, thinking, acting, we’ll get back to that. But because we’ve already talked very productively about reflection and noted first insights for ourselves, and are now continuing here with thinking, and the term reflection has now come up in this context with thinking, and specifically mentioned by you now at this second stage, so to speak. And that can of course lead to irritations again, in contrast to us having previously put reflection first. And now it gets really exciting. Now suddenly an enormous complexity comes in. Can we maybe straighten out again some knots or irritations that can now arise, Jürgen? The question directed at you again.
I think I expressed myself incorrectly, dear Yasemin. I don’t see reflection at stage 2. So on — sorry, you mentioned stage 3, right? At my stage 3, taking-note. But at stage 3, understanding. Because you just said I had positioned that at stage 2. No, sorry, let me correct that. You said stage 3. Yes, I just reported it incorrectly. Exactly. I built the bridge because I remembered, and I also traced this in my documentation, that we had worked out that a very essential, the essential aspects of our reflection, our self-reflection especially, besides perspective-generation, besides a strengths-weaknesses analysis of ourselves, is understanding, developing an understanding for the moment I’m in, for example, understanding this moment. That was the bridge for me. And I then also thought about it — it’s still floating around, and it kept coming up for discussion, is reflection a different kind of thinking, a specific kind of thinking, is it a precondition or a resultant quantity, all these positions. Only, I tried, for today’s topic of understanding, to take this resultant quantity away from reflection, to pick it up, and to assign it, in the search for the corresponding stage, to this understanding. And the overarching essential trigger for me saying that, when you reflect, when I go into a self-related inner view, to become clear about something — we had that example with Marc, I think in the second-to-last room, this example where he notices for himself, yes, I’ve understood that, and then he goes into his inner view and reflects and checks himself, have I really understood it, and then determines either, yes, sticks, or, I haven’t understood it. So, and that’s causally the reflection, I hope I can convey this somewhat, reflection is, for me, nothing other than the searching, besides the already mentioned, the searching, that I understand myself, and understand the situation I’m in, and that’s why this assignment. I hope it came across that way, and I’ve answered your question.
There we can gladly still look, if there’s a process chain between reflection, thinking, and acting, at which point would understanding come then? I’d find that really exciting to look at now too. But we can also postpone that if you want. So that would be another important question. Because is it then, if reflection is put first, do I then have understanding before thinking, and then start processing that further in some way? Or is there also — we already noted with reflection that we have different reflection loops in an overall process. Or is that possibly also the case with understanding, Jürgen?
I’m personally of the opinion that reflection, when I decide to reflect, I’m already in a thinking process. So I would, my personal opinion mind you, I would describe reflection as a sub-process, a very special kind of thinking. And specifically in the typical form of self-reflection, without someone else supporting me, or also including others whom I reflect about. So this really conscious encapsulation. There has to be a stimulus for that. There has to be an impulse for me to sit down and say, reflect. And whether I sit down and say “think” is for me X, Y, whatever, that’s actually completely irrelevant. Because I personally think, I mean, that reflection is a sub-area of thinking and thus initializes the thinking process, under certain circumstances or however. Thank you.
Yes wonderful, thank you so, so much. And that possibly fits again with what you said yesterday or the day before, Marc, that you’d read somewhere that there are different specifications in the area of thinking. And one of those is called reflection. So we hold that as a sub-area of thinking, so to speak. And that would then also be a point we can build a bridge with here again. Marc, would you like to add to that, before we gladly bring in Sonja too?
Yes, thanks. Otherwise this would get too scientific for me too, not fully agreed. And let me summarize again very briefly what Jürgen said. Jürgen started with the blockage, with the taking-note. Taking-note isn’t yet a cause,
just registering, taking note, and understanding. It’s easier for me to imagine something. And so again a quick example. I’m imagining right now, about the word blockage — we’re at the airport and there’s a checkpoint. And my brain is the airport inside. And outside is everything that comes at us. And I’d like to add one dimension, and, dear Yasemin, thank you for your explanation. You said, and I fully agree, that our brain always considers what’s it worth to me. And now I have another new dimension, namely the dimension of feelings. And I have to say, my brain doesn’t always ask itself whether it’s worth filing away. Because if that were 100 percent true, I’d also talk to people I don’t like and who don’t represent my opinion at all, because then I’d be open. And that’s exactly this blockage, this check-in point at the airport, sometimes simply decides because we don’t want to, because we’re not willing at all to listen, through the rejection. The blockage arises through the rejection, without knowing what thoughts are coming. Per se it’s rejected. And I can’t know at all whether the information is worth filing or not. And I also listen to my partner sometimes. I don’t even know yet whether that’s valuable information or not. Then I simply decide, well, that might be worth it for me too. If she has the feeling I’m closed off, the weekend is more harmonious if I’m not impolite. But sometimes I also don’t do that anymore. I simply reject things. And that’s why — I’d like to get back to the topic, thinking, understanding. For me, understanding also includes this process, that we know: when we’re rejecting, when we’re not open, and when attention isn’t there, then this check-in point at the airport is closed. If that’s not given at all, so I can pass through this check-in point, it has to be open, and whoever stands there as guard, my brain, must not be distracted. I can’t talk with you all on the side and simultaneously write a book and so on. So full concentration and openness. That would be my contribution again. I’m glad you’re with us too today, dear Sonja.
Yes, thank you so, so much for picking up the aspect with emotions. And there I’d like to clarify, so to speak, maybe I expressed myself ambiguously, that this storage process with memory storing doesn’t primarily have to do with us actively, quite consciously asking ourselves the question, does this bring me a use or something? But that actually happens fully automated, in the background, completely unconsciously, and has nothing to do with this conscious reflecting or such at first. But it’s completely emotion-guided at this point, and connects to prior experiences and also to information that’s stored, in the form of knowledge, in the form of experiences we’ve made, lived, that have maybe become tangible for us, etc. Really within the shortest time, the brain decides, based on these prior experiences, which are of course also connoted, positive, negative, maybe traumas that happened once in the past and so on. And this process is so fully automated and in such fast time that this plays out. I said earlier, so even just this first memory storage area, the decisions made here, within 0.5 to 2 seconds, that’s really lightning-fast, so to speak. That means, this isn’t something we steer actively here in any form, or actively consciously ask ourselves this question, does this bring me a use, but our brain does that fully automated in the background. It’s just important for us to know that these processes take place in this form. Because the moment I know that, and the moment I have a resultant quantity from it, and any evaluations, interpretations, gut feelings that can be derived from it, then I have the possibility, against the background that I know how this process ran, to check that again, quite deliberately, actively, consciously, for example with a reflection I then do on the cognitive level. And through that I get into self-efficacy, so to speak. And that’s why it’s incredibly important to be able to follow exactly these processes that run in the background, at this point. Great. So that’s really important again, to understand that in this context too. Sonja, a very good morning. I’m curious about your additions.
A very good morning to the group. Yes, this is super exciting to listen to you all, and I’m a bit surprised that one point hasn’t been mentioned so explicitly yet, namely that all this processing costs an incredible amount of energy. And if the energy isn’t even available already in the working memory, then all the downstream processes will fall short or not take place at all. And that’s why it’s worth taking a look at how this working memory is even energetically supplied, and whether it’s supplied at all. If I take a phone battery as a parallel example. We have a few apps on our smartphones that use up much more battery than other apps. And we then simply can’t use those as long as apps that use less battery. And making yourself aware of something is an activity that uses up a lot of battery. And not just making yourself aware of something, but also wanting to understand it, and also wanting to reflect, so also putting it in relation to other information and experiences, uses even more battery, and very quickly this battery is completely empty, and then we first have to go into power-saving mode, or the phone shuts off, and then no processes take place at all anymore. So the bottleneck is this very first store, and if that hasn’t been properly emptied, because for example we slept badly, aren’t rested, then the intake capacity of this working memory is extremely low. And then, even if we’re maybe intelligent people, we’re not able to understand, understand simple things. And we notice that on days when we’re exhausted, tired, when we have a lot of emotional things to process, or when just too many stimuli reach us, then we’re sometimes not able to make the simplest connections, understand the simplest things. And that’s why it’s so essential that we pay attention to good sleep hygiene, that we learn to differentiate stimuli too. Because if we don’t do that, then all stimuli get analyzed and evaluated by the same elaborate processes. And then there’s simply far too little left to establish real understanding. And yes, this aspect, this battery of the working memory, I wanted to bring that in for sure. And as far as I know, this, one calls it the frontal-brain battery, is most likely to be found in our hippocampus, if you work with a model there. And there the working memory is definitely very limited, and there are some substances that deposit, which get broken down at night through sleep. And if not enough sleep takes place, then these deposit substances unfortunately are still present in the hippocampus, and have to be removed later with the next cleanup crew. And as long as that hasn’t happened, we’re not able to process new information in the same quantity and quality either. I hope that wasn’t too complicated. Just remember the example with the phone battery, I think everyone can follow that. Thank you.
Yes, wonderful. Thank you so, so much, also for the vivid depiction, because I think that makes it very, very clear in this context too. And maybe also briefly on the energy. Ultimately, even in the resting state, the brain already uses 20 percent of energy. That’s the background. And exactly as you said, Sonja, our brain would basically explode if it constantly processed everything with the same intensity. And here it’s about — so our brain is programmed for survival, so to speak. It’s about securing existence. It’s really about life or death, simply to keep the person alive, so to speak, to keep itself alive. And because we use so much energy, even in this resting state, it’s necessary to differentiate everything that comes crashing in on us, so to speak, and simply see, do I need this in some form or not. And everything I process in some form uses a lot of energy. And that’s why, to conserve my battery, I have to look accordingly at what it’s actually worth doing something with. So everything that would secure survival has absolute priority. And second comes this use-aspect. There we can nicely build the bridge again. And it makes it plausible again how the brain is programmed, and according to which prioritizations and categorizations it works to a degree here too, and so wonderful. The only thing, maybe you can say something about that again, so there’s no misunderstanding, I don’t know now whether that’s general with this battery, or whether it’s specifically directed at one of the memories, because you talked about the working memory and talked about the first stage, but the first stage is the ultra-short-term memory. Can you say something about that, or should we leave that relatively open and say we don’t know, so we don’t need to say anything wrong, only if you know exactly can we go into that again.
So I don’t know exactly whether the ultra-short-term memory is also located in the hippocampus, if you can even locate it that precisely. But with the working memory area I’m very sure that we essentially have activity in the hippocampus there. And that’s decisive for whether we let the information through into consciousness at all first. Because conscious thinking, becoming aware, simply requires much more energy than just this unconscious weighing you just described. That has to happen constantly, because otherwise the brain can’t cover its basic function of securing our survival. And becoming conscious is already quite a heavy decision for the brain, whether that’s worth it or not. Do I even have to bring this into consciousness, or can I smuggle it past consciousness and the processes still run and I still live on. And in the moment where we’re very exhausted, it’s much, much more just about, do I survive or not survive, then only these basics get checked. But if I’m nicely awake, then I also have much more capacity available to pursue this use-question more precisely. And then I can think much more differentiatedly. I can hold the information in the working memory for a while, to network it together, to then even transfer it into the next memory store at all. It doesn’t need to be transferred directly into long-term memory yet, for example to follow a conversation. That actually only becomes necessary if I also want to remember in the evening what was talked about in the morning at Deep Talk Club. Then I have to spend a bit more energy and have to try to network that better internally. And all this networking, that costs energy again too. And if the pathways already exist, it costs less energy than if I first have to build these pathways. So it’s all basically a question of energy expenditure. I don’t know if that answers the question enough, but it goes in that direction at least.
Yes, thank you so, so much. And I also don’t know whether science, so to speak, or neuroscience at this point can actually already clarify these questions so clearly. And you said it so nicely, you also have to look at where exactly that’s located in the brain. And often it’s also not just one area, but through these interactions that also take place, overall it’s about energy consumption. I think we can also say that generally then. And then we’re on the safe side, in quotation marks. And we don’t need to locate or specify it that precisely at this point either. I think the principle at least has become clear. And that’s what’s important here. And also the relevance now of what you also mentioned, like sleep for example. And I’d like to pick that up too and build the bridge. Because yesterday, actually, after we closed the room, I thought, oh, we didn’t think of sleep at all. To mention that again too with the aspect of influencing factors with regard to thinking, because we’d also picked up things like sport and nutrition on the side, for example. But we had, I think, already mentioned that with sleep in the context of the first approach, if I’m not mistaken. If we forgot to mention it, all the nicer that it came up again just now, because it makes this relevance clear again, and that we build the bridge here again, so to speak, and also underline again that sleep, precisely to recharge our batteries etc. and to be able to have healthy thinking processes, to be able to bring energy, to be able to use the battery sufficiently, for example over the day, that this is also a really important factor at this point, an influencing quantity too in the sense of whether thinking can even take place at all, and which resultant quantities can be derived from it. Jürgen, I saw you wanted to add something too.
Yes, I didn’t want to miss giving Sonja a thumbs up for her contribution. We can splendidly discuss how a machine functions. But without fuel, without energy supply, no machine functions. So a really important point. And an experiment occurred to me that has a certain fame and supports your thesis. Not your thesis, but it is fact — supports how important energy provision is for comprehension, for understanding, all the way to the dimensions of empathic intelligence. It’s an experiment that was conducted, I believe in the 90s,
with judges, who were given very specific verdicts, specific and standardized verdicts for decision, and specifically in situations or at points in time immediately before eating, when they were hungry, and after eating. And that sounds really trivial now, but the understanding for the delinquent, this searching and analyzing and also going into a reflection, did I really understand correctly, did I correctly classify his motives for this act — those were quite different, and basically actually reflected with a status after eating compared to the verdicts before eating. And you might picture the dimension of how important it is again just to know, just to know that the body also thinks along. Thanks again for your contribution, and thanks for listening.
Yes wonderful, and there are actually many, many more studies on this too, also in application processes for example, whether, in the selection, whether that’s an applicant or whether you look at the documents, whether you have a warm drink or a cold drink, that also has effects on that. So that’s very, very exciting and also actually shows this complexity of the topic at this point. And I’d also like to underline that again. That means, again and again, when we pick up such aspects, also from brain research, that we break it down again and again, to reduce the complexity, so to speak, and basically also to present processes and such. And that there are then always different influencing quantities, so to speak, on these processes that take place. And on one hand it’s basically so simple, and on the other hand it’s then so complex again, because there are so many different factors that can also, in quotation marks, form different directions again, and that’s also why it explains why, even though so much can also be explained by science in many places, that when you then have it in application, you can also transfer a lot in doing, precisely through these learning processes we just discussed today. But still, certain things remain — so we can put an input in, in the hope that a certain output might arise from it. But we can’t necessarily always influence everything that then happens in this, I’ll call it black box now, or which factors run into it. Then that has something to do with the individual, which prior experiences are there, whether it takes, whether it doesn’t take, is evaluated as interesting or not. That’s individually different, even if it’s the same information, fed in through the same sensory channels and so on. So that different things come out again at the end in the resultant quantity, in the sense of, do I decide to go into action now, how do I behave, and so on. And there it becomes clear that I can indeed, if I understand the processes running in the background, so to speak, increase a certain probability that something can take, but I always have to wait and see what the result is, in order to then possibly change my input quantity again, so to speak. Marc, Jürgen, Sonja, would you like to add to that? Gladly, Sonja, then Marc.
I wanted to bring up a really important point about the sleep point again. Because how important sleep is for our thinking and our performance capability is so often underestimated. And we then often discuss the duration of sleep and also connect quality with that. That we say, for example, a good manager only needs five hours of sleep. I strongly disagree with that. Because as far as I know, there are two phases in sleep in which information gets processed. I don’t mean the deep-sleep phase now. I mean this process, that in one half of the night we sort the information. And in the other half, all the little notes attached to this information get tidied up. And if that second half is missing, then all the little notes, like you get at the deli counter, are still lying there the next day too. And then you have to distinguish them from the new little notes that come in. That’s much harder then. And then we’re just not able to be as capable the next day, with little sleep, as the day before. And then that worsens our productivity, our thinking capacity, and the quality of our thinking generally. That’s why I wanted to strongly advocate here again for sufficient sleep, and not just a bit of sleep. It’s really as Jürgen said, energy supply through eating, through sleeping, that’s essential, has an essential influence on how well we think, and also — important point by the way, I found that great, Jürgen — how capable of empathy we are, and that of course has a big influence on how well our society functions. If we have a society full of empaths, it’ll be shaped differently than if we have a society that’s less empathic. And when we’re tired, we’re simply the worse decision-makers, and that’s then also the worse society. So everyone should sleep more, at their own discretion. Thank you.
Thank you so, so much. Marc.
Yes, I want to go back to what Jürgen said before, and I called it checking in, with the blockage, and I’m happy if this is also then a closing word once we get to the topics understanding and communication. For me, the word emotion, that plays a significant role. Our brain avoids energy and doesn’t feel like dealing with things, and it became clear to me again, dear Sonja, through your contribution, how, if you also understand politics, many have so much stress with their family just to survive, that there’s simply no time left to spend that many emotions, to spend that much energy. And if then someone stands in front of us who says, I’ll take care of everything, you don’t need to worry about anything, and they only manage — not that we understand things, but that they awaken our emotions and we just trust them — we don’t need to think about it anymore. To be empathic, you also have to question, you also have to understand. And I keep observing that communication in politics and also in business isn’t aimed at understanding, but that it’s easier for us to awaken emotions, because the processes we want to achieve with that happen much, much faster than if we wait for the other person to understand it. This knowledge also helps in communication and in empathy. Thank you for the topic, dear Yasemin. I’m starting into the weekend today, like every day, whether sun or not, with a smile, and I wish you a relaxed, great, exciting weekend, however you imagine that. Warm regards.
Yes, wonderful, thank you so much. Then let’s gladly continue with the closing word. And afterward I’d like to pick up two points from the chat, to round off the room for today and announce tomorrow. Jürgen.
Fantastic room, fantastic contributions, and heartfelt thanks for that, dear Sonja, dear Marc, and to you, dear Yasemin, always again with this profound connection with regard to our neural — my god, let me get this out — our being in this sub-area of how our brain functions. And I personally take away a really important insight for myself, which was discussed again, you said it, just the knowledge that something like this exists, that we function this way, already makes an immense contribution to an understanding. And so, I keep saying it, the choice of topics and the connection of the individual topics you offer is such an important contribution, not just to absorbing knowledge, but basically also to getting to the level of understanding and comprehension. Heartfelt thanks again for that, and I wish you a nice weekend.
Yes wonderful, thank you so, so much, Sonja. Yes, I can really only agree with that. I find it great how this differentiation of these topics, that you provide us here in the rooms, contributes to us understanding much more. Because just the knowledge that things exist, and how complex all of that is, expands our understanding and our comprehension, makes us gentler. It makes us gentler with ourselves and with others, and I find that a huge enrichment, and I thank you for that, dear Yasemin, from the bottom of my heart, and I’m really happy to hear these contributions, especially also from Marc and Jürgen, because you two shape the room significantly, and that always encourages me to join in, or even to dial in at all. That’s really great. Thank you so, so much, and I wish you a wonderful weekend.
Yes, wonderful. Thank you so, so much from my side too. A really great, enriching room, I find, with many connections we established today. Many examples, many follow-up questions, critical questioning at this point, and joint reflecting, to really be able to hold onto various results with impulses that come in. And I’d actually like to pick up two more things here too. Ismail meanwhile asked the AI. I assume it might be ChatGPT, but that’s just an assumption. In any case: the exact location of the ultra-short-term memory isn’t clearly defined or localized. The temporal processing in the brain is a complex process that encompasses multiple regions and neural networks. Could the AI be right? I’m always a bit careful, because we know the AI sometimes interprets too, and sometimes, if you’re not a hundred percent sure, it’s better to check again, so to speak. But it basically fits with what we also said. So, I think we can also leave that relatively open here, and, in the sense of avoiding error, so to speak, whenever we’re not sure, better put it forward as a thesis in the room. And you can gladly go check that yourselves afterward too. By now we find an incredible amount online too, so that we can also research that accordingly afterward, as long as one or another has the desire and time for it. And the other aspect, I don’t know if it was exactly about the recordings. Specifically, it was asked again where you can listen again to the recordings from the room. And on one hand, you can find quite generally, on all sorts of podcast channels, whether that’s Spotify or otherwise, we’ve put up all the recordings from Deep Talk, categorized by author breakfasts, expert talks, dailies, and so on. If you want to check again, you can also — especially for the dailies, these daily rooms — we’ve definitely put those up too, with some time delay, about 14 days in between, quite deliberately too, so that the attractiveness is maintained of actually being there live, on one hand to participate in the interaction, above all to be able to ask questions and so on. Quite deliberately, so to speak, there’s also a certain time shift built in, about 14 days. And it then also gets put up on the website yaseminyazan.com, so my first name, my last name, and then dot com. And then under the tab blog, that should be it. Let me check in parallel that I’m not saying anything wrong. I mean it’s under blog. There you also find neuro news, by the way, that you find there. Then we also have the book tips there and so on. So it’s worth checking in there again and again anyway. And exactly, that’s the tab blog. And under that you also find the dailies, just the dailies. The other formats you always find on various pages. And that’s why, there you can also look again. Generally we also have a Deep Talk Club page. So there too, for example, author breakfasts can also be found there, and so on. So depending on what your preference is. There are also links given there for the most-visited various podcast channels. But it doesn’t make sense to share a specific link now, because everyone, depending on who uses Spotify, will probably rather listen via Spotify. Others might like to listen on YouTube, it’s also posted there. So we have countless channels where you can find that. But if you remember deeptalkclub.com, that’s written as one word, you’ll find further information there, and the dailies, the daily recordings, you’ll find on my website under the blog tab. Exactly. And then tomorrow we have our author breakfast, which I’m also totally looking forward to. And specifically we’re expecting Dr. Susanne Lapp. That’s actually my trainer, with whom I went through several different NLP trainings. And she wrote the big handbook for the systemic NLP practitioner and coach. Already in the second edition, because the first sold out very quickly. And so I’m really looking forward to looking at the topic of NLP with her tomorrow too, under this overarching topic of thinking, so to speak. And we’ve also agreed, and I know she’s bringing something, she’ll also bring something from NLP, to actually let you all apply a method or technique in that area too, so that we basically also have a kind of practical exercise right along with it. I don’t know exactly what she’s bringing. I left that totally open. I’m totally curious and myself totally curious too. So I think it’ll be very, very exciting. Tomorrow, you’re gladly welcome to join at 8am if you have time and desire. Otherwise you can also, again with some time delay, so to speak, listen to the recording afterward. But I think it’s definitely worth it to be there tomorrow morning too. In this sense. Thank you so, so much to all of you, both those who participate here on stage, always bringing in valuable contributions again. Also the contributions via chat are totally important. And of course we’re also happy about the listeners who are always here until the end. Leaving emojis, like now with the little hearts. Thank you. Also as feedback, so to speak. And yes, and that’s how it’s fun together too. And so I’m looking forward to welcoming you again tomorrow morning at 8am here. Until then. Ciao.
