Mindfulness versus Humility and the Three Constructs: A Critical Analysis, Part 1
Work the Problem
The fundamental flaw in mindfulness practices in general and commodified mindfulness especially lies in the misperception that mindfulness practices effectively focus on sensory information (observations) as individuals experience each input. To be clear, observations are any form of perceived sensory information. Critical thinking analysis examines why the "in the moment" approach cannot address the continuous movement of sensory information. A 2024 study published in the science journal Neuron estimates the human brain only processes 10bits/s of sensory information that is being collected at 109 bits/s.[1]
This profound difference between information collection and processing capacity demonstrates why moment-by-moment mindfulness cannot effectively engage with the continuous flow of sensory information. This insight challenges the foundational premise of traditional mindfulness approaches and suggests the need for a more sophisticated understanding of expanded consciousness and sensory processing.
Proponents of mindfulness practices, especially those selling their version of the practice, will cite numerous studies that detail measured brain activity during meditation compared to typical daily brain function. Researchers have credibly documented the impact of meditation on neural activity. But meditation driven influence on brain activity is at the low end of the spectrum in consciousness expansion. The data is only relevant to the “brain barrier” mode of lesser consciousness.
The Continuity of Sensory Processing
Sensory information or experience does not flow in moments. No measurable time span delineates the movement of sensory information. Observations occur and we experience them in a continuum, rather than discrete moments. The expanded human consciousness system is aware of every sensory input that populates the continuum.
Since most of the human species operate from the “brain barrier” or lesser consciousness, our capacity to perceive and process multiple streams of information simultaneously and continuously is functionality disabled. We limit ourselves to observing a finite amount of data at any point in the continuum. The sensory inputs that get our attention are those with enough impact to trigger an emotional response. If someone is observing two people arguing, the emotional response of the observer might be anger. If a child playing with a dog is simultaneously present in this scenario, the anger experienced in the first interaction inhibits the observer’s capacity to process the observation of the child. The depth of our ego-bias framework multiplies the intensity of the sensory impact. The force of anger triggered by the arguing adults is causal to thoughts that construct an event-based inner dialogue. The inner dialogue becomes an extended observation by which more emotions will be generated.
The Fallacy of Momentary Response
The mindfulness paradigm misunderstands the engagement and aim of humility and the three constructs (gratitude, compassion, harmony). This limitation becomes especially clear when considering:
The speed at which sensory information arrives
The overlapping nature of perceptual experiences
The complex interplay between different sensory inputs
The continuous nature of emotional responses
The ego-bias factor in sensory information processing
The speed of the sensory input that triggers an emotion, and then the emotion instigating a thought is incomprehensible. What’s the central issue from a mindfulness perspective? The observation, the emotion, or the thought? Or all the above? What is the pivotal point?
The mindfulness approach was a component of an informative 2014 Scientific American article. “Mindfulness, or open-monitoring meditation, requires the meditator to take note of every sight or sound and track internal bodily sensations and inner self-talk.”[2]
The contemporary emphasis on mindfulness practices presents a theoretical and practical challenge when examined against the actual mechanics of sensory information processing. The temporal gap between sensory stimulation and collateral thought suggests that any attempt at mindfulness intervention addresses post-event impact rather than causal moments. Emotional responses generate immediate energetic projections that influence the broader consciousness field. An individual cannot “mindfulness” their way out of that reality.
This energetic component has several important implications:
In the absence of inner work and consciousness expansion, the instantaneous nature of energetic projection means that emotional energy affects the consciousness horizon before any possibility of conscious intervention.
Once projected, emotional energy creates ripple effects throughout the consciousness field that cannot be retroactively nullified through mindful attention.
The energetic disturbance occurs at a fundamental level that precedes cognitive awareness or potential intervention.
The key is to embrace a method that preempts conflicting emotional responses. The constraints rooted in mindfulness practices bring focus to the necessity for practical objectivity and a critical thinking perspective on the purpose behind humility, gratitude, compassion, and harmony.
Mindfulness versus Humility and the Three Constructs: A Critical Analysis, Part 2
[1] The unbearable slowness of being: Why do we live at 10 bits/s?
[2] Neuroscience Reveals the Secrets of Meditation’s Benefits