Originally Posted by Nephrology
Quite the opposite. I think those who have the most helpful suggestions for improving one's ability with a firearm don't know much more about the brain than the fact that it sits between your ears.
Similarly, while I trust a neurologist would be able to help me read a head CT, I don't really think they will have a lot of insight on how to improve my dry fire practice. (A neuroscientist can't even help me with the CT, let alone my firearms training... )
Those who I really don't trust are those who don't understand the science (which is OK, I think most of neuroscience is made up anyway) but enthusiastically apply it to their topic of interest regardless. I think most of the neuroscience of behavior type stuff that has any practical application to daily life (guns or otherwise) is going to be common sense (you get better at things by doing them a lot? You don't say!). I don't need the psychobabble.
Those who I really trust and pay careful attention to speak plainly. They say what they mean, as simply as they can, and let the message speak for itself. It is shooting after all - not brain surgery
I think we are saying the same thing but in different ways.
But as to your last line, while it is not brain surgery some things are counter intuitive. I had the pleasure of following 1100 people for about 6 years, 5 years full time. I didn't realize at first what being able to actually follow the development of hundreds of people could show. A couple trends I saw led me to have a few different ideas that common sense wanted us to believe. Some things are just as they appear. Some are not. Some of those that are counter intuitive really don't matter that much. And a few of those that are counter intuitive actually matter for particular processes in the brain. Meaning you have to get a bit geeky and think about it a bit past common sense because failure to do so can really screw a shooter up.
Reply With Quote