In an effort not to completely hijack the book recommendation thread, I'm taking this discussion to a new thread.
The discussion started here:
I'm pulling my post that I consider most pertinent to this, but I suggest reading the whole thread to get the full picture.
Of course it doesn't to you...you are not mono wired.
What one mind reads as a guide to enable you to realize something, the other mind interprets it as a potential threat. It's really quite simple that two people can interpret the same stimulus differently.
If a punch is thrown at the average person on the street it is usually seen as a pretty threatening thing that elicits a defensive response.
If a punch is thrown at a trained fighter it is viewed as a stimulus that elicits an offensive response.
Ok, as a person who works in special needs education and therapy and has a certain amount of knowledge in the area of brain wiring, I have to call bullshit on that. Sorry for the harsh words but there is nothing to suggest that a mono wired mind would see the world as differently as you claim or that something that clearly doesn't make sense only doesn't make sense to me because I'm not mono-wired (which I dispute anyway...I'm not wired either way). Yes, two people can interpret the same stimulus differently but it is a huge and unsupported leap to chalk that difference to being mono wired or poly wired. You can say that it's just how your mono mind sees things, but that would have more to do with flawed reasoning than having a mono mind.
First of all the fighting analogy you use doesn't apply to your claim because a person isn't wired as a fighter. They are trained. So if you're going to use that example, you're essentially arguing against your own "wired" argument.
Second, to chalk such differences of understanding up to wiring is a cop out. It's a way to absolve a person of the responsibility of having to take the effort to stretch and understand broader ways to view things.