So called "instinctive" vs conscious aiming

[Aaron Proffitt 2]

Truth be known,I never knew I was a split-vision shooter until I was told I was.Now,that I know I conciously do it(sorta) I suppose my shooting has improved. Not sure where that puts me.

[BLACK WOLF]

The only time when 'how an archer aims' should be important to someone...is when they are teaching or learning.

No one has an unfair advantage in competition if they are following the rules...but that isn't saying that some aiming techiniques won't have any advantages over another aiming techinques.

Bottom line...the archer is the one pulling the string and it's up to them to find out what works best for them...but if the archer does a little research...the info they will find should help them choose what aiming system is more likely to increase their accuracy for their particular goals.

I personally would never recommend that an archer try to aim instinctively if they want to compete in an event similar to an American Round while trying to group arrows at long distances. Just as I wouldn't recommend Point of Aim to an archer wanting to hit moving targets.

It always amuses me how some people get so bent out of shape about a word that describes a particular aiming techinique....especially on some of the other websites  

Ray  

[J-KID]

Just to further confuse things. . .

An instinct is a "fixed action pattern" that an organism is born with.  It is inate or inherent in the organism at birth and all species of a kind have the same instincts.  In animals, these can be very complex and even animals raised in isolation will exhibit these instincts when the correct stimulus is presented.  Psychologist are in some disagreement as to whether humans possess any instincts.

Instincts should not be confused with reflexes.  Humans and animals both possess reflexes which are very different from instincts.  Cut off a chickens head and the body will run.  No brain functioning is associated with a reflex response.  When the doctor taps your knee the impulse travels to your spinal cord and makes a u-turn back down your leg and causes it to rise.  A second impulse is sent up to the brain telling it what is going on and the brain sends a response impulse down to stop the knee from rising.  The amount of leg movement tells the doctor how long it took the second impulse to get to the brain and a response impulse to get back again and tells the doctor how well the central nervous system if functioning.  Most people think that if your leg doesn't rise it is a bad sign.  If that happens the doc will just hit you again till it does.  What we don't want to see is too much leg movement because that tells us that the second impulse was stopped somewhere in the central nervous system and probably indicates a spinal injury or disease.

So, even if humans do possess some instincts, instinctive archery is not really instinctive because we are not born with the "fixed action patter" of draw-release without thinking that is stimulated by a bow in one hand and a string in the other.

Instinctive shooting is about proprioceptive discrimination (knowing where parts of your body are in space) or what many would call hand/eye coordination but it's much more than just your hand and eyes.  Instinctive shooting is about transferring a behavior from a conscious level to a subconscious level.  Some gifted people start out with less to transfer.  Many people could throw a baseball to a catcher from the pitchers mound.  Other, like Cincinnati Mayor Mallory can't!  He would have much more work to do to transfer info from the conscious level to the subconscious level.

So there really is no such thing as instinctive shooting.  I had a difficult time putting that in the title of my book because it perpetuates incorrect information but that was a battle not worth waging.  The type of archery we do, be it gap shooting or "burn a hole in the spot" shooting falls somewhere on a continuum between conscious and subconscious.  I've discovered that to the degree I can get my attention down range,  on the target, to that degree I will be successful.  When my attention is back where I am at all I faulter.  Others are different.

No archer is a "true instinctive" shooter (since you are not born with the ability) so the argument there is a moot point.  Some are pure "subconscious" shooters like me and some mix "conscious and subconscious" like a gap shooter.

We are all part of a brotherhood of archers with the individual freedom to release the arrow in a manner that fulfills.

Just some thoughts to further the conversation.

[BLACK WOLF]

Very few people believe that 'instinctive aiming' refers to an ability that we are born with, although some aspects of 'instinctive aiming' such as pointing and basic hand and eye coordination are often discussed as possibly being true instincts.

It always amazes me how some people get so bent out of shape over a name...and I'm not saying you are at all Jay. I pretty much completely agree with what you said above....except when you say there is no such thing as instinctive shooting.

Instinctive aiming exists. You may disagree with the name it was given...but it still exists as a seperate yet similar way to aim a bow without sights.

Instinctive aiming is just the name a specific aiming style was given that is different from gap, point of aim or some of the other barebow aiming techiniques.

Further study into semantics will reveal that the word 'instinct' can apply to an aiming style due to a portion of it's definition based on one of the longest running dictionaries of the English language.

Just because part of the definition applies does not mean every part applies.

Merriam Webster - INSTINCT - 1 : a natural or inherent aptitude, impulse, or capacity - had an instinct for the right word.

Language is a learned behavior. If a person can have an instinct for the right word...an archer can have an instinct for the right sight picture, which is also a learned behavior or ability.

2 a : a largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason b : behavior that is mediated by reactions below the conscious level.

Part of the aiming process while aiming instinctively is executed below the conscious level. The subconscious plays a huge role while aiming instinctively. The only thing that an instinctive archer is consciously doing during the aiming process is picking the spot they want to hit and putting their complete concentration into that spot.

Furthermore 'instinctive' can also mean arising spontaneously or relating to instinct, which can mean 'instinct like'.

We can argue all day about the semantics of the word...but one thing that should be understood is that aiming instinctively is NOT exactly the same as the other barebow aiming techiniques. It's different just as gap is different from point of aim, so it requires a seperate name to help define it, which indicates it exists as a different and unique way to aim a bow and arrow.

I think the words 'reflexive' or 'intuitive' actually may define it a little more accurately but I surely don't feel any need to change it's name.

Instinctive aiming is totally fine by me        

Ray      

[J-KID]

I surely don't want to change the name.  I like the ring of "instinctive" shooting or archery.  We just need to make sure that we know that it is "instinct like."  That is a good, and accurate way to say it.  Both of your definitions for instinctive include the idea of an "inherent" ability which is not learned.  What we do (hand/eye coordination etc.) is learned, even though we may have learned much of it somewhere else.  Some are even predisposed neurologically to have better faculties for shooting than others. All I care about is that we realize that instinctive shooting is not instinct.  It is a learned behavior.  I like the "instinct like" because it does become second nature.  If it were first nature it would not have to "become" and therefore would be instinct.  (Okay, I'm not going back there again)

I think that conceptualizing a continuum

CONSCIOUS ---------------------- SUBCONSCIOUS

and then realizing that everyone falls somewhere on that continuum is a good way to think of it.  People fall somewhere on that continuum.  A compound shooter with sights and a very mechanical style falls strongly to the left.  An instinct like shooter falls strongly to the right.  That is where I always want to be, however, I do find myself slipping to the left sometimes and my shooting suffers.

[BLACK WOLF]

Jay,

Great post.

I'm curious...Name some specific things that you believe are an ineherent instinct.

Do you believe a fawn flees from danger based on instinct or is it a learned behavior...or is it a combination of both?

Do you believe we pull away from fire as our hands get near it based on instinct?

Can inherent instincts be improved upon?

Can pointing be an instinct or based on instinct?

What do you make of Merrian Webster using 'instinct' in the sentence "had an instinct for the right word"?

If communication or language is an inherent instinct why couldn't pointing be an inherent ability?

Do you believe meanings of words can evolve?

Ray  

[J-KID]

I don't think humans possess instincts.  We do possess reflexes that do not require brain activity.  If we do have instincts they are no where near as complex as animals.  We typically refer to them as "fixed action patterns" in animals becuase of this complexity.  Your fawn example is a good example.  When a fawn is separated from it's mother is bawls for a period of time to call the mother back.  If that doesn't work it will go to a high point where it can overlook the area and lay down motionless for as much as a couple days.  If the mother comes back to the area the fawn is waiting.  If a predator heard the bawls from the fawn the fawn is now in a position to see the predator first.

A more complex example would be a gray legged goose that lays its eggs on top of a mound.  If an egg rolls off the mound when the goose is feeding, the goose will hook the egg under its bill and walk backward up the mound, roll it back into its place and settle down on the eggs.  If the egg rolls from under the bill, halfway up the mound the goose will not stop and go get it.  The goose will watch it roll down as it continues its backward movement all the way into the sitting position on the eggs.  If we tape a piece of fishing line to the egg and continue to pull it away from the goose on every trip up the mound the goose will not learn to stop and go get the egg.  It will continue to go through the fixed action pattern over and over till exhaustion.

Moving our hands from fire is learned at an early age.  Kids are forever touching hot things.  They learn through operant learning (punishment) not to do it again. Or they learn from the parents warning (negative reinforcement).

We know that pointing is learned through observation and trial and error at an early age.

Communication and language is not inherent other than we are wired to learn it.  I did not like my psycholinguistics course, however, we know that we are wired to be predisposed to learn language quickly.  A child raised in isolation would never learn language.  An animal raised in isolation with no opportunity to learn will still exhibit its natural instincts.  It will also be able to communicate with like kind if put in that situation.

Can inherent instincts be improved on?  I'd say no because we probably don't have instincts.  We do have predispositions or gifts that we can develop.  This is the result of our unique neural wiring.  That's why it is important to help kids identify their gifts or strengths.  So they can develop them.  Many of us had a gift for archery but did not discover it till later in life.

To say someone had an "instinct for the right word" is figurative.

The meanings of words can evolve and the dictionary often changes definitions to accomodate changes in language.  In science, however, we need concrete terminology to work with and keep close tabs on our definitions.

I think calling it instinctive shooting is fine as long as we realize it is somewhat figurative.

I feel like I'm in Intro to Psych class, only your questions are better!

By the way, psychologists are not always right but we do test these hypothesis as best as we can scientifically to find something near the truth.

[Benha]

I shoot like NDTerminator except I never shot gap consciously. My daughter who is eleven has so much natural talent she amazes me. I do believe she shoots so well because she doesn't know she shouldn't be able to. She was born with the ability.

[BLACK WOLF]

I believe we do have instincts. I really don't understand why we wouldn't based on the fact that we too are animals...except we have a higher capacity to learn than other animals and have the abilty to improve upon those instincts.

I believe behaviors, gifts, talents and/or abilities can be passed on genetically which therefore are inherent.

Gestures, body language and tone of voice are all forms of communication that we or other animals can exhibit. Those are some of the ways of how we communicate with other people that speak a different language.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree  

But the one thing we do seem to agree on is that 'instinctive aiming is a uniquely different way to aim a barebow that requires a seperate name to describe it other than just barebow aiming, gap aiming or point of aim.

Ray  

[J-KID]

I'd say less than 10% of psychologists, neurologists and physiologists believe humans have instincts like animals.  And I am sure that percentage is very generous.  I did some research on this one time and found only a few supporters of the idea that we had any fixed action patterns.  The primary example they cited was "separation anxiety" that infants demonstrate.  When taken to day care they often cry violently then become lethargic for the rest of the day.  That is similar to what a fawn does.  That's about the only example they cite.

Ray hit on a valuable point regarding instinctive shooting.  He stated that his daughter "shoots so well because she doesn't know she shouldn't be able to."  I really believe we are often our own worst enemy when it comes to instinctive shooting.  The more we think, analyze and machanize the worse we get.  If we can have the faith of a little child, so to speak, and just feel the shot we do much better.  The conscious mind has to get it into the subconscious but once it's there the conscious needs to stay out of the way.  That's hard to do sometimes.

[BLACK WOLF]

I believe the reason why we don't have any FIXED action patterns is because we have a greater ability to adapt, learn and change those patterns where as other animals don't or don't to the degree we can.

Your goose example is a perfect example to me as how we as humans have a greater capacity to learn and make changes where as lower animals aren't able to as well.

I COMPLETELY agree with your explanation on sports performance and the subconscious. In most cases the elite athletes are the one's who don't have to consciously think about the mechanics of their chosen activity.

If a mixed martial artist has to consciously think about how to execute a move or a strike...the chances of the movement failing are greatly increased.

Ray  

[GroundHunter]

Hoooooo... Boy! the Saducees and Pharisees will come out to rightly devide the words and their meaning. For the purposes of transmitting archery proficiency and knowledge to "yee seekers" of such proficiency and knowledge, some of us (whether we are vetrans or new discoverers of this wonder) offer the words "instictive shooting", tell you stories, show you videos,pictures of 1-inch groups at 20 yards, and 4 inch groups shot at 10,20, 30 and 40 yards sucessively while walking backwards, and try to explain how it's done. How we do it. Yet, some will argue with a sunrise, or a sunset, or Joe Montana and say it ain't so, you don't do it like that - it just can't be.

Those folks may come around someday. But they won't learn instinctive shooting. not 'cause they can't or because it can't or doesn't work. Because they won't.

Meanwhile, you who want to do what Howard Hill, John Schultz, or Byron Fergussing, or Dick Plamer, or lots of others dead, alive or even on Tradgang do and did, just try it.

Not as hard as it looks. The first few times you hit a bottle-cap sized target on purpose at 20 yards, you will begin to see that, and how instinctive shooting works. Watch Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (Redford and Newman) when Redford asks "Can I move?"

Then get Byron Furgusson's videos shooting aerial targets from a moving pick-up. Or just try it.

Instictive, swing-draw, release on achor. Check out all the folks shooting aspirins out of the air. It's not digital. It's not thinking through a process, it's not aiming. It's not measuring the gap. It's just developing the analog, eye-hand, body-coordination/skill to "do one" and do it again.

Or don't do it. But please don't tell the folks who are doing it that they aren't doing it. We know what we doin'

[J-KID]

Originally posted by GroundHunter:
Hoooooo... Boy! the Saducees and Pharisees will come out to rightly devide the words and their meaning.

1.  I think you misquoted Scipture.  The Pharisees and Sacucees did not "rightly divide."  What they did was reinterpreted Scipture to their liking.  

The one you were looking for is 2Ti 2:15.

"Study to present yourself to God approved, a workman who has no cause to be ashamed, accurately dividing the Word of Truth."

 

Originally posted by GroundHunter:
Then get Byron Furgusson's videos shooting aerial targets from a moving pick-up. Or just try it.

Instictive, swing-draw, release on achor. Check out all the folks shooting aspirins out of the air. It's not digital. It's not thinking through a process, it's not aiming. It's not measuring the gap. It's just developing the analog, eye-hand, body-coordination/skill to "do one" and do it again.

2. Byron Ferguson uses a somewhat complicated method of gap shooting (measuring gap and bow cant) that he explained in some detail in an issue of "Traditional Archery Magazine" sometime back.  He uses traditional equipment but just cause you can't see it don't mean he's really "doing it."

3. Okay, maybe some humans do have instincts. (Jude 1:10)

All in fun . . .

By the way, nice choice of bows.  I really like my Tomahawk SS, 62" 58#@28.  Sweetest bow I've shot (instinctively).

[Terry Green]

Again,

It's just a term used to describe a type of aiming method where the subconscious runs the shot....to the point were it becomes 'instinctive like'.

See how easy that is?

[J-KID]

Instinctive like.

Your the man!

[BLACK WOLF]

But hey...sometimes it's fun and educational debating the meaning of stuff  

Ray  

[BLACK WOLF]

Hey Jay...thanks for sharing that Bible verse - "Yet these men speak abusively against whatever they do not understand; and what things they do understand by instinct, like unreasoning animals—these are the very things that destroy them."

It appears that Biblically...instinct doesn't involve reason or in other words the power of comprehending, inferring, or thinking especially in orderly rational ways which is exactly how instinctive aiming is executed.

As simple as it sounds...it's just point and shoot by feel...even though we know to be any good at it...it's much more complicated than just that. When someone get's really good at it...that is what they are basically doing. There is no thinking in an orderly fashion in regards to aiming. It is just point and shoot by feel  

Ray  

[J-KID]

I have no problem using "instintive" to refer to a shooting style.  However, it is good to know the difference between instinctive and learned etc.  It all makes us more aware of what is really going on when we shoot and do it more effectively.  More importantly, it gives us a language to communicate and teach others and that is the bottom line.  If you shoot all your life what have you accomplished?  If you pass that passion on to others they will pass it on in turn.  Your gift will out live you.

Continue the heritage.

[J-KID]

Black Wolf, you are completely correct.  The Greek word (I took Classical Greek in college) actually means, as you stated, something that does not involve reason and was a common term used by the Greek philosophers.  Reason is self evaluation, observation, reflection, comprehending, inferring, thinking etc.  

Kierkegaard said the self was a relation that related itself to itself and in relating itself to itself related itself to others.  What that means is that humans can ponder things (reason).  That is what gives us a concept of past, present and future.  Humans think about the past, the present and project that into dreams for the future.  Animals don't sit around reasoning like that and animals have little if any self awareness.

Reasoning takes place in the conscious mind.  So if istinct is something other than reasoning it must take place at a subconscious level.

Very cool discussion.

[BLACK WOLF]

Jay,

You said - "Reasoning takes place in the conscious mind. So if istinct is something other than reasoning it must take place at a subconscious level."

We definitely agree there    and a definition of instinct describes it as happening below the conscious level.

I believe humans are born with certain instincts just as other animals are...but as humans we have a higher capacity to reason and learn therefore as we reason through something that may have started out as an instinct, it no longer is instinctive because we are reasoning through it.

For example - I believe it's when it (the ability or feeling) has become so ingrained throughout the mind and body where the archer no longer has to reason through it, is when I believe a learned ability such as aiming can become an instinct in the sense their is no longer any reasoning going on, which allows the subconscious mind and proprioception to take over.

I just want to tell you...this has been one of the best discussions in regards to this topic I've had on any archery board. Some of the other people I have discussed this with have been so childish and prejudice towards this subject, it becomes almost comical...so I want to thank you for being so mature discussing this, even though we partially disagree....Thanks!

Ray