The structure of the tale
We listen, read, and see this story drawn a thousand times each day. Each day the myth of the struggle between the brain and the heart is played before our eyes a thousand times every day. This myth in which, in short terms, they seek to convince us that the brain is, and must remain, a subordinate body; that we should not attach too much importance to the idea that we have the capacity to think. This myth, in short, is a propaganda tool of intellectual castration.
No doubt our culture already spontaneously offers favorable factors to the generation of the structure of this myth. The perception of psychic activity as a struggle between separate wills, one usually more appetitive than the other, leads us to look within us the headquarters of a second self. The heart, the only organ with obvious activity when a living body is open, has the best conditions. It is located near the center of the body, its color is extremely attractive (virtue, that red is attractive, to be attributed to the blood, not the heart itself, for it is the blood, indicating the danger to health, wound or meat food available, what the eye has learned to identify as the colour par excellence), and its behavior, pumping, distribution, makes it appear as an organizer. For this reason (except for the circulation of the blood, relatively recent discovery), the heart appears in primitive cultures as the most common depositary of the soul, as the representative of life and the individual who lives it. To take away life is taking away the heart. The stomach, the "body’s boiler" whose function as a power generator is also easily recognizable has only the advantage of being located in an even more central place. But the simple fact of burning fuel for work force is hierarchically inferior. In addition, the stomach has, with respect to the heart, a notable disadvantage in representing the leadership of the organization: its position is not protected. The stomach is perfectly exposed, as if the body were not to concerned of losing it. The heart, however, is sheltered by the strength of the rib cage, out of view like a jewel of immense value, almost hidden between the distractive lung’s mass. Achieve it is a triumph over the defensive structure of the body, and seeing it throb while the rest of the body remains virtually inert suggests the identity with life itself.
We know, however, that the heart does not think. Actually, the original metaphorical psychic attribute has always been feelings. We say, and we said, the brain thinks and the heart feels. But this has not seemed effective enough for the campaign against the brain. Today we talk about “thinking with the heart” to signify that, when drawing conclusions, feeling does not have a value below the mental thought; should not be treated from a hierarchical inferiority. We say that we must think with the heart to give the feeling, the heart’s character, an independent, complete and autonomous entity; to prepare the next step: the surprise attack on brain power.
However, some features in the heart’s character are still curious. If we remember the fable, the brain thinks, and thinks a lot, but the heart also uses tricks that can only come from a mindset. His thinking is actually more effective, as when used to dismantle the extensive work of the brain by a moderate effort it reveals itself especially key. Of course, part of this efficiency must be attributed to desire. To defeat the brain, heart simply unleashes desires to conduct a set of feelings that he once ruled. The organizational work of the brain breaks down once it gets to break the dam of consciousness. But how does this levee break? Where does the heart take the key that opens the gate of certain desires that, strong as they are, have not been enough to prevent its closure?
It seems that the heart disposed, indeed, not only of the ability to feel and desire but, according to a computing metaphor, of a small nucleus of thought process particularly bright and of a completely different function from the awkward and mammothian brain’s intelligence.
This special intelligence can not be emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence, having burnt all self-help books that refer to it, remains only classical intelligence, once you learn the functioning of emotions. Has emotional intelligence s/he who is able to translate into thinking the message of emotions, so you can manage your actions with a much richer information. Is emotionally intelligent s/he who does not despise the emotions as a source of knowledge. This never means handing the reins to the emotions. In fact, emotional intelligence not only preserves the hierarchy topped by conscious thought, but it reinforces this hierarchy. For this thought it is a new channel of information, which was formerly disconnected from emotions generated by the preconscious forces, whose growth could cause the loss of control.