It is not just in Chinese philosophy that wu wei appears in. Classical Tantra, for example, talks about iccha-shakti.
The latter connection to the modern understanding is ok, but limited. Harmonizing with the different psychological and anatomical selves is only a part of it. This is also about harmonizing with Reality. (Which, when I put it that way, implies that there is a separateness to Reality for there to be harmonized; that's the dualist explanation to what is essentially a non-dual teaching).
I guess that in hierarchical structures of companies there is a varying degree of using(ACC/lateral PFC). Probably people higher up in the structure should have mastered having a strong PFC than ACC, people in the lower structure are like the ox-butchers, who ideally should have mastered one or few tasks which might not be so easy for people handling many tasks together.
A modern take on this subject is a book called Inner Game of Tennis by Tim Gallwey. I read the Inner Game of Golf recently and it talks about allowing your subconscious mind to perform without your conscious (verbal) mind gettin in the way. A lot has to deal with becoming relaxed and not allowing your critical self to tense up your body. Apparently Pete Carrol (NFL Seahawks coach) credits the book to a lot of his success. Im guessing here but it's possible that Jordan Spieth (won two major golf tournaments last year and tied Tiger Woods lowest scoring record at Augusta) used this book too. The author has some putting drills that I correlate to Spieth's use of not looking at the ball for short putts; he looks at the hole instead.
The neurology of baseball as discussed on NPR on 9-3-2016 identified successful pitchers and batters as those who did not allow thinking to interfere with their instantaneous physical actions. Reaction times measured were less than 500 milliseconds.
The science is pretty solid as far as psychology goes. Thinking Fast and Slow is often recommended on HN because it provides such a good overview of how the mind makes decisions with what Kahneman calls system 1 and 2. He ended up winning a nobel prize for his work in decision theory.
However I think matching what we know is right to ancient texts is the sketchy part. After all, there's plenty that's wrong in the ancient texts, we just don't see them.
The empirical and phenomenological observations across centuries and cultures by different mindfulness practitioners about the nature of the human mind are not to be dismissed so easily, even if they have had varying levels of rigour in their discipline.
... Should be the official Nautilus tagline. It certainly seems to be their governing principle. Well, actually, that's forgetting "needlessly overwritten"
But I can also laugh with you :-) The dao is a tautology. To say that it can be found in science is to say that water can be found in the ocean. The dao is neither right nor wrong because it exists due to its definition. Whether helpful or unhelpful, it depends on your point of view.
To the author, his observations are helpful so we can celebrate his enlightenment. To you you they are ridiculous, so we can enjoy our laughter.
The latter connection to the modern understanding is ok, but limited. Harmonizing with the different psychological and anatomical selves is only a part of it. This is also about harmonizing with Reality. (Which, when I put it that way, implies that there is a separateness to Reality for there to be harmonized; that's the dualist explanation to what is essentially a non-dual teaching).