-
201
Appendix: Linear thinkers and Nonlinear thinkers
Introduction
Here are 2 papers on the neurological differences between
linear
thinking Syllogician Schizoids and non-linear thinking
Aspergian
Schizoids. Paper 1 introduces the theoretical background needed
to
appreciate paper 2, which deals with the topic of linear and
nonlinear
thinking.
These papers, though scientific in the Lakatosian sense, have
some
rough parts, partly due to the difficult nature of the content
being
communicated. They need some concentration, and certainly
more
than one readings, and thinking between reading, to understand!
The
only comfort is that these are more interesting and more
important
than most technical presentations; those who read and understand
it
will gain a lot.
New readers shouldnt hastily conclude that this is too complex,
it
is truly very simple! If unable to understand something, just
move on
and tackle it later.
Neurons are the cells in brain etc. which are responsible for
thought
etc. Neurotransmitters e.g.: the 3 named in below picture,
are
chemicals which travel between neurons, for enabling thought or
its
subcomponents etc.
-
202
Paper 1: The task-cycles of Dopamine and Norepi
The layouts and activities of Dopamine (D), Norepi (N), and
Serotonin (S), the three Classical Monoamine
neurotransmitters,
are particularly important in the psychology of the Central
Nervous
System, because:
1. Activities involving these neurotransmitters coincide
with major mental events, e.g.: thought according to
scientists
2. These neurotransmitters occur in a super-system
which we define as the dynamic front. This makes
them important, as the dynamic front is important:
The dynamic front is a set which includes 2 neuron sections, and
the
N or D molecule goes from one neuron's section to the other's.
The D
or N receptor and transmitter are attached in these 2
sections
respectively; considering each neuron section a separate system
unto
itself taking as the analogue male and female systems as the
example of movement of sperm i.e. impregnation resulting in
major
biological event (pregnancy) shows the movement of actors (D
or
N) across the dynamic front is generally important, in the
context of
biological systems.
-
203
Of particular importance are the largest neurotransmitters
which
operate in the dynamic front, which are the 3 monoamine
neurotransmitters viz. D, S, and N. The presence of the amine
makes
them important as unleashers of energy (12), but we will not
be
focusing on S we shall focus on D and N, as they are
psychological
rivals. (S is beyond the scope of this thesis, which is
justified as S has
a logistical rather than psychological role, unlike D and N, as
we shall
now see).
Studying the evolution of D and N which, like the sperm in
case
impregnation, are central is therefore sufficient to understand
the
evolution of the dynamic front super-system whose central
components are D, N, and S; all other dynamic front chemicals
and
neuron sections involved (in thought, for example) are
merely
adjutant support systems which we can ignore, as support
systems
are logical dependents on the D/N task systems, whose evolutions
are
enough to study.
Thus we start with the premise that the layouts and activities
of
Dopamine (D), Norepi (N), and Serotonin (S), are
particularly
important in the quantum psychology of the Central Nervous
System.
Quantum psychology has nothing to do with quantum physics, and
it
is not a difficult concept. It means the smallest
characterizable
behavior of the nervous system's smallest (central)
differentiable
components. In other words, there is a quantum
neuropsychological
function associated with D (or N), which is about how the
system/
apparatus associated with the D or N task-cycle, intercepts
and
modifies incoming signals as per certain simple, logical rules,
as we'll
see which makes these modifications the psychological events
at
the smallest scale, that is, quantum neuropsychological events
that
is the meaning if we say the "quantum neuropsychological
function" of
D or N.
All other entities are support systems and the D/N task
cycle's
skeletal apparatus is central therefore, before
proto-neurons
which contained only what is central rather than all the
secondary
features became complex like modern neurons there were still
D,
N, and S task-cycles, which (psychologically) are the same as
in
modern neurons. Hence we can study the roles of task-cycles of
D
and N, across evolution of life-forms, and that will be the
modern role
of D and N.
To summarize: the proto-dynamic front task-cycle had, for either
D or
N, a quantum neuropsychological function which is the same as
the
-
204
quantum neuropsychological function in the modern neuron,
whose
other complexities we can ignore in our quest to find the
eternal,
significant quantum neuropsychological function of the D/N/S
task-
cycle.
Support for drawing such conclusions is the ancient creature
sponge,
in which sperm cells exist and have the exact same role as
what
sperm cells have in higher creatures, showing thus the
immutability
of the central task-cycle of the dynamic front, which in our
case are D
and N task-cycles.
As signals progress through the nervous system's signal cables
(the
slender parts of neurons i.e. axons and dendrites), they either
die out
due to transmission loss, or, if regarded as valid by some
biological
rules, they are boosted as per D or N's signal boosting
characteristic,
of which it is said:
"Intracortical currents are triggered by the release of
neurotransmitters, in particular, that neuromodulators like
noradrenaline, dopamine or serotonin have indirect
modulating
effects" - Frodl-Bauch et al., 1999, as quoted in the
Nieuwenhuis et al.
paper (12).
Enhance the synaptic responses of cortical neurons to their
other
inputs, in effect increasing the gain of cortical neuronal
activity, thus
N might serve to amplify signal conduction" (12). And similar is
the
role of D, since both D and N are chemically very similar. Thus,
these
neurotransmitters boost signals, if valid. D and N have
different
conditionality for determining which signals are valid/to be
boosted,
as we'll see.
Now let us study the conditionality for boosting, which tells us
the
quantum neuropsychological role of Dopamine and
Norepinephrine.
Studying the evolution of D, N, and S to find the (eternal)
quantum neuropsychological details of the Central Nervous
System
As Dobzhansky said: "Nothing in biology makes sense except in
the
light of evolution. Well now study the key stages in the
evolution of
the nervous system/life-form.
Life forms are ultra-complex chemical reactions, and
neurotransmitters are stable ranged chemicals defining their
deepest aspects (reactions taking place across the longest
range).
Now S has a specific unique structure which puts it on a league
of its
own, but D (Dopamine), O (Octopamine), and N
(Norepinephrine)
-
205
have similar structures, which means that all three can be
clubbed as
similar.
S is found in plants as well where it guides major operations; S
is
thus one of the most ancient of the dynamic front molecules. D
is also
found in plants, and though both D and S may therefore be found
in
plants, they dont occur in the relevant D-S system type of
nervous
system (D-S interactions set), due to which we can define the
plant as
merely a simple S base of reactions, rather than D-S base of
reactions.
I.e. we define an aspect of the dynamic front of the CNS or
proto-CNS
as base of reactions let us say, base of reactions means the
central
class of chemical reactions in the multifaceted chemical
reaction life-
form.
In the science of major aka disruptive evolutions, which must
occur
in the critical dynamic front theory is: to see disruptive
evolutions
as accidents!
In one such accident, D and S entered into a highly specific set
of
reactions (D-S interactions), which was the birth of the D-S
base of
reactions.
It is established that S plays a major role in modulating D
systems;
we call it D-S base of reactions; the rise of which, was the
first
complexity in life-form evolution, beyond the simple plant, in
which
the D pyramid of reactions and the S pyramid of reactions are
not
reacting in the specific style that defines the D-S base of
reactions/D-S
interactions set.
We might choose to reserve the term animal for bilaterally
symmetric animals, and call the D-S-base of reactions-based
life-
form, as "planimal".
An example that can be cited is the sponge, in which have been
found
both Dopamine (2) and Serotonin (3) by scientists. That is
worth
analysis... The sponge has long been superficially recognized as
the
missing link between plant and animal, and where else but,
of
course, the dynamic front, could be the area where the
difference
arises! Soon we will further vindicate our view that the sponge
is a D-
S base of reactions, and not any more complex than that (as are
other
creatures).
-
206
Thus the planimal, like sponge a life-form defined by how the
D-S
base was chief in its hierarchy of reactions evolved when the
plant
bodily molecule of D entered into this highly specific D-S
interactions
set with S thus giving both D and S the pioneering status of
neurotransmitter, birthing the proto-nervous system, which was
at
the heart of this creature called planimal, whereby cells
collaborated
in a lifestyle more complex than that of plant the planimal was
the
first quasi-animal.
And now, in another disruptive evolution, yet another
accident
occurred: D maybe evolved into O (Octopamine) in some domains;
or
at least we can say that O, a molecule seen to exist in certain
plants
(but not in the nervous system capacity), was "captured" by the
D-S
base of reactions.
Some of these accidental events were biologically "successful"
i.e.
some O-involving reactions were accepted by the old D-S base
of
reactions the law of entropy allowed the sum to thrive. However,
O
and D are chemically similar, and, to an extent, can be likened
to
capstones competing for control of the same adjunct molecule
pyramids for the purpose of reaction. There might be a wide
range of
such adjunct molecules.
This "mutation" was, then, the rise of the O-D-S (or D-O-S) base
of
reactions, with O-D-S defined by the primacy of O in the
total
reactions pyramid (life-form), and D-O-S defined by the primacy
of D
in the total reactions pyramid (life-form). Thus the rise of O
sprouted
two types of creatures. The D-O-S or O-D-S creature is called
animant,
we may say.
-
207
Now, the animant differs from the planimal (e.g.: sponge), just
how
planimal differs from plant. However, the animant could still
fuse
like the sponge (two sponges may fuse with each other, and
"average
out" their traits).
This we say because there is a compelling theory about the next
step
in evolution:
Thus, sometime after the rise of the 2 types of animant, was
the
fusing accident, when a pre-trilobite creature emerged as the
fused
D-O-S + O-D-S creature i.e., the bi-brained invertebrate animal
that
had bilateral symmetry. It was a most successful design; even we
are
bilaterally symmetric! Nearly all are like that, excepting a
few
animants like Jellyfish and hydra, which are radially, not
bilaterally
symmetric, showing that the O-D-S or D-O-S super-reaction is
found
in them, not both.
-
208
The Left Brain/right body was D-O-S (and then D-N-S), where D
has
primacy (the neural correlates of such primacy are yet to be
found,
but it appears to have something to do with capturing of the
amygdala), and the Right Brain/left body was O-D-S (and then
N-D-S)
where O (and then N) had primacy.
There was, further, another disruptive evolution when O
changed
into the similar N (Norepi). Merely on the basis of how
vertebrates
have N whereas invertebrates have O, we can say that N brought
into
the picture a new ability for the nervous system to be
decentralized,
as borne out by the presence of spinal cord (which is main
detail,
beyond the vertebra). Otherwise, psychologically, O and N
seem
similar, seem to have similar task-cycles. But we have deviated
in
covering these interesting details of evolution. Our original
purpose
was to find the quantum neuropsychological roles of D and N. Let
us
get back to the task of finding the nature of D and O/N
task-cycles,
assuming that O is, psychologically, the same as N, and only
different
physiologically.
Isolating the essential nature of the D task-cycle
Generally, D works in a certain stimuli-reactive style (which
we
therefore call "receptive"), while O/N works in a different
manner
which can be called "generative". The stimuli-reactive
(receptive)
nature of D was found from examples; note the consistent
presence
of characterizable stimuli:
1. In plants, D handles browning (4) in response to injury
(i.e., injury
is a type of stimuli occurrence of which triggered a D
Task-Cycle; so
here the D task-cycle is reacting to a stimuli... This will be a
consistent
observation).
2. D is released by algae Ulvaria obscura, as an anti-herbivore
defense
mechanism (5)
(herbivore was a stimuli received by the algae, leading to a
reaction,
initiating which was the role of D task-cycle, which is thus
again seen
to have reacted to stimuli).
In complex creatures, despite the presence of complex bases
of
reactions, D activity is observed to be involved in reaction to
stimuli:
3. In insects, D acts as a punishment signal necessary to
form
aversive memories" (6)
(aversive memories of external objects, which were stimuli to
the
insect, reaction to which stimuli, shows the D task-cycle's
isolatable
nature as reactive to stimuli)
-
209
4. D (task-cycles are observed when) the creature gets aroused
(6)
(arousal is, again, a response to external objects
characterizable as
stimuli).
5. D task-cycles are found to occur as responses to various
stimuli like
money, prospect of sex, food etc.
6. The spinal cords diencephalospinal dopaminergic system
was
discovered; it handles the auto-reactions to stimuli, like
withdrawing
from heat, knee-jerk etc.
7. In particular, the sponge, which, according to the theory,
gives an
example of a pure D-S nervous system:
Sponge lacks nervous, digestive or circulatory systems; instead
the
water flow supports all these functions. However most species
have
the ability to perform movements that are coordinated all over
their
bodies, mainly contractions squeezing the water channels and
thus
expelling excess sediment and other substances that may
cause
blockages [whose presence were stimuli which caused action, thus
it
was a reaction]. Sponges may contract to reduce the area
vulnerable
to attack [a response conforming to attacker stimuli]. The
mechanism is unknown, but may involve chemicals similar to
neurotransmitters. Actually, the mechanism involves D Task-
cycle(s) in the sponges D-S proto-CNS, a D task-cycle supported
by a
very basic support system (thanks to University of Tokyo
researchers, who've ascertained the presence of Dopamine in
some
species of sponge (2)).
The sponge's type of purely receptive (stimuli-reactive)
behaviour
vindicates our earlier statement that sponge is home to no more
than
the D-S base of reactions.
Isolating the essential nature of the O/N task-cycle
It is already stated that, while physiologically N and O are
different,
psychologically they are the same. Hence we can cite here
examples
of both O and N, as the quantum neuropsychological role of both
are
the same. While D-S is involved in reactive behaviours,
O-S/N-S
system seems involved with more than just knee jerk-type
reactions
to stimuli.
1. In the locust jump, O modulates muscle activity, making the
leg
muscles contract more effectively.
Jumping is not directly a reaction to any particular
stimuli.
2. Similarly, O is widely used by invertebrates in
energy-demanding
[novel, not automatic or stimuli reactive] behaviours like
flying,
-
210
egg-laying, and jumping. These are not dependent on any
isolatable
stimuli, as was in the case of D.
3. "In the firefly, Octopamine release leads to production of
light in
the lantern".
A definite pattern is seen O, the precursor of N, is involved
with
contrived actions which are not direct stimuli-responses. It
appears
that several signals, rather than 1 signal (stimuli) is involved
in the
case of O or N.
For example, fire-fly puts on a lantern depending on, say:
1. Whether or not it is night (a TRUE or FALSE value,
conveyed
as a signal or no signal)
2. Whether or not a female is nearby (a TRUE or FALSE value,
conveyed as a signal or no signal)
3. (And/or something else that is known as a signal, such as
whether or not enough fuel for putting on the light, TRUE or
FALSE)
Thus all three must be TRUE, only then will the O task-cycle
occur
and light will come on. So O/N seems like an AND gate, from
this
perspective. N, the psychological equivalent of O, also
handles,
similarly, complex activations (complex, in the sense, not
directly
reactive to stimuli):
"In 1964, Chapman and Bragdon [11] found that ERP responses
to
visual stimuli differed depending on whether the stimuli had
meaning or not. They found that the responses contained a
large
positivity [a signalling event, called P300 event potential, and
later
proven to involve N] that peaked around 300 ms after the
stimulus
appeared".
"They speculated that this differential response, which came to
be
known as P300, resulted due to how the [stimuli] were meaningful
to
the participants.
This P300 wave was subsequently associated with the Locus
Coerelus-Norepinephrine neuromodulatory system by
researchers
(8, 9, 10).
This seems to be a mere stimuli response, but it is more than
just
that, as we'll now see.
In this case, the N-involving P300 task-cycle was dependent
on
multiple inputs that is the meaning of the term meaningful
which
they use.
Let us see the same experiment in more detail:
-
211
"In later studies published in 1967, Sutton and colleagues had
subjects
guess whether they would hear one click or two clicks. They
again
observed a positivity around 300 ms after the second click
occurred - or
would have occurred, in the case of the single click... They
also had
subjects guess how long the interval between clicks might be,
and in
this case, the late positivity occurred 300 ms after the second
click".
Thus, in case of Norepi task-cycle, whatever the answer to be
solved,
multiple relevant signals add up to solve it:
4. "They again observed a positivity around 300 ms after the
second
click occurred".
N-calculated solution = 2 clicks, which is solved out of 2
signals
(click1 AND click2) thus 2 input signals (quasi-stimuli) were
used
to generate output.
5. "Or would have occurred, in the case of the single
click".
N-calculated solution = signal 1 click AND signal no more clicks
=
only 1 click.
Thus, again, multiple signals are required for the O/N
task-cycle to
"trip". Once again we see that the O/N task-cycle is similar to
an AND
gate.
6. The P300 is thought to reflect processes involved in
stimulus
evaluation or categorization.
Evaluation/categorization implies stimuli being weighed in
the
context of certain other data which again upholds the
multi-input
nature.
Thus the N-task-cycle calculates from various signals and gives
the
type of output required so this output is generated out of
multiple
signals.
About this many-in, 1-out type of signalling, Nieuwenhuis et al.
offer
(12): NE release gated by the LC-NE system is elicited after
neurons
processing sensory information have presumably reached a
decision
threshold. The phasic burst can alter activation in
all cortical processing layers, essentially collapsing the
vast
information processing circuit to the outcome of a single
decision
layer.
The differences between Dopaminic and Norepic type of
processing
-
212
Thus the difference is between D's simple
stimuli/signal-reactive aka
monoconditional signalling and N's complex reactive
multiconditional
signalling.
N has ability to consider signals from multiple directions
(signal
cables), not just one (as appears to be the case in the D task
cycle).
Another very interesting detail is that Norepi task-cycle sites
are
axons of neurons: " widespread effects of noradrenaline on
axon
terminals" (13); Dopamine task-cycle sites are dendrites of
neurons;
Yao et al.: Dopamine receptors are present throughout the soma
and
dendrites of the neuron, but accumulating ultrastructural
and
biochemical evidence indicates that they're concentrated in
dendritic
spines" (14).
We have, then, enough proof to state: the rise of the O-S-D base
of
reactions, was when from the sponge emerged the proto-Axon,
having a talent of using an O-involving process to
discriminatingly
relay orders to other cells (rather than tyrannically declaring,
always
stay on) those cells then gladly adapted to the leadership,
taking on
roles.
That brought about the rise of specialized organs (which are
absent in
sponges, who lack O/N), and evolutionary intelligence. Because,
for
organs to work, the discriminatory (multiconditional) signalling
is
required (no organs can function at the "always on" or
directly
stimuli-reactive mode). We can refer to this organ-growing
property
of O/N by the term "localized evolutionary intelligence"107. It
is
absent in sponges, which " lack nervous, digestive or
circulatory
systems" our characterization of the sponge as a merely D-S base
of
reactions, is further proven.
The "organ master" role of N is apparent: for it triggers the
release of
glucose from energy stores, increases blood flow, heart rate,
oxygen
supply etc. in the fight-or-flight situation (which is not
direct reaction
to stimuli).
And similarly, Axons also seem like taskmasters of organs:
At synapses, axons make contact with other cells, usually
other
neurons but sometimes muscle or gland cells [axons give orders
with
discriminating ability]
107 O is found in plants having localized evolutionary
intelligence e.g.: bitter orange (7).
-
213
The Axon/O/N's organ master role is confirmed in how
Livingstone
et al. observed that injecting O into a lobster and crayfish
resulted in
limb and abdomen extension (15).
D and N as logic gate constituents of behavioural neural
networks
Smoking is a well-known involver of D task cycles, let us see
what
happens there.
Smokers were found to have more dendritic development (28).
The
smoking-related dendritic/dopaminic task-cycle systems
(check-
posts) are such that, on receipt of signal from valid
direction108 they
automatically trigger D Task-cycles, which boost and convey
the
signal into action-linked brain areas, causing autonomous
impulse to
smoke.
Journey of red data through transmitting axons is felt by
many
dendritic spines, which contain dopaminic check-posts; if
relevant to
dopaminic trigger (as in the bull who gets angry on seeing red),
the
triggers, being associated with D checkposts, are tripped,
causing a
reaction.
The circuit's D trigger element is comparable to the simple
falling
domino: if stimuli fits (i.e. if signal comes from right
direction) the
D task-cycle is tripped, and the signal is boosted into a
predefined
direction. D has a basic cause-effect/triggering mechanism the
life-
form design uses Ds type of simple, monoconditional,
one-in-one-out
trigger mechanism to build complex neuronal arrangements
(circuits). Similarly with N, whose multiconditional signalling
feature is used.
Thus these neurotransmitters themselves are at the center of the
life-
form, as the dynamic front theory suggests. In the D or
N-involving
events, which can be called signal(s)-modification events
the
neurotransmitter, not its generator (Locus Coeruleus or
Substantia
Nigra) is central in the quantum level signal-modification
event;
every other brain system associated with the process, despite
having
a relatively quantitative presence, is more likely merely a
support
system. Thus the quantum episode is about Dopamine or
Norepis
immediate task cycle apparatus's modification of neurodata, how
this
modification follows in case of either neurotransmitter
consistent
logical laws.
108 Sight of cigarette, smell of smoke, drop in body Nicotine
levels, may all be valid
signals, to be boosted the dopaminic AI has learnt redirected
into impulse to smoke.
-
214
It is about how the neurotransmitter reacted to neurodata
i.e.
converted neurodata (signals) to another logically following
neurodata; it is not about an advanced neural control system
which
gave input to the Locus Coerelus-Norepinephrine modulatory
system,
which then sent the Norepi molecules onward which is a
misconception probably inspired from the popular but
misleading
myth about the "Dopamine reward system". That false view
imagines
the neurotransmitter factory (LC/SN) as a system that releases N
or
D according to various inputs and not merely a minor
refilling
system which is what it actually seems to be. When the LC
generates Norepi, it is not on the basis of any other input
apart from
the input provided by the vesicle which said My Norepi
molecules
were spent in local reactions, refill me, or some such thing
(The
particulars of these mechanisms themselves are beyond the scope
of
this thesis).
This style in which D or N acts is used by signal-progressing
neural
circuits both more D-reliant, less N-reliant circuits and more
N-
reliant, less D-reliant circuits. Such are the circuits which
colour the
nature of one's personality, which is all about how the myriads
of D
or N are arrayed, so that a person behaves in specific ways
depending
on the programming.
Thus, surely, if one asks, "What makes a brain different from
the
other brain"? The answer is the layout of D and N
"checkposts",
which are arranged in different permutations and
combinations
representing different behaviours. If there is any
fundamental
arrangement coding, which one can analogize to DNA, it is this
D/N
coding, much of which seems changeable. There are hundreds if
not
thousands of different behaviours (expressible as D/N
signal-
modifying circuits), the majority of which may be similar from
human
to human.
As a general matter of terminology, the dopaminic process, as it
is
more stimuli dependent, is called receptive process, and
circuits
dependent on more dopaminic processing belong to the
Receptive
System (RS).
For N, similarly, we speak of the generative process and the
Generative System (GS). Humans having many more D-type
behavioural circuits (instincts), are called high RQ
(Receptive
Quotient) people... and some of their instincts can be very
complex.
Some behaviours can be called largely reactive/dopaminic
(thus
housed mostly in the left brain, which takes up such tasks)
and
others can be called largely Norepic (and thus housed mostly in
the
-
215
right brain, which takes up such tasks). One can segregate
behaviours
into these 2 types.
For example:
Table 1
Relatively Dopaminic Relatively Norepic
A lifestyle involving internalizing what
others are thinking, what are in their
minds (shows a quantitative dependence
on external stimuli)
A lifestyle of playing "Game Theory" (in
which every move of others must be
noted and counters taken for "success")
A lifestyle involving
thinking, i.e., processing
data that is in one's own
mind
A relaxed lifestyle based
on cooperation, not
cut-throat competition!
Logical ability as it involves the internal processing of data
(signals)
and only qualitative reaction to stimuli, more than
quantitative
reaction to stimuli naturally involves more N, and the
N-dominated
right brain (26).
Generally, behaviours which are cut-throat hyper-competitive
(a
lifestyle of competition with a negative emphasis on
cooperation)
are more reliant on D; behaviours which more involve logical
refinements (a lifestyle of cooperation) are generally more
involving
N.
In what seems an apologetic for cut-throat competitive
behaviours,
we are presented with the Dopaminergic mind hypothesis "Dr.
-
216
Previc presents the provocative theory that, approximately
80,000
years ago, high levels of dopamine led to the profound
developmental
leaps that most set modern man apart from his human and
primate
relatives".
This "pro-Dopamine" school of thought ascribes intelligence to
hyper-
Dopamine mentality:
"A general theory is proposed that attributes the origins of
human intelligence to an expansion of dopaminergic systems
in human cognition" (16)
"Dopamine is postulated to be the key neurotransmitter
regulating six predominantly left-hemispheric cognitive
skills
critical to human language and thought: motor planning,
working memory, cognitive flexibility, abstract reasoning,
temporal analysis/sequencing, and generativity"(16).
The reason for a pro-dopamine stance may be the same as why
excess Grey Matter was declared an indicator of intelligence it
was
more common in the financially successful families of some
biased
scholars. However, matters of wealth must be wholly separated
from
matters of health!
A different viewpoint on Dopamine seems necessary given how
several disorders have been associated with Dopamine
hyperactivity
to name a few, Schizophrenia, Kannerian Autism, obsessive
compulsive disorders, and ADHD. A paradigm shift is required
the
theory now presented sees Norepi as the post-planimal's
primary
neurotransmitter, and sees Dopamine as an outsider (to an
extent) in
the brain, an organ whose rise began with rise of the
multiconditional
signalling Norepi.
The Neuropyrosis theory
Below are shown the pathways of Dopamine (black) and Norepi
(green) respectively.
-
217
The upper brain is the natural ecology for N as seen in how
N
travels farther, i.e., has greater range of operation across the
brain...
On the other hand, apart from certain ancient areas (i.e.
cerebellum
and basal ganglia), D is found only in relatively insignificant
amounts
in the rest of the brain.
Notably, D is found in the Pre-Frontal Cortex, where it has,
beyond
the basic necessary extent, an anomalous existence, according to
the
present theory.
The theory of anomaly is confirmed by how Morn et al., who
specifically characterize the prefrontal cortex as a region with
low
levels of the dopamine transporter, note: In the striatum and
basal
ganglia, dopamine is inactivated by reuptake via the DAT. In
the
prefrontal cortex109, however, there are very few DAT proteins,
and
dopamine is inactivated instead by reuptake via the
Norepinephrine
transporter (17).
Yavich et al. (18) give us another interesting observation: The
DAT
pathway is roughly an order of magnitude faster than the NET
pathway: in mice, dopamine concentrations decay with a half-life
of
200 milliseconds in the caudate nucleus versus 2,000
milliseconds in
the prefrontal cortex.
The longer lifespan as well as the cuckoo characteristic,
implies that
D is actually thriving (in a calculative role) due to an
upper-brain
style, advanced Norepic neural ecology where the over-activity
of D
109 [where excessive presence of monoconditional signalling is
anomalous/unhealthy]
-
218
causes problems, according to the Neuropyrosis theory, which
will be
now described.
The increased activity of Dopamine, and lesser activity of
Norepi (in
this case, it is always a Yin Yang110), in the brains of
Alzheimer's
disease patients, is found by Heneka et al., who say AD
individuals
show ~ 70% loss of locus coeruleus (LC) cells and Degeneration
of
the locus coeruleus might be responsible for increased A
deposition
in AD.
The neuropyrosis theory states: A brain in which D is
excessively in
control, so that there is more dendrital development (more
grey
matter) suffers damage from overheating. Why? A brain/PFC
more
dependent on Dopaminic monoconditional processing, by nature
witnesses greater signal density, as per the diagram seen
above.
Second point is that more D task-cycles are needed for
receptive
behaviours as a relatively basic (monoconditional) type of
'logic
gate' is being overused hence, in case of left hemisphere
dominance
of the brain, D task-cycles occur in much greater number than
the
number of N task-cycles occurring in the right hemisphere
dominated
brain.
110 Dopamine, due to enjoying a chemical structure that is
largely similar to that of
Norepi/Octopamine can carry out some reactions in which N was
originally involved
(e.g.: be uptaken by the Norepinephrine transmitter) and N/O,
from the start, had
some reactions resembling reactions of D. Therefore, it seems N
and D can, to a large
extent, compete for fitting into the brain's reaction pyramids.
That makes people have
either excess N (so they are right brain dominant) or excess D
(left brain dominant). The
latter means that the whole brain, even the right brain, becomes
relatively dendritic
(e.g. Fingelkurts et al. note that depressed people have less
hemispheric specialization)
-
219
That fact implies, as each D/N task-cycle adds the same amount
of
energy to in-brain electrical energy, an overall greater signal
density.
The increased signal density (which is due to more dopamine
task-
cycles) in case of Alzheimer's disease, is discussed by Alice
Walton of
Forbes:
"The famous culprit in Alzheimers disease, amyloid-beta plaques,
is
found to accumulate following increased brain cell activity.
Specifically, theres evidence that people who have more activity
in
their default mode networks may have increased risk for
Alzheimers
disease. As researcher David Holtzman of Washington
University
says, people whose default mode networks have an average
increase
in activity relative to others may be at increased risk to
get
Alzheimers disease later in life and less activity in this
network, less
risk.
The default mode network involves the dendritic LT-area111,
which is
well developed in syllogicians.
The increased signal density in case of Alzheimer's disease is
further
confirmed in how the lateral ventricles, which carry ventricular
fluid
to support neural activity by cleaning out metabolic waste,
are
enlarged in Alzheimer's disease, which again shows excess
signalling
activity.
And quantitative existence of signals in the brain is a very
devastating thing for brain tissue. Each time a signal passes
through a
neuron, some loss occurs on the way. This loss is converted to
heat
(the electrical equivalent of friction). Overheating causes
neuronal
collapse and "neuroinflammation" (which is a repair reaction)
in
critical areas like hippocampus (which handles
conceptualization),
EC, PFC etc.
Effect of overheating due to excessive monoconditional
signalling aka
receptive activity:
111 Burgess et al. (1) sum up the default mode theory of the
["LT-area", see paper 2]:
This influential theory relates specifically to medial rostral
PFC, and is motivated by the
repeated finding of decreases in activation of medial area 10
during a wide range of
demanding cognitive tasks (Christoff, Ream, & Gabrieli,
2004; Gusnard & Raichle, 2001).
Raichle et al. (2001) argue that when an individual is awake and
alert yet not actively
engaged in an attention-demanding task, a default state of brain
activity exists.
When focused attention is required, in novel activity, activity
in these areas is lessened.
-
220
Increased volume of current pass through areas critical to
thinking,
which are destroyed in AD:
Memory transfer area Entorhinal Cortex, one of the first to
show
damage in AD (21)
Thus, just how a piece of thermocol rapidly shrinks if exposed
to
heat, or how the plastic covering of an electrical cable melts
if too
much current passes through it hyper-signalling associated
with
the nature of D destroys the substrate (i.e. neuronal dendrites
and
axons).
The neuropyrosis i.e. Overheating theory of AD, explains AD
better
than current hypotheses like:
Herpes simplex virus type 1 has been proposed to play a
causative
role.
-
221
The tau hypothesis is the idea that tau protein abnormalities
initiate
the disease cascade. In this model, hyperphosphorylated tau
begins
to pair with other threads of tau. Eventually, they form
neurofibrillary tangles inside nerve cell bodies. However, it
would
seem that collapse due to overheating occurs first, and rubble
is just
its result.
In 1991, the amyloid hypothesis postulated that beta-amyloid
(A)
deposits are the fundamental cause of the disease. That reflects
the
same misguided methodology black beads result from burning
of
thermocol, rather than causing its burning; they are only
caused, not
causal.
Thus an experimental vaccine was found to clear the amyloid
plaques in early human trials, but it did not have any effect
on
dementia.
The oldest, on which most currently available drug therapies
are
based, is the cholinergic hypothesis, which proposes that AD
is
caused by reduced synthesis of the neurotransmitter
acetylcholine.
The cholinergic hypothesis has not maintained widespread
support,
because medications intended to treat acetylcholine deficiency
have
been ineffective.
Nunomura, et al. implicate oxidative stress in AD (24), but the
root
cause is the neuropyrosis activity related to dopamine
hyperfunction
and Norepic hypofunction.
Dementia is bad by itself. But what is worse about neuropyrosis
is
that people who will suffer from Alzheimer's disease, also
suffer
depression. Depression seems a very specific signal of the
brain
affected by neuropyrosis, as the same observations are visible
in the
depressed and demented brain: Default mode network shows
greater activity when depressed participants ruminate (22).
Further, Depression involves enlargement of lateral ventricles
(23),
like AD.
The idea that it is a hyper-RS state that causes Alzheimer's
disease by
neuropyrosis, is confirmed in how, "In Alzheimer's disease
(AD),
brain atrophy has been proposed to be left lateralized" (19)
(i.e. more
atrophy in the left brain hemisphere) in the light of the detail
that
the left brain hemisphere is dominated by Dopamine, relative to
right
hemisphere.
As shown by Magda Ilcewicz-Klimek et al., who show that
depression
involves increased connectivity between the default mode
network
and the subgenual cingulate (25) one cannot generally say
that
-
222
depression is only because of more Dopamine rather,
increased
dopamine, less Norepi is associated with hyperfunction in
the
Receptive System; Generative System is hypoactive, thus
qualitative
brain areas (e.g.: the Non linear thinking area just behind the
middle
of the eyes, which we study next) are not utilized. That is
associated
with excessive D activity in critical areas, which end up as the
sites of
neuropyrosis.
The super-process doesnt involve qualitative areas (like the
NLT-
area studied next), and therefore, quantitatively burdens
critical
areas (e.g.: hippocampus), which are like over-burdened
marchers
slowing down the whole brain, leading to motivation deficit,
failure
to engage, fatalism, pessimism etc.
The prevention, if not cure, is simply to restrict the overly
Dopaminic
kind of activities mentioned in table 1. The basic problem is
that
humanity is estranged from its natural habitat i.e. nature, and
thrust
into a wastefully competitive (overly frictional) pseudo-ecology
in
which overly dopaminic behaviours are encouraged, because of
which the mutable brain becomes more receptive (you are what
you
do).
For improving quality of life, humanity must develop a new
ecology,
whose quantitative aspects are natural; qualitative aspects
are
artificial; and, in which, inter-dwelling distance is
standardized and
maximized.
-
223
- References-
(1) Burgess, P. W., Veitch, E., & Costello, A. (submitted).
The role of
the right rostral prefrontal cortex in multitasking: The six
element
test.
(2) Hongwei Liu et al. (2004), Isolation of Araguspongine M, a
New
Stereoisomer of an Araguspongine/Xestospongin alkaloid, and
Dopamine from the Marine Sponge Neopetrosia exigua Collected
in
Palau
(3) Simon Weyrer et al., Serotonin in Porifera? Evidence
from
developing Tedania ignis, the Caribbean fire sponge
(Demospongiae),
Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 44: 659-665. Brisbane. ISSN
0079-8835.
(4) Mayer, AM (2006). "Polyphenol oxidases in plants and
fungi:
Going places? A review". Phytochemistry 67 (21): 23182331.
(5) Van Alstyne et al. (2006). "Dopamine functions as an
antiherbivore defense in the temperate green alga Ulvaria
obscura
(6) Schwaerzel M et al. (2003). "Dopamine and octopamine
differentiate between aversive and appetitive olfactory memories
in
Drosophila
(7) Tang, F; Tao, L; Luo, X; Ding, L; Guo, M; Nie, L; Yao, S
(2006).
"Determination of octopamine, synephrine and tyramine in
Citrus
herbs by ionic liquid improved 'green' chromatography".
(8) Lutzenberger, W., Elbert, T., Rockstroth, B. (1987). A brief
tutorial
on the implications of volume conduction for the interpretation
of the
EEG. Journal of Psychophysiology, 33. S56.
(9) Pineda, J.A.; Foote, S.L.; Neville, H.J. (1989). "Effects of
Locus
Coeruleus Lesions on Auditory Event-Related Potentials in
Monkey".
J. Neurosci 9 (1): 8193.
(10) Johnson, R.; Jr (1993). "On the neural generators of the
P300
component of the event-related potential". Psychophysiology 30
(1):
9097. PMID 8416066
(11) Chapman, R.M. & Bragdon, H.R. (1964). Evoked responses
to
numerical and non-numerical visual stimuli while problem
solving.
Nature, 203, 1155-1157.
(12) Nieuwenhuis S, Cohen J D. , Aston-Jones G, Decision Making,
the
P3, and the Locus CoeruleusNorepinephrine System
-
224
(13) P Mobley and P Greengard, 1984, Evidence for widespread
effects of noradrenaline on axon terminals in the rat frontal
cortex,
Yale School of Medicine
(14) Yao WD, Spealman RD, Zhang J, Dopaminergic signaling in
dendritic spines, Biochem Pharmacol. 2008 Jun
1;75(11):2055-69.
(15) Livingstone, Margaret; Ronald Harris-Warrick, Edward
Kravitz
(1980) "Serotonin and Octopamine Produce Opposite Postures
in
Lobsters". Science 208 (4439): 7679.
doi:10.1126/science.208.4439.76. PMID 17731572.
(16) Previc FH, 1999, Dopamine and the origins of human
intelligence, Flight Stress Protection Division, Brooks Air
Force Base,
Texas
(17) Morn JA et al., 2002, Dopamine uptake through the
norepinephrine transporter in brain regions with low levels of
the
dopamine transporter: evidence from knock-out mouse lines.
The
Journal of Neuroscience, January 15, 2002, 22 (2):389395
(18) Yavich, Forsberg, Karayiorgou, Gogos, Mnnist 2007,
Site-
Specific Role of Catechol-O-Methyltransferase in. Dopamine
Overflow
within Prefrontal Cortex and. Dorsal Striatum. Journal of
Neuroscience (impact factor: 7.11). 10/2007;
27(38):10196-209.
DOI:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0665-07.2007
(19) Derflinger S et al. (2011), Grey-matter atrophy in
Alzheimer's
disease is asymmetric but not lateralized., J Alzheimers
Dis.
2011;25(2):347-57. doi: 10.3233/JAD-2011-110041.
(20) Michael T. Heneka et al., Locus ceruleus controls
Alzheimer's
disease pathology by modulating microglial functions through
norepinephrine, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 March 30;
107(13):
60586063.
(21) Rahul S. Desikan et al., 2010, Selective Disruption of the
Cerebral
Neocortex in Alzheimer's Disease, the Alzheimer's Disease
Neuroimaging Initiative
(22) Cooney, R.E.; et al. (2010). "Neural correlates of
rumination in
depression". Cognitive Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience 10
(4):
470478.
(23) M. J. Kempton et al., 2011, Structural Neuroimaging Studies
in
Major Depressive Disorder, Meta-analysis and Comparison With
Bipolar Disorder Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(7):675-690.
doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.60
-
225
(24) Su B, Wang X, Nunomura A, et al. (December 2008).
"Oxidative
Stress Signaling in Alzheimer's Disease". Curr Alzheimer Res 5
(6):
52532.
(25) Magda Ilcewicz-Klimek, Christopher R Honey, Helen S
Mayberg
(2011-11-18). "A multicenter pilot study of subcallosal
cingulate area
deep brain stimulation for treatment-resistant depression".
Journal
of Neurosurgery 116 (2): 31522.
doi:10.3171/2011.10.JNS102122.
PMID 22098195
(26) Aha. Insight experience correlates with solution activation
in the
right hemisphere EDWARD M. BOWDEN and MARK JUNG-BEQGAAN
(27) Fingelkurts AA, Fingelkurts AA, Rytsl H, Suominen K,
Isomets
E, Khknen S, Impaired functional connectivity at EEG alpha
and
theta frequency bands in major depression, BM-SCIENCE - Brain
and
Mind Technologies Research Centre, Espoo, Finland.
-
226
Paper 2: The Neural Correlates of Linear and Nonlinear
Thinking
Abstract:
The highly developed Frontal Executive Network (FEN) of the
human
brain has long been recognized as the "seat of cognition" but
ideas
as to how it works were hard to come by. The division of the FEN
into
two different areas, area 1 and area 2, which handle two types
of
thinking, was reviewed. It is evident that area 1 is
relatively
"dendritic", while area 2 is relatively "Axonic". By this and
other clues
such as the Axon's relationship with Norepi, Norepi's
novelty-
detecting nature, and area 2's comparison with the cerebellum
etc.
a preliminary theory of the methods of working of these two
areas is
proposed. It is proposed that the two areas handle linear and
non-
linear thinking respectively. This theoretically solves the
mystery of
the "System 1 and System 2" associated with current dual
system
theories of cognition, which say that there are two different
cognitive
systems in brains.
Though we may take it for granted that there is only one
common
mental process the idea that there is a relatively qualitative
logical
process and a different, relatively quantitative basic
perceptive
process112 is not new though it may have only a fringe
following.
Thus the relatively unknown Wilfrid Sellars of USA criticized
his
more famous countryman Lewiss Kantian pragmatism or Carnaps
positivism, for claiming that perceived knowledge is independent
of
the conceptual processes which result in perception. In 1956,
Sellars
wrote: I presume that no philosopher who has attacked the idea
of
givenness or, to use the Hegelian term, immediacy will deny
that
there is a difference between inferring that something is the
case,
and, for example, seeing it to be the case... Many things have
been
said to be "given": sense contents, material objects,
universals,
propositions, real connections, first principles, even givenness
itself.
The falsehood of The Given is the apparent-to-a-few, but
mostly-
under-appreciated illogicality of a complex objects necessarily
cursory
immediate appraisal (The Given), which the basic associative
process
a bit too overconfidently perceives. As Sellars says about
such
insubstantial appearances, one can deny that there are "data" or
that
anything is, in this sense, "given" without flying in the face
of
reason.
112 Which works with beliefs; and we can call it empirical
associative/syllogical process.
-
227
This idea of a difference between a certain basic thinking
system,
which swiftly prances in the trivial world of the Givens, and
the other
system which discriminatingly analyses, predates 1956, being
known
to the untold number of older thinkers who have attacked the
idea of
the Given (i.e. the Kantian notion of "sufficiency of the basic
associative
process").
Indeed theories regarding Dual systems of cognition are not
new
they are, rather, at the heart of psychology, even the reason
for its
existence. As Evans of Plymouth notes, research must be about a
first
system that works with beliefs... and a second system that works
with
logic.
Jonathan Evans (9) is quoted: Theories positing dual
cognitive
systems have become popular in cognitive and social
psychology.
Although these theories have a lot of common features,
inspection of
the literature reveals a number of difficult and unresolved
theoretical
issues".
Following up on paper 1 about how Dopamine and Norepi are
biochemical rivals central to nervous system function, and
are
associated with dendrites and axons respectively, this
thesis
attempts to resolve some of the most important of these
theoretical
issues.
Evans says: "The paradigm case in dual-process theories of
reasoning
is belief bias [a typical tendency to prefer basic association
of beliefs
over logic i.e. advanced associative process] In this method
(Evans et
al., 1983; Klauer et al., 2000) participants are given arguments
to
evaluate, whose conclusions either follow or do not follow
logically,
and are either consistent or inconsistent with belief.
Research
repeatedly shows that both logic and belief significantly
affect
decisions made, but the two seem to be in conflict within
individuals.
Noting that popular accounts (like Kahneman's book Thinking
Fast
and Slow) describe the elusive neural systems as System 1
(the
belief-bias i.e. syllogical system) and System 2 (the logical
system),
Evans adds: While belief-bias processes do have the
characteristics
typically ascribed to System 1 (fast, parallel, automatic),
they
are certainly not ancient. Nor are they shared with animals that
lack
a belief system. Thus, while some biases may be attributed
to
mismatch between the function of evolutionarily old
cognitive
systems and the current worlds much changed environment
(Stanovich, 2004), we need a different account for others
including
belief biases".
-
228
System 1 (aka syllogical faculty, which has been called
"logical", and
even "scientific", but it is about purely empirical, not
deductive
association of beliefs) and System 2 (logical skill, or more
precisely,
deductive logical skill which dysfunctions in the Nonverbal
Learning
Disabled) are both uniquely human, but some have better
developed
System 1, while others (Aspergians) have better developed System
2,
as we'll see.
The Frontal Executive Network
The Frontal Executive Network (FEN) has long been recognized
as
the uniquely human seat of cognition: The frontal lobes are
more
developed in humans than other animals. There is no other part
of
the brain where lesions can cause such a wide variety of
symptoms"
(1).
J. D. Chick and P. De Witte: "The importance of the frontal
lobes
derives from rich connections with almost all other parts of
the
central nervous system. The FEN, being most fundamental in
the
"systems of thinking" context, can be called the brain's
psychological
nucleus.
Scholars have found that it pulls relevant data from posterior
brain
areas for purpose of associative thinking. However, little
beyond this
idea is known.
Burgess quotes Rabbitt on the enigma of the FEN: Attempts to
define
executive function encounter an identical difficulty: no
single
exemplary task or even subset of tasks provides an adequate
ostensive definition. It is often necessary to fall back on
consensus
definitions drawn from the common sense of the man in the
street
or the collective wisdom of distinguished experts in the
field...these
tend to be wide-ranging catalogues of examples of
intelligent
behaviour and avoid entirely discussions of underlying process
(2).
This paper presents a preliminary investigation of the
underlying
process.
2 types of thoughts were found to exist in the FEN (aka
"Medial
Rostral PFC"/MPFC), so that it has been split into two
components,
rostral and caudal:
Gilbert et al.: "Activation peaks from studies involving
mentalizing
and self-reflection tasks were significantly caudal to those
from
studies involving other tasks. Conversely, activation peaks
from
studies involving multiple-task co-ordination were
significantly
-
229
rostral to those from other studies" (3). "Mentalizing"113, that
is,
reflecting on mental states is the manner of contemplating
others'/self's mental states, in which the (caudal) MPFC was
found to
have a role (4). On the other hand, in multiple-task
co-ordination,
which is a type of multi-object contemplation the rostral MPFC
has
a role.
Another proof of this demarcation of the MPFC into two
different
parts according to the different types of thoughts occurring in
these
parts, from Hiram Brownell et al.s experiment. Rita Carter
(15)
summarizes the experiment: 2 stories were asked. The first
story
tested Theory of Mind ("mentalizing"). The second tested
multi-
object contemplation ability. The question relating to the first
story
was:
Why did the burglar give up? which required one to think about
the
burglar's mind; while the question relating to the second story
was:
why did the alarm go off?, which required multi-object
contemplation
about a system of objects.
Rita Carter: Answering the first question required ideas
regarding
the burglars mind. The scans showed that normal persons used
quite
separate regions of their brain to work out each answer. The
first
113 See diagram attached to table 1, paper 1, for an idea of
what verbal mentalizing is.
-
230
question, that called for calculation of a persons mental state,
used a
spot in the middle of the prefrontal cortex one of the most
'evolved'
parts of the brain [orange/1]. Working out the question related
to
the second story used another spot beneath it (marked
2/yellow;
the experiment found that Aspergians used area 2 even to solve
the
first story's answer! This means that Aspergians tend to use the
NLT-
area).
These results were more or less confirmed by the
neuroimaging
studies of Gilbert et al. (3), who say "Neuroimaging data
revealed
adjacent but clearly distinct regions of activation within
MPFC
related to (i) mentalizing vs. non-mentalizing conditions
[red/A] and
(ii) SO vs SI attention [multi-object contemplation]" [green/B].
Thus,
clearly, the FEN has 2 components the upper area handles
mentalizing (and other processes), the lower area handles
thinking of
objects!
The next part of this thesis will show that the upper,
mentalizing-
related part of the FEN/MPFC can be called Linear-Thinking
area
(LT-area), whereas the lower
objective/multi-object-contemplation
part of the FEN/MPFC can be called Nonlinear-Thinking area
(NLT-
area)... The MPFC, or, to use the other word, "BA10" has
been
described as "one of the least well understood regions of the
human
brain".
-
231
During human evolution, this area expanded relative to the rest
of
the brain. Expansion of both NLT-area and LT-area occurred as
part
of human evolution.
Note the dendritic attribute of the LT-area:
It [LT-area] is also unusual in that its neurons have
particularly
extensive dendrital arborisation.
(Definitions of the terms Axonic and dendritic a
neuron with more higher order dendrital elaboration
and axonal development (myelination, branching) is
called Axonic and if it has more lower order
dendrital elaboration (branching/arborisation), it is
called dendritic).
Area 10 [LT-area] in humans has the lowest neuron density
among
primate brains.
Thus LT-area neurons have much more dendrital development;
neuron density is low; in other words, there are low number of
axons
(as only one axon per neuron) and profuse dendritic branching in
the
LT-area. The NLT-area, in contrast, has higher neuron density,
with
lesser dendrital arborisation. We can represent our
understanding as
a rough diagram:
-
232
The theory of two types of associative thinking
In the context of above diagram, the diagrammatic statement of
the
main Theory of two types of thinking (nonlinear thinking and
linear
thinking), is:
Scientists confirmed that dendrites store data about objects
(which
can be assumptions or more robust data). In both NLT-area and
LT-
area, neurons are emulating reality (storing object
representative
data aka object models), for purpose of associative thinking.
Models
are not corresponding to reality they are merely representations
of
reality.
-
233
The process of associative thinking presumably rejects
models
which do not fit the kernel of apparent truths, which can be
called the
mind's worldview.
Before this associative process begins, the system does not
know
which models are true.
The theory of two types of associative thinking states that
there are 2
different types of associative thinking in brains the first, the
LT-
area's dendritic associative process, that is purely empirical,
and the
other the NLT-area's axonic associative process, which has more
to
do with novel insight of non-empirical nature. In the
NLT-area
(where models are stored in neurons 1 to 7, for example): Due to
more
axons or more neurons per unit volume, the system emphasizes
contemplation of many models (ability to store more models
rather
than more detailed models, allows ability to weigh more models
in
contemplation). The NLT-area is about several models; the
LT-area is
about fewer but more elaborate or detailed models former is
the
scientific/logical method (in the philosophy of science,
considering as
many models as possible is most scientifically sound (Lakatos et
al.
(23)). The architecture of the LT-Area supports the
contemplation of
a few, extensively defined, and less reliable object models
(which can
be called less object-oriented) rather than as many models as
are
needed for logical contemplation. Therefore the focus of the
LT-area
is not on deductive contemplation, but on communication and
the
dendritic associative process (whose "paradigm case" is the
syllogical
process).
Dendrites are associated with Dopamine and Axons are
associated
with Norepi/Norepic processing, as per paper 1. That implies:
the
Axonic (meta-) NLT-area is associated with more Norepic
processing
than Dopaminic processing. Let us now study only the Norepic
aspect
of the NLT-area.
Nonlinear thinking The Norepic data processing associated
with the relatively Axonic NLT-area (more common in
logicians)
-
234
The NLT-area's deductive logic process can be analogized to the
lock-
picking process.
Norepic processing is numerous studies have shown associated
with contextual selection of an "eye-catching" datum, exactly as
seen
in the above diagram.
-
235
Norepi's processing is of this particular eye-catching data
involving
type:
a. The P300, the Norepi-related cortical event, responds to
environmental stimuli having behaviorally relevant,
motivational, or attention grabbing properties (18, 19, 20).
b. The P300 is usually elicited using the oddball paradigm,
in
which low-probability target items are mixed with high-
probability non-target (or "standard") items (21).
c. Devauges et al. found Cortical [Norepi] release can
increase
the alteration detection rate (number of times an alteration
was selected) in multiple-cue probability learning (6).
d. A. J. Yu et al. developed a Bayesian framework to examine
NE
release in instances of "unexpected uncertainty," where a
drastic alteration in sensory information produces a large
disparity between expectations and what actually occurs. The
model predicts that NE levels spike when the predictive
context is switched, then subside. It was shown that lesions
of
the LC impair this attentional shift (i.e. shifting attention
to
novel data) (7).
e. Chris Chatham: McClure et al. suggest that the anterior
cingulate cortex (ACC) may direct release of Noradrenaline
in
the LC. ACC is sensitive to conflict (i.e. if there are
multiple
competing stimuli or responses).
Thus the (mind's) eye-catching datum is selected, and becomes
the
subject of the output in the QGA this is how axonal processing
(in
the meta-NLT-area) works.
The detection of the most novel data causes either of the 3
types of
output or operations on NLT-area data: Elimination of
eye-catching
data, modification of eye-catching data, or Traction i.e.
summoning of
related data.
Now let us see how the dendrital processing in the
LT-area-linked
relatively dendritic circuit, differs. Again, axons are
associated with
Norepi, dendrites are associated with Dopamine and dendrital
processing, as per paper 1. That implies: the LT-area-linked
relatively
dendritic circuit is associated with more Dopaminic processing
than
Norepic processing. That is to say, Axonal/Norepic processing is
not
absent it is merely less in the LT-area-linked dendritic
circuit.
However, we will study only the Dopaminic/dendritic aspect of
the
meta-LT-area.
-
236
Linear thinking: The Dopaminic data processing associated
with
the relatively dendritic LT-area (more common in
syllogicians)
-
237
Above are Purkinje Cells from the ancient cerebellum First
we
notice that theyre highly dendritic. In that, the cerebellum
resembles
the (meta) LT-area.
Statement:
a) There are two types of associative processes, the
(rearranged-as-per-
formerly-known-pattern-data-returning as we shall be proving
now)
dendrital associative process associated with Dopamine and
dendrites... and the eye-catching-in-formerly-unknown,
detected-pattern-data-
returning axonal associative process associated with Norepi
and
Axons.
b) Extensive dendrital arborisation is not common, being found
only
in a few neurostructures such as the cerebellum and the LT-area.
One
can speculate that insight into the dendritic meta-LT-area's
style of
processing, can be gained by an examination of the cerebellum's
style
of processing.
The cerebellum receives input from sensory systems of the
spinal
cord and other brain areas, and integrates these inputs to
fine-tune
motor activity. E.g.: ensuring you dont step on your right foot
with
the left; thus a standard test of cerebellar function is to
reach with
the fingertip for a target: The Healthy person will move the
finger in
a rapid straight trajectory, while a person with cerebellar
damage
reaches slowly and erratically, with many mid-course
corrections.
The output from the cerebellum (where body parts should be) can
be
called a basic rearrangement of input (where body parts
are)/innate
data (ought to be).
-
238
The dendrital associative process seems to involve a sort of
comparison of to-be-arranged data with either pre-existing data
or
pre-defined formats (that conforms to the idea of D's
monoconditional
signalling!). The theory that the dendrital associative process
involves
a type of rearrangement/homogenization of data, is confirmed in
an
example which covers (undoubtedly) the LT-area (Aspergians
seem
worse at jumbled words in general): Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at
an
Elingsh uinervtisy (16), it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the
ltteers in
a wrod are, olny taht the frist and lsat ltteres are at the
rghit pcleas.
The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit
a
porbelm. What actually occurs when we look at, say, lteter?
Surely
we can say only that (in a dendrital process) the input data
was
compared with innate data (memory of "letter"), and output
(mental
contemplation of "letter") was found; it was, thus, a
rearrangement of
lteter. This is not so different from what happens in the
cerebellum, if
one thinks about it!
Thus we theorize that, in cerebellum-like dendritic systems,
circuits
with high quantity of data (where is foot, what is terrain like
etc.)
carry out an associative process which takes into account
many
sensorily intaken as well as non-intaken, innate data but it
involves
no deduction. The input data, as well as the output data, can
be
described as quantitative; the processing seems to involve more
the
monoconditional signalling which is indeed linked to D, than
N's
multiconditional signalling. Therefore, as the example of
cerebellum
shows, the dendritic system's output is about homogenizing
or
rearranging input data into internal coherence, not
insight/unknown
logical output as shown below that kind of processing is handled
by
the NLT-area.
Of course verbal go-around/thumb-rules can compensate for the
lack
of insight one can say, "whenever the tree bends to one side,
wind is
blowing towards that side" and use it as a general law... yet
that policy
has its limitations.
-
239
The LT-area process, being non-deductive, can be called a
largely
dendrital associative process. Transplanting this idea from
the
cerebellum into the similarly dendritic LT-area, gives insight
into the
LT-area process...
A semantic example of dendrital processing is how verbs are
processed (run becomes running etc.), or arranged
grammatically.
Or in its highest case, syllogical faculty reduced to outputs
which
are coherent with respect to Givens ("knowns" and "seens") even
if
not necessarily logical.
Syllogical faculty, as in the NLD patient in whom right
hemisphere
dysfunction is noted surely involves maximum development of
the
LT-area, because of how the right brain hemisphere is Axonic
(see
last footnote), thus Right Hemisphere dysfunction means a
generally
dendritic brain, which implies a higher development of the
dendritic
LT-area.
Thus we can state:
-
240
Thus the basic associative process is purely empirical, no
insight into
patterns is involved.
The same empirical association of data, or dendrital
associative
process, is discussed by Burgess et al. (17): "MPFC [LT-area]
lesions
disproportionately impair performance in ill-structured
situations
(e.g. Burgess et al. 2001; Goel & Grafman, 2000; Grafman,
2002). In
other words where the optimal way of behaving is not
precisely
signaled by the situation, so one has to impose ones own
structure.
Rostral PFC seems most involved in situations for which there is
no
well-rehearsed or well-specified way of behaving, and
therefore
behavioral organization needs to be self-determined. Burgess
discusses quantitative deduction, which is dependent on the
LT-area;
that has an empirical nature, and is different from
qualitative
deduction, that is, the NLT-area's process of insight (the true
meaning
of logic).
The LT-area "seems most involved in situations for which there
is no
well-rehearsed or well-specified way of behaving, and
behavioural
organization needs to be self-determined" This reminds us of
the
Aspergian's liking for a routine according to which their tasks
should
be done, and their unease with unpredictable situations;
e.g.:
Aspergian Schizoids are bad at improvisational conversation.
Burgess
et al. note that [LT-area] impairment led to a tardiness and
disorganization [Autistic character traits], the severity of
which
ensured that despite his intact intellect and social skills
[certain
higher social skills are processed in the NLT-area], he never
managed
to return to work like before. It explains why Aspergians are
worse
at chaotic quantitative empirical activities like official
algorithms, or
why Aspergians care more deeply about reform (which makes
the
system efficient, thus unnecessary things need not be
quantitatively
done).
Dopaminic processing, i.e. simple rearrangement of input data
and
comparison with innate data occurs in games like crossword,
chess,
jumbled words, and so forth; that is why Aspergians are bad at
such
games, or why these games occur in the newspapers circulated by
the
syllogicians.
An example of complex QRR modulators: Given the many details
one
knows regarding many people what to do? All these details
are
arranged for a result (e.g.: intimidate/please etc.). Such are
the
"situations for which there is no well-rehearsed or
well-specified way
of behaving, and therefore behavioural organization needs to be
self-
determined".
-
241
Such data rearranging neurostructures QRR modulators which
correspond to "instincts" constitute a "primal logic, which,
though
often complex, is part of the Receptive System, and involves
hard-set
dopaminic neural organs. QRR-Ms, which seem to be largely in
the
PFC (which gets stricken in case of AD) can result in
complex
behaviours, depending on the intricate arrangement of
Dopaminic
monoconditional signalling checkposts but it is different from
the
process of insight. As such, people high in such talents
(street
smartness, communicative abilities, charisma etc.) can be called
high
RQ (Receptive Quotient) type humans (Syllogician Schizoids).
Such
LT-area processing is nevertheless a type of intelligence,
useful in the
practice of doctors, pilots, editors, and many other
professionals.
Another example of QRR-Modulators: In the documentary
"Street
Thief", the thief has expertise in social engineering, stalking,
and
intelligence gathering, and discusses careful, meticulous
planning
cycles.
Until now we've seen 2 types of processing, Norepic/axonal
and
dopaminic/dendrital processing. It is not right to say that the
NLT-
area has only the former and LT-area has only the latter
rather,
NLT-area has more of the former, and the LT-area has more of
the
latter.
Thus we demarcate between 2 forms of associative thinking:
A. LT-area associative thinking, whose main aspect is
belief-
bias-based aka syllogical faculty.
B. NLT-area associative thinking, whose main aspect is
logical
talent.
Evans says: Research repeatedly shows that both logic and
belief
significantly affect decisions made, but the two seem to be in
conflict
within individuals (9).
Evidently, then, there are 2 systems in any brain, one working
with
logic and the other with beliefs; in some people known as
logicians
(e.g.: the senators of Rome) the NLT-area-linked logical system
is
predominant; the LT-area-linked syllogical system is predominant
in
syllogicians (examples of them are the Greek sophists or the
prefects
of Rome).
-
242
Left Brain, Right Brain
The axonic NLT-area largely interacts with memories stored
in
Axonic sites the dendritic LT-area largely interacts with
memories
stored in dendritic sites. Now, the right brain is relatively
axonic114,
hence most of the Axonic memories are stored in the right brain,
thus
the logical system should involve more the right hemisphere.
And
indeed, Bowden et al. (14) note that the right brain hemisphere
is
associated with the Aha! Insight experience which is nothing
but
the logical process.
St. George et al. (12) note that the right brain is making sense
of what
is: The brain areas involved in discourse processing were
scanned by
fMRI ... substantially more right hemisphere activation for
untitled than
for titled paragraphs.
The dendritic left brain, in contrast, just believes a title
that claims to
be representative of the passage which is the word-based
modeling of reality, which centrally defines syllogical skill's
nature.
The dendritic left brain is again pinpointed as the residence
of
syllogical reasoning by Gwen L. Schmidt et al. (13), who say:
Right
hemisphere role in unfamiliar sentences containing distant
semantic
relationships [logical relationships]". A left hemisphere role
in
"familiar sentences containing close semantic relationships
[syllogical relationships]. More work was done by Gazzaniga et
al.,
who show that, though it does not handle the finer points, the
right
brain can tell what is what... Which is why logicians/senators
must
be heard; a civilization without objective logic-guarding
senators is
like a brain without axonic development (i.e., the depressed
brain)...
114 Chris Chatham summarizes the research on the dendritic left
hemisphere: The left
hemisphere has larger dendritic branching than the right, at
large distances from the
dendrites main shaft; the opposite trend holds at distances
closer to the main dendrite.
-
243
The problem with an overly dendritic neural doctrine
"Aristotle and Galen did not consider the cerebellum truly part
of the
brain: They called it the parencephalon ("same-as-brain"), as
opposed
to the encephalon or brain proper. Bower argues that it is a
sensory
organ hyper-receptive, thus unlike the rest of the brain, which
is a
generative bastion of Norepi.
Is the syllogician's LT-area/FEN's progress towards a
cerebellum-
like, sponge-like dendritic structure a problem rather than
a
progress? It certainly seems a medical emergency given
Fingelkurts'
assertion that the depressed brain is less specialized (more
gray
matter-oriented, more dendritic). We can study an extinct
hominid,
the homo floresiensis (HF), to settle the issue. Though it is
indeed
said that the LT-area expanded as man evolved it is notable
that, in
the HF, BA10 (the LT-area) is even larger than in men! Notably,
it was
accompanied by a general shrinkage of the brain
(microcephaly)
though HF was advanced (as a derivative of homo erectus), its
brain
became smaller than that of the chimpanzee! Indeed the HF
became
extinct because of its overdependence on the LT-area. Thus HF is
a
closed model proving that increase of syllogical faculty is an
anti-
brain trend (indeed, hyper-RS is hypo-GS), so that it shrinks
the brain
as a whole. It appears that defects in the process of artificial
selection
should be blamed for the evolution of either the HF, or
increased LT-
area strength in syllogicians; again proves how estranged from
nature
man is!
-
244
~~~References~~~
(1) Kolb, B. and Whishaw, I. Q. (1990). Fundamentals of
Human
Neuropsychology, chapter 21. Memory, W. H. Freeman and
Company,
third edition.
(2) Rabbitt, Patrick (1997) (ed). Methodology of frontal and
executive function Hove UK: Psychology Press
(3) Sam J. Gilbert et al., 2007, Distinct regions of medial
rostral
prefrontal cortex supporting social and nonsocial functions, Soc
Cogn
Affect Neurosci. 2007 September; 2(3): 217226.
(4) Frith U, Frith CD. 2003, Development and neurophysiology
of
mentalizing, Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003 Mar
29;
358(1431):459-73.
(6) Devauges V, Sara SJ, Activation of the noradrenergic
system
facilitates an attentional shift in the rat. Behav. Brain Res.,
1990 Jun
18;39(1):1928.
(7) Yu, A. J.; Dayan, P. (2005). "Uncertainty, neuromodulation,
and
attention". Neuron 46 (4): 68192.
doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2005.04.026. PMID
(8) Nicholas Humphrey, Introduction to Consciousness
Regained,
1983, Oxford University Press
(9) Evans, J. St. B. T.; Barston, J. L. & Pollard, P.
(1983). "On the
conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning".
Memory
and Cognition 11 (3): 285306
Klauer, K.C.; J. Musch, B. Naumer (2000). "On belief bias in
syllogistic
reasoning". Psychological Review 107 (4): 852884.
(10) Evans,, J. St. B. T; Curtis-Holmes, J. (2005). "Rapid
responding
increases belief bias: Evidence for the dual-process theory
of
reasoning.". Thinking and Reasoning 11 (4): 382389
(11) Bob Jacobs, Matthew Schall, and Arnold B. Scheibel, A
Quantitative Dendritic Analysis of Wernicke's Area in Humans.
11.
Gender, Hemispheric, and Environmental Factors
(12) St George M, Kutas M, Martinez A, Sereno MI, Semantic
integration in reading: engagement of the right hemisphere
during
discourse processing
(13) Gwen L. Schmidt, Casey J. DeBuse, Carol A. Seger, Right
hemisphere metaphor processing? Characterizing the
lateralization
-
245
of semantic processes, , Department of Psychology, Colorado
State
University
(14) Bowden, Edward M.; Jung-Beeman, Mark (1 September
2003).
"Aha! Insight experience correlates with solution activation in
the
right hemisphere". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10 (3):
730737.
doi:10.3758/BF03196539
(15) Mapping the Mind, Rita Carter, Christopher D. Frith
(16) The Significance of Letter Position in Word Recognition
PhD
Thesis, 1976, Nottingham University, by Graham Rawlinson
(17) Burgess, P. W., Veitch, E., & Costello, A. (submitted).
The role of
the right rostral prefrontal cortex in multitasking: The six
element
test.
(18) Johnson, R.; Jr (1993). "On the neural generators of the
P300
component of the event-related potential". Psychophysiology 30
(1):
9097. PMID 8416066.
(19) Pineda, J.A.; Foote, S.L.; Neville, H.J. (1989). "Effects
of Locus
Coeruleus Lesions on Auditory Event-Related Potentials in
Monkey".
J. Neurosci 9 (1): 8193. PMID 2563282.
(20) Swick, D., Pineda, J. a, Schacher, S., & Foote, S. L.
(1994). Locus
coeruleus neuronal activity in awake monkeys: relationship
to
auditory P300-like potentials and spontaneous EEG.
Experimental
brain research. Experimentelle Hirnforschung. Exprimentation
crbrale, 101(1), 8692.
Duncan-Johnson, C.C.; Donchin, E. (1977). "On quantifying
surprise:
The variation of event-related potentials with subjective
probability".
Psychophysiology 14 (5): 456467.
(21) Squires NK, Squires KC, Hillyard SA. (1975). Two varieties
of
long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory
stimuli in man. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol.
38(4):387-
401. PMID 46819
(22) Behrendt RP, Hippocampus and consciousness, 2013
(23) Lakatos (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research
Programmes: Philosophical Papers Volume 1. Cambridge:
Cambridge
University Press