Mind chaos

Celebrate our ..ignorance. Ignorance equates to un-awareness. Nature-endowed. Become familiar, accept it, embrace it.

2011-11-04T12:26:00.010Z

Business Judgment Rule legal definition of Business Judgment Rule. ..by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

Business judgement rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

business judgement rule .. the innards of the system ..

.. reads ..

"To challenge the actions of a corporation's board of directors, a plaintiff assumes "the burden of providing evidence that directors, in reaching their challenged decision, breached any one of the triads of their fiduciary duty—good faith, loyalty, or due care"[2]"

the triads .. good faith, loyalty, due care .. so vague .. so obtuse(?) (how did that word came into mind?) ..does that make any sense at all? .. sense ..that I am oblivious to .. my conscious mind? .. and yet.. it came .. fulfilling .. a closure .. as yet .. un.. un.. what? .. unresolved ..

obtuse adj., -tus·er, -tus·est.

"Lacking quickness of perception or intellect.
Characterized by a lack of intelligence or sensitivity: an obtuse remark.
Not distinctly felt: an obtuse pain.
Not sharp, pointed, or acute in form; blunt.
Having an obtuse angle: an obtuse triangle.
Botany. Having a blunt or rounded tip: an obtuse leaf."

resolved .. by virtue of being ..vague .. handling such notions .. would not bear the best .. individuals can provide .. and any actions on the triads behalf .. would be characterised by .. lack of quickness of perception or intellect .. lack of intelligence or sensitivity .. not sharp, pointed, or acute in form; blunt

the sombre facade .. individuals are dressed .. exhibit .. put forth .. reason-inspired .. reason, its shaky foundations .. and its over-reliance upon such brittle fundamentals .. brought to bear .. by individuals surrounding the decision-makers .. any decision-makers .. at any level of any organised form .. individuals have willingly placed themselves .. or are placed by an organised system .. in whatever way it has evolved .. its evolution traced through centuries of human activity .. and unwittingly subjected by them .. the decision-makers .. and the decisions made .. which the least of all being .. that it is annoying .. going to the extremes .. which might include complete destruction .. verging annihilation ..

it proved to me .. that despite not knowing out of the top of my head .. the definition .. and therefore the reason for using that particular word (obtuse, that is) .. that intuition .. and intuition-governed discourse .. is paramount in achieving .. innovative results .. and works .. in un-awareness .. apparent .. un-awareness

..taking the whole process .. into a matter of trust .. trust of our intuitions .. they work via underlying mechanisms .. deployed virtually unaware of our consciousness .. or at least .. by some of the definitions given for consciousness ..

celebrate our ..ignorance .. how did that come forth .. ignorance equated to un-awareness .. become familiar with it .. accept it .. for ourselves .. and for other other people around us .. do not apportion malice as the only reason .. behind any decisions .. they make .. be that corporations bosses .. head of states .. politicians .. and above all .. anyone ..

.. endowed with .. it is nature-given .. our ways .. to explore ..our surroundings ..

wrong decisions .. accept them as mistakes .. theirs .. ours .. and move on .. remedy the situations .. the states, the outcomes .. if they need .. remediation ..

tolerance .. despite the ample display of arrogance .. human individuals are entitled to it .. their undeniable entitlement .. anyone is entitled to .. and anyone displays it .. in abundance .. it is a prerogative of the human individual .. we need it ..

vague .. fuzzy .. so spread out .. unable to quantify .. quantify .. legal .. law .. attempts .. to distil meaning .. definitions provided .. the cases a court by which ..it provides solutions .. boundaries .. limits .. strappings .. mere strappings .. arbitrary bootstraps ποδηγετιση ..

the whole system .. rely upon ..

uncertainties .. full of uncertainties .. thence ..it is amazing how anything based upon these ..triads .. can ever achieve the stable structures the corporations appear to have .. but at the same time .. the excesses that dominate the sector ..

Consciousness kicks in...

2011-09-19T01:16:00.002+01:00

Consciousness is a four- or higher-dimensional force that can operationalize the C-choosing-function and affect our trajectory through four-dimensional space.

consciousness ..composite entity .. components ..or the way it manifests itself .. as awareness ..or attention ..or free will .. to name a few ..

what passes as an inability to define consciousness ..is more fundamental ..is systemic as such .. consciousness as being the property of the system ..that stands above reality .. and manifests to us as .. spurts .. that last for moments only .. the intersections ..of a 4-d plane

bear similarities with

what makes people create convictions and stand by them .. simply a result of the materials upon which they conceive what happens what takes place in the sphere they are surrounded by .. where they unravel the threads of their lives

materials representing their state of knowledge ..of what is to be known and how deeply they know what they think they know .. skewed to a great extent upon the choices they made .. choices that they exert overriding influences .. self-imposed limits .. that ring-fence ..tight boundaries .. that strangle the individual within .. breathing space restricted .. the air it breathes .. it is needed .. ideas .. these furtive entities if heeded .. if their passage ..in and out ..of our sphere of influence .. are capable to break up the stranglehold ..the security enabled ring-fencing .. that was allowed to start building in the first place ..

consciousness kicks in

Fighting addiction .. by .. by-passing entire domains. ..

2011-06-20T13:14:00.003+01:00

In New Addiction Treatment Erases Drug-Associated Memories

"Professor Barry Everitt said, “The results suggest that efforts should be made to develop drugs that could be given in a controlled clinical or treatment environment in which addicts would have their most potent drug memories reactivated. Such treatments would be expected to diminish the effects of those memories in the future and help individuals resist relapse and maintain their abstinence."

a mental .. alternative ..

Drug .. anything classed as drug .. cigarettes .. alcohol .. name it .. addicted ..

addiction .. sustained .. by paths .. trodden .. visited .. again and again .. on and on ..

drug-associated memories .. drug-behaviours .. fractally organised in the brain .. in domains .. sub-domains ..etc ..

fighting addiction .. by .. by-passing entire domains ..

all a matter .. of what route is taken .. by one's mind .. one's consciousness daily stream ..

a route not taken ..a domain not visited .. is as good as .. not existing ..at all ..

a domain ..full of drug-associated memories .. all dragged .. into .. virtual oblivion .. from literally one moment to the next ..

once the tip of one's .. consciousness arrow .. mind .. is attracted .. beguiled .. drawn into

a more powerful cause .. purpose .. that swamps .. obliterates any cause .. (pre)-existing ..

.. logical explanation?

2011-04-19T11:00:00.003+01:00

logical explanation .. what is that .. accustomed .. been bred within .. the logical explanation .. mechanistic .. Newtonian .. states organised along these lines .. societies ..

is there anything logical .. the way it is assumed .. the attributes of the concept amassed over the years .. the language formed .. used profusely and determine the thoughts that people make ..

there is nothing logical .. in the way people's minds work .. there is nothing logical .. in the way nature works for that matter .. in the way that systems work .. in general

emergence .. weightings .. concepts .. or entities undergoing processes .. the processes themselves .. that derive out of the working the concepts .. what the entities that comprise the system do ..

weightings in the processes .. that make one stronger or weaker than another .. each of the competing processes ..though they are other than competing against each other .. merely .. set side-by-side .. any competition might be surmised .. its purely seen in artefactual manner .. as seen from the perspective of an outsider .. an observer .. and that observer is identified ..as the human individual..

processes .. playing in the same field .. what could be construed as .. competing with one another .. but there is nothing intrinsic within the processes .. that could justify .. the idea of competition .. each process unravels on its own merits and for its own sake alone ..

what is measured as the outcome .. is a combination of the outcomes .. of all the processes within a particular field ..

The spread of uprisings ... An explanation from beyond ..

2011-03-24T12:01:00.012Z

An explanation beyond the tangible, of what can be seen; touched; listened to, of rationality, of what is known and discussed about consciousness (1).

Right now I am contemplating while I listen to Al Jazzera English live channel on the protests that currently are taking place in Syria today 12:00 noon on Thursday 24th March 2011.

The triggers were given from what I read about in that paper (3)

represent states .. all in a superposition of states .. which its imminent collapse .. will be manifested as an act of decision making .. the individual making a judgement

and in this superposition of states .. anything is entered . as Feynman's original explanation .. the journey of an electron for going from A to B includes the path that takes the electron to the moon before it ends to B

.. combined with what I contemplated and wrote about in that post about the human individual as quantum mechanical entity

the other paper about concepts

ideas concepts do not spread only in hard copy written listened talked

but in the context of global consciousness

.. that the only thing that has to be done is for individuals or individual to merely think of a concept in the form of a fledgling idea .. without even the need to be written down, for others to read, to be spoken, for others to listen .. merely contemplated

it resembles what has been said about memes .. but goes even beyond that .. quantum events .. quantum mechanical entities .. the idea of waves .. propagating in the noosphere .. do not require .. what can be taken as .. hard copies (tangible)

the common and collective cauldron of concepts .. the material by which .. consciousness is made out of .. consciousness as it is split .. into the myriads consciousness of the individuals around the world .. but altogether connects .. there is cohesion .. cohere into what it is part .. global consciousness .. assembled .. created .. brought to existence .. according to principle of the whole as being more than the sum of its parts

superposition of states .. the myriad states .. which its collapse .. brings about the existence

the myriad states .. out of the ideas and concepts .. thought .. when a concept thought .. out of the myriad combinations of all the concepts already existing .. a novel approach .. the idea that instantiates .. becomes the state to collapse ..

that indicates .. how futile is Gaddafi's efforts .. to battle against the uprising of Libyan people .. what Yemeni president Saleh tries to avoid

someone would call it the awakening . of the global consciousness .. that spreads all over the Arab world

certainly the growth of all the social media contribute to that awakening the spread of the ideas and concepts

new social media certainly were not sufficient in themselves to spark an awakening or bring about real political change.(2)

the boundaries of merely being a tool for global capitalism in the hands of the corporations .. but having a will of its own .. the global consciousness .. have surpassed .. broken out of the boundaries .. that they were set out to begin with ...

provides the bed upon which global consciousness .. to unleash unstoppable forces

they are many wonders that they are still on hold for the human individual .. the extent its mind can reach .. a process that all these years was hindered .. by the insane and inane pursuit of money .. the wasting of the human potential .. to pursuits .. that debase .. brutalise .. trivialise its true worth and value

------------
(1) Mind Chaos: Knowing the limits consciousness offers to self.
(2) The persistent fear base of authoritarianism
(3) METACOGNITIVE EXPERIENCES AND THE INTRICACIES OF SETTING PEOPLE STRAIGHT: IMPLICATIONS FOR DEBIASING AND PUBLIC INFORMATION CAMPAIGNS

“tipping point” .. weighting? .. chaotic dynamics .. chaos self-similarity at work .. adhering to ..

2010-12-23T00:36:00.002Z

"These results suggest a “tipping point” in the cortical network dynamics analogous to that found for the spread of ideas, innovation, and economic behavior in social networks, where a small increase in the number of participating agents can suddenly lead to widespread cascades of adoption."

.. where did I get that quote from, evades me.

“tipping point” .. weighting? .. chaotic dynamics .. chaos self-similarity at work .. adhering to ..

but what about ..as well .. to 'the small increase in the number of participating agents can suddenly lead to widespread cascades of adoption' ..

Bifurcating being thinking itself. And what guides and unravels thoughts, what powers the thinking process is chaos itself.

2010-11-02T23:12:00.002Z

Starting in a chaotic mode. Just what it comes into my mind. The point at hand, to start. What does this mean and how can I accommodate the thoughts brought forth, in this post with my pre-existing notions already stored in my brain. And certainly, as paper-lecture 1(?), proclaims, if I do not manage to fit it alongside or in-between my pre-knowledge structures, I will re-arrange my pre-knowledge structures, even break them up, and re-assemble them again as new knowledge structures, creating new knowledge.

That I see, in my brain-level, as the formation of new synapses and hence novel neural paths, the neural path itself, all the nodes traversed, nodes being effected by the synapses, is what stores the knowledge structure, the concepts, the notions, the ideas. All together coalescing to produce the mind. The creation of a new synapse representing the bifurcation. Bifurcating being thinking itself. And what guides and unravels thoughts, what powers the thinking process is chaos itself.

Learning being the very application of the chaotic reiterative function, repeated on and on, on every knowledge structure possessed. And let us bring on what is mentioned in (that website(?)) that proves, what holds for the logistic map, the sensitivity to the initial conditions.

I will start with the iterations. Certainly, chaos and what has come up forth and we know about it, requires reiterations, repetitions. It is self-referential more than anything else. Despite whether, as the claim of its intrinsic determinism referred, it is deterministic or not. As I see it and profess its implication in the lives of individuals, within an individual or of societies of individuals, its reiterative nature come about via our habits which determine the course of events in our lives, again individually and collectively.

As habits, exercising our habits, is the way we apply the concepts we abide to, as it is explained in that paper(?) dealing with concepts, the very mention of habits include the notion of reiterations. Our exercising our habits.

Παρασκευή, 23 Οκτωβρίου 2009; 12:37:52 πμ

Science's arrogance?

2010-10-21T09:48:00.008+01:00

In Nasim Taleb's book 'Black Swan, the Impact of the Highly Improbable', page 138, it mentions:

"Let us examine what I call epistemic arrogance, literally, our hubris concerning the limits of our knowledge. Episteme is a Greek word that refers to knowledge; giving a Greek name to an abstract concept makes it sound important. True, our knowledge does grow, but it is threatened by greater increases in confidence, which make our increase in knowledge at the same time an increase in confusion, ignorance, and conceit."

Episteme, it may refer to knowledge but it primarily means 'science', so someone should read the term of 'epistemic arrogance' as 'scientific arrogance', more at the heart of the matter alluded by the uncommon use of the term, unfamiliar to a wider audience. The use of the Greek word 'episteme', it is not merely giving a veil of importance but the equivalent of a derogatory term to science itself. That science could stoop so low as to becoming arrogant.

By the use of Greek words freely outside the context of the Greek language ignoring the semantic overtones that bear, it has been an ingrown pastime, Greeks would say a lack of respect of the language. But what the heck, why not, words are merely symbols to be used at will to the context it is transferred to and the meaning attributed it alone. However when as in this case the use of a word that in its original form means what you try to avoid saying to their face reveals a cautiousness from the part of the introducer and mar the very concept itself instead of being different.

You are avoiding saying to their face that science itself creates arrogance.

.. has a past ..

It is not the limits of our knowledge that it is questioned here but our over-reliance to our conscious aspect of our consciousness, it is our conscious mind that is arrogant, it bears the ingredients to become arrogant.

.. don't blame knowledge itself but the way it is used ..

It is our conscious mind that overwhelmed by notions that prevail in our societies, in the current stage and age, that drives individuals to a trail of arrogance.. (page 139)

".. Harvard Business School students, a breed not particularly renowned for their humility or introspective orientation. MBAs are particularly nasty in this regard, which might explain their business success."

.. nasty ..!!

or in page 137

"Many of the opera-bound people looked like they worked for the local office of J. P. Morgan, or some other financial institution where employees experience differential wealth from the rest of the local population, with concomitant pressures on them to live by a sophisticated script (wine and opera)."

Conscious mind is a product, highly amenable to influences, which at any time could lead it astray. Succumbs under the pressures, a (highly?) volatile quantity. That is the make-up of our conscious mind. Restrains, puts reigns to its unconscious counterpart, undermines the unconscious, instils it with fear, hesitation. Hesitance, self-doubt creeps in, confidence is undermined.

When my conscious self gets in the way, interferes, I loose the streak that my unconscious put forth. All the concepts are there, awaiting, but the conscious is an ill agent, contributor, handler. Can not handle things in the way the unconscious can, knows, handles.

And how can it not be. Logic reasoning, logic reasoning works at another level above what unconscious works, a bundle of things that their main reason being there, is to put barriers, to slow down, mostly to a standstill, the thoughts that rush in.

Science, the way it is employed by its purveyors, can not be imaginative.

Conscious mind emergent? A construct? What fires up the conscious, cranks the brain machine from the top, from a higher level? Till all the cogs of the brain machine are in motion, it takes time, they are not deployed fast. Fast enough. A notion that is revealed to any individual that complains at a computer, that is not fast enough, unaware of the speed, the complexity of a program entails, which its conscious mind can not emulate, but its unconscious can.

The unconscious works down at the deepest level, down to the level of neurons themselves, at speeds unimaginable. Where inspiration resides and fires up.

The conscious, can not only keep up the pace, but stops the fire spreading. The unconscious is what pokes out the ideas, bifurcations ahoy. The conscious kills the unconscious, undermines, the unconscious, instils it with fear, hesitance. When my conscious mind gets in the way, interferes, I loose the streak that my unconscious pushed forth. Grammar rules, overbearing syntax, fancy words that could do without, see to that. The conscious writhes in, struggles and suffers.

-----------
and its use in this context it is not merely to make the abstract concept sound important but it is used to derogate science itself or at least one of its aspects the aspect that science can be used in arrogant ways, a slur against science itself and not a totally different concept.

Consciousness is not a thing, but a process

2010-09-19T07:21:00.006+01:00

deep inroads dug .. the stream is narrowing .. are nearer to a solution

In Fractal Neurodynamics and Quantum Chaos: Resolving the Mind-Brain Paradox through Novel Biophysics, Chapter 2.1 Defining Mind and Consciousness, Paragraph 2.1.3.3

"As William James originally pointed out "consciousness is not a thing, but a process"."

Consciousness, a process and by being a process is ongoing, it needs to keep going. Sustained by what has sparked it, in the first place. Once sustaining is not possible, ceases to be, consciousness dwindles to its ground state, nothingness.

"Conscious features may thus be rapidly transformed by the very act of observation, leaving only the sensoria as stable observables."

Conscious features what we use to define and describe our inner and outer worlds and by such an act instantiating an instance of existence of ourselves at its centre. Consecutive instances stringed along depicting the flow of our lives, each instance depending on the conscious features being continually transformed enabled by the very act of observation anchored in our sense organs.

"Thought is an example of such dynamically unstable observation, because the act of thinking results in an evolution of the experience."

Thought being more than just an example, but the reason the human individual has reached to such heights of development, the part of consciousness that enables experience to evolve, to transform experience in ways impossible for other brain architectures existing and use this transformation to continually re-define its role in its surroundings. Adjusting to its surroundings enabled and simultaneously transforming the surroundings to fit self, a virtually eternal cycle.

"An idea is an unstable bifurcation to a novel thought state."

The essence of idea, as they appear as unstable bifurcation, fledglings to be nurtured, fed to fulfil their purpose thereafter, to consummate the role they will play in restructuring our inner and outer worlds, our world. Their immense transformative power. Without ideas we would have never progressed from our primitive stage.

Inspiration .. flashes .. what is perceived as, .. the norm of thinking out of the turmoil of brain activity.

2010-07-20T07:56:00.002+01:00

...

I would not put .. a nail .. a distinction between the two .. suffice to say .. the fine boundaries .. of conscious and unconscious activity .. their interaction .. a collaboration .. how it is affected .. obscured .. blurred .. disoriented by the conditions surrounding ..self .. favourable conditions ..a must .. for its un-interrupted ..action .. whatever these might be .. for an individual .. a specific individual ..

a mind .. fresh, crisp, brand new .. like in the morning .. as if the thoughts .. leave a residue behind .. that clogs up .. the paths .. the passage-ways for the trajectories to run .. for thinking to develop .. evolve .. thought residue .. clouds the mind .. the conscious action .. its will aspect .. clouded, obscured, haphazard .. looses purpose, focus, attention .. the sleep clears the mind .. hippocampal or other action .. memories .. jumbled-up fragments .. separated, sorted in piles, segregated .. the paths cleared .. highways .. ready for another bout ..of activity .. amidst a day's toil

'The Emperor's new mind' Roger Penrose page 542

"The many hard hours of deliberate conscious activity would certainly be necessary, and sometimes it would take a while to re-acquaint myself with the problem."

.. in my mind .. trying ..to acquaint? .. myself? .. to the hmm.. value? .. role? .. significance? .. relative ..value? .. of whatever .. of conscious ..vs unconscious .. the relevance .. of conscious and unconscious ..activity .. deliberation

despite all .. this chaos .. I feel .. I am building the attractors .. and out of both .. modes of thinking? .. conscious ..thinking and unconscious ..thinking .. to find out .. how the two are related .. or ..being more precise .. how ..I relate them

.. mentioned them as modes ..of thinking .. though to someone .. and not me .. would not attribute .. thinking with unconscious

.. nevertheless I feel .. that both ..collaborate .. need each other .. intertwined .. one takes hold ..on what the other ..has left on .. a loop .. swirling constantly ..and that action ..goes beyond .. what someone .. wants to prove .. they have ..a connection? .. their connection .. all of their own ..despite of what ..lingers at the back ..of the mind ..of anyone .. trying to handle ..their relationship

they need .. one-another .. regardless ..of viewpoints ..one looks at them ..

hard hours .. of deliberate conscious activity .. Penrose hard on his heels .. to prove ..the superiority ..of conscious ..self? .. to its ..unconscious counterpart .. but that is not .. what conscious is .. it is not one of its attributes .. deliberate? .. may be to the point .. that expresses will ..and tenacity ..and perseverance .. a focusing ..kind of ..action .. to concentrate the focus of attention .. to one particular ..aspect ..object .. while at the same time .. is wandering about .. swirling around .. above ..what it is sustained ..by .. what is relevant .. to the aspect or ..the object .. deliberately ..its activity ..is focused upon ..

conscious activity ..is driven by will .. wants to ..

.. what I have ascertained .. about ..a point to ..contemplate ..separately .....

.. the concentrated nature .. attribute of ..conscious activity ..its single-dimensional nature ..its wave-front .. the tiny .. focal point .. to the quantum .. of the world .. that bears it? ..it is a part of .. a photon wave .. its wave-front ..sinusoidal .. the loop ..in time ..of its motion ..its movement ..followed the wrong thread .. inappropriate .. irrelevant dimension .. strayed .. lost focus .. taken away .. to the unconscious ..side .. need to ascertain ..focus ..deliberate ..conscious action ..

conscious action .. to put me back into the path .. I had originally in mind .. hard hours of conscious activity .. anything but .. where ..haphazard ..chaotic involvement .. what conscious does ..is to pull ..one's mind .. out of the chaos .. and put ..the concerted thinking .. back on the track .. force the mind to settle the chaos .. into an attractor .. a dive ..necessary ..in deep waters

all thinking ..is unconscious .. conscious action .. the flashes .. a sign that a connection ..has been availed .. an association .. of concepts ..notions .. ideas .. which to the physical level of the brain .. equates with a ..bridge .. a synaptic connection .. between one neuron with another .. or may be more than one .. several neuron-to-neuron connections between neuron groups .. assemblies .. which as ..wholes .. represent the concepts involved

flash .. connections snapped ..into being .. inspirations .. the mode of function of brain activity .. the norm and not ..the exception .. the underlying turmoil of all brain activity .. of thinking ..

Chaotic logic?

2010-02-02T11:45:00.003Z

...

.. chaotic logic .. an overview of logic .. ponder on it .. it will come without being aware of .. the problem and the solution .. out of the attractors .. that chaos is built out with .. never fret .. be confident .. have confidence ..

Example: The second law of thermodynamics .. sprung up .. in front of me .. present itself .. to my consciousness .. without warning .. un- anticipated ..

it made wonder .. is it just a fluke? .. does it fit? .. to my current mode of thinking .. the urge to revise .. the concept used .. mode .. it is not mode .. 'something' objects .. argues .. what is that 'something' .. that raises that objection .. apart from the tedious .. the obvious .. that is 'me' and 'me' .. participants .. huh .. in this conversation .. huh again ..

participants .. where .. did these participants .. came from .. concepts .. grappled with .. and by .. thought .. the circularity .. in this process .. contemplating the concepts .. the concepts get back to you .. concepts participate in the conversation .. a loop .. suspended on its own .. materialise .. instantiate .. without the need .. for another .. the physical presence .. of another individual .. to bounce on your ideas .. on your thoughts

what is your role then .. (no question-mark) .. just a wondering thought .. your participation .. in this process .. seems minimal .. the process unravels .. without you actually making a significant contribution .. you are just recording the outcomes of the process .. concepts .. kind of .. answer back .. and concepts raise the questions .. you are just the vehicle of that conversation .. you might as well .. not be here .. witness? .. (that's a question-mark)

hindsight .. or the idea this line of thought .. touched .. touch .. the rudiments of .. soul .. or 'something' .. along the lines of soul .. the word soul .. being used and abused .. repeatedly ..

witness .. (not a question-mark) .. wondering .. contemplation .. the closure of the thought? .. for now? .. reached a stalemate? .. no bouncing back? .. it exhausted the gamut .. the range .. of stored .. stored what? .. the words .. memories .. concepts? .. that's just using the same term .. to refer to itself .. stored .. what there are imprints of .. patterns .. neural nets .. in neuron pathways .. adjacent neurons .. synapse .. connected .. synapse mediated pathways .. the carriers .. (look at that) .. that gives an answer .. to what .. you implied .. what you came up with .. a few minutes ago .. in the paragraph above .. the witness .. you are not a mere witness .. or just a witness ..you are the carrier as well .. or .. even .. the sole carrier ..

without you .. without your mind .. there won't be any concepts .. to talk about .. you make it possible .. if it wasn't for you, concepts would not exist .. receptacle .. you are the receptacle .. where concepts reside .. develop .. argue with you .. or between themselves

immortality? .. purpose for being? .. what we are? .. along these lines ..

How long will it take, for an (any) untrained brain, to fathom into the most intriguing aspects of human knowledge.

2010-01-11T16:07:00.004Z

How long will it take, for an (any) untrained brain, to fathom into the most intriguing aspects of human knowledge. The complexity is bottomless but yet within the grasp of the mental capabilities of the human individual. One can master any subject in any discipline human knowledge invented.

The question is asking, how long, as it takes for granted, and not assuming, that such a task can be accomplished. It is not, if, or whether, a human individual is capable of mastering any aspect of knowledge open to scrutiny, but how long. The current thought occurred, well not occurred, instantiated, out of thoughts triggered while reading the following paragraph page 102, 'emergence, from chaos to order' of John H. Holland

"Processing. For simplicity, the model will do its central processing via a large number of neurons that are interconnected at random. That is, the axon of any given neuron in the central group branches in such a way as to make random synaptic contacts with other neurons in the central group. The connections, once established, remain fixed thereafter. This arrangement, of course, sets aside all the structural biases that evolution has supplied to real nervous systems. There is, however, an advantage to using a model net that has no initial structural bias. Any feature extraction accomplished by such net can only be the result of learning; it cannot be built in by an initial structural bias."

Feature extraction. Features that describe and define concepts. Concepts assume their existence by the features that describe and define them. What the human brain is doing is identifying features, lost in the mists of insurmountable complexity, but lost to the untrained mind, only too obvious to the trained mind. The vast range of stimuli for the brain to take in, enormous. Hinders the efforts of individuals to acquire meaning, stimuli for all the features concepts or non-concepts are made out of, and acquiring the right stimuli of the right features, the features the trained mind will pick out from. And how this ability is afforded .. it is afforded by learning ..the process by which vast amounts of knowledge has been accumulated over eons by inquiring minds, one that is the signature of all individuals.

It sets aside the structural biases, the hardwiring aspect, the genes, the genetic makeup, what has been used up incessantly to separate people, into worthy and unworthy, capable and incapable, brilliant and stupid which attributes intelligence as something inherited through generations. The tendency of past and current societies to belittle the human individual and its constant efforts to stray the individual away from accomplishing its goals, collectively and individually.

What fed hordes of conceptions to support racism, sexism and all other discriminatory constructions to achieve ulterior goals. It (learning) shakes off, and keeps shaking of, all these maligning conceptions, the proof, the indication of such process, or whatever someone can call it, it is irrelevant

Humble me .. I will challenge the 'randomness' quality .. attributed by the sentences .. 'interconnected at random' and make 'random synaptic contacts' which do not give credit to the implications of chaotic processes which our brain employs, and by implicating chaos as a participant and as a way of processing, we make use of the attractor concept deeply seated within the chaos framework. The concepts sought after, lie within an attracting basin that chaos assisting processes leads us to.

Chaos enabled pathways, trajectories assists us in our journey to knowledge, as knowledge is already there, awaiting for our arrival.

The wonders of my mind ...

2009-12-28T13:44:00.002Z

Learning, that is what I am doing right now. And what is learning? Simply categorising all the new information that entered the realm of my mind, in the immediate past, pigeon-holing it, organising it according to the framework, I have chosen gradually over time.

Haphazard, in a way chaotic, as i prefer to call it. Chaotic in the manner it instantiates, it is brought into existence, right from when it is generated right down to the way it is implemented.

Generation, by the way the accumulated instabilities already in place, deep into my brain, vibrate, responding to tiny flickers of ideas, I come across, and set the neurons in my brain in motion. Neural energy floods my brain, drives my neurons re-arranging actions. Instabilities, ideas ad limbo still seeking closure resurrect. Synapses ad necessito break apart, the room they leave, a void to be filled by new synapses, eagerly absorbing the new ideas, while an excited state overwhelms my being. New synapses, unforeseen, rigorously form.

Implementation chaotic, by way it is organised and by that I mean, without being sought after, specifically. Without seeking the particulars of any specific information, but letting information come in, seemingly haphazardly, without any plan, any conscious plan for that matter, without a consciously implemented plan.

Brought along, another attribute of chaos. In the way it manifests itself, a radical overhaul of sectors of ideas fostered by minute inconspicuous details of information. Little ideas with overwhelming potential, as by changing them, enable my mind compelling insights.

Out of the blue, of no-where, of seemingly incoherent information, the attractors of my thoughts, the framework set forth, is hidden from my conscious mind, but nevertheless, exists. What is seemingly haphazard, is not haphazard at all. It guides the essence of my thoughts, without me knowing and puts them together.

Learning, a process which incorporates all the seemingly disparate ideas, into a coherent whole. Its limitation, its necessity of a clear, un-troubled mind state, required. Clarity of mind available, at only suitably selected day's intervals.

Analysing a thought from its inception to its conclusion.

2009-10-02T06:33:00.003+01:00

Analysing a thought from its inception to its conclusion. It is a process and as such it will be dealt with. For the thought to materialise, to instantiate it has to be embedded in two levels, the brain and the mind. The brain refers to the neural structures that carry the mental structures, the neural structures being the vehicles for the mental structures.

It relies upon the existence of a certain number of intermediate, pre-existing thoughts in the form of ideas, concepts, notions namely pre-existing mental structures despite their validity, as such the only pre-requisite is that they are secure in a psychological sense in the mental level and more significantly, for the thought process to occur their existence in the neural level. A necessary condition to be satisfied otherwise the thought process would not occur.

The thought process would undergo with whatever is available at the neural level. The mental structures are composite exist as free-standing units and they are accomplished via connections associations between neural structures by synaptic pathways. Synaptic pathways traverse disparate regions of the brain? Proximity matters?

Confusion matters? Confusion dissolved? Cleared? Confusion a hindrance for a thought to occur? A thought can be thought as a novel way of looking at things, something new created despite its magnitude or its significance. It differs from other mental processes that involve a simple recall of stored ideas, concepts, notions, or even plain memories.

Thinking is a process where new associations are performed and is triggered when individuals are confronted with tasks which there is not a ready made solution. They have to invent the solution.

"make sense"

2009-09-30T12:45:00.000+01:00

Peeve of the day

Kevin LeBleu said...

Tom: I don't think "make sense" is a very good measure. Our brains are only built to make sense of what they'd encounter in a natural/wild environment, without the aid of technology much more advanced than stone tools. Even then they only had to make enough sense of stuff to out-survive the other guy.

Perhaps "have supporting evidence" would be a better measure?

A few examples of things that don't make sense, but are well supported by evidence are General Relativity, Special relativity and Quantum Electro Dynamics.

Another problem with the "make sense" approach is that deity "makes sense" to a lot of people, because our brain is built for understanding how other people think and finding patterns. Unfortunately, it makes it easy for our brain to try and interpret naturally occurring events as having a human-like intelligence behind them.
May 4, 2009 10:43 AM

... "I don't think "make sense" is a very good measure" ...

What does make sense ... actually means.

Certainly there is a valid point ... in what Kevin LeBleu mentions that ...

"Our brains are only built to make sense of what they'd encounter in a natural/wild environment, without the aid of technology much more advanced than stone tools."

Our brains, and not even our minds, are built to make sense and by that I take it, as our senses, our sense organs, all of them, will confer to what it makes sense. Implicates our sense organs. The sense we make, is what our sense organs, allows us to.

It brings into my mind the thoughts I had contemplated upon the range of stimuli our sense organs can detect, upon which, our brains and our minds will make sense out of. Our brains will only see the narrow range of what is going on around us, that our own human resolving time allow us to detect and from them to pick the stimuli and use to make sense. Anything else is obscured, it is not there, practically equivalent to, it does not exist, as our brains and the minds we make sense with, do not take it into consideration.

The thought Kevin LeBleu expressed

"... without the aid of technology much more advanced than stone tools"

it reminded me what I read about our human resolving times compared with the resolving time of a fast electronic device

"For the human eye and ear, resolving time is about 0.1 s, while a fast electronic device might have a resolving time of 10 billionths of a sec (10^-10 s)."

This idea alone made me think how many events are taking place around us, that our senses can not distinguish and built experience, as our resolving time is not small enough to separate them into the distinct entities they are. How much information is lost. Technology makes it possible to overcome this limitation, as the recent scientific breakthrough about the world's fastest camera.

To what extent people are taking on board these fundamental limitations of our brains, when they try to make sense out of any new ideas they come across.

Is it not an overindulgence, being over-optimistically proud of what we consciously know, and with such unfounded fervour, try to pass along what sense we make?

That kind of attitude is not different, from the ridicule (I can certainly imagine so) suffered by the individual who invented the wheel, by his fellow stone-age contemporaries, or any other innovation that run counter to what individuals made sense of.

for me ... this is not, in any way different, for any idea that comes along.

What if our human resolving time was on a par with the resolving time of a fast electronic device?

Though, the thought above it would require drastic human alterations, not feasible, however it raises the question of how much more there is around the matter of our experience, the information we take in, that there is experience still to be had.

Would it not then our brains, with our senses, equipped with the resolving times of fast electronic devices, be able to resolve between events, that now we experience as taking place simultaneously, as been distinct from one another? How would this alter our perception? The sense we make out of things around us?

Do we rely too much in what we consciously know and make sense out of. There is loads of information out there, from which we have only the knowledge of the tip of the iceberg.

Is it wise to dismiss any new ideas that are coming forth on the grounds of what it makes sense, for us right now?

Questions seeking to resolve ensuing chaos

2009-09-30T09:17:00.004+01:00

...

.. chaos ensues as there is something still unresolved ... seeking its resolution .. as in everything there are variables and parameters .. that define the processes underlying a system's state .. the paths taken .. a change in one of the values in the variables or parameters perturbs the processes under way ... myriad alternatives are revealed .. with each one a potential solution to the problem at bay .. that offers the resolution needed

individual seeks order? .. the drive, the motive .. to resolve chaos .. by looking at the internet with the keyword chaos .. we probably will amass a great number of cases daily .. which refer to chaos .. and find what was still unresolved .. and what change .. in what specific variables or parameters perturbed the processes .. what alternatives have been unravelled .. and whether there was any of alternatives picked out .. as the solution to the problem

Changes in variable or parameters? .. either change .. or change in only variable or parameter? .. anyway, my thought developed that .. the changes which will bring forth temporary(?) chaos .. would be on parameters .. as first the range parameters vary is small .. whereas variables can accommodate a larger range .. variables expected to change freely .. without a big effect on the state of a system .. a linear effect .. whereas parameters are restricted, not as free as variables .. and their change .. might alter completely the state of the system .. potentially(?) nonlinear effect

might alter completely the state of the system? .. as a system is defined by the variables and parameters that brings it forth .. is relying upon a specific set of variables and parameters ... new variables are expected to appear, to emerge .. and they are responsible to the system's new state .. 'old' variables might either disappear completely or their presence might be reduced .. second-rated .. their significance diminished .. a set of other variables at bay .. variables hidden .. underlying .. non-observed .. unobserved .. the system changed non-linearly

Rejecting objectivity, embracing subjectivity.

2009-06-15T01:05:00.005+01:00

It is mentioned in the article, "Quantum Mysticism: Gone but Not Forgotten", that

"... the mathematician John Von Neumann intentionally used ambiguous terms when discussing the philosophy of quantum equations, meaning he could fit on either side."

Either sides of, mysticism in science, as different aspects are explored, what the article is about. But beyond that, this phrase reveals the extraordinary significance that language plays in the efforts of human individuals to probe reality.

Ambiguity intended, not an accident, conferring meaning for either side. Individuals in either side found meaning in John Von Neumann's terms, each for their own sake. Revealed by the individual John Von Neumann, the extreme flexibility of language, assisting in meaning creation by individuals.

As it is further mentioned

“He was a genius at linguistic innovation and came up with German terms that could support many different interpretations,”

Linguistic innovation, terms to support, many different interpretations. The essence of language in the human individual's attempts to grab a firm hold on reality. Von Neumann's genius reveals language's in-exhaustive potential. Dynamic, hand-in-hand with the mind's ingenious ability to probe reality. Always in flux. By its use the individual is able to, acquires the ability to discern the minutest details of physical processes.

Stop seeing language as the rigid body, riddled with rules, queen's english and so on, a tool to separate the pleb from the patrician. Rules that are flexible, that bent but do not crack, do not give in. Rules that are as many as the individuals, that use the language, rules that their only purpose being, to assist the individual's effort to achieve meaning. Instead of a set of rules that render language, a tool for the privileged, the supposedly educated lot in the world, that intimidate individuals, spurn them from expressing themselves and bring forth the contents of their minds. Sprawl for others to see, increase the subjectiveness in the world. Use their consciousness to a massive collective effort to probe reality.

Mentioned in the article

"In 1958, Schrödinger, inspired by Schopenhauer from youth, published his lectures Mind and Matter. Here he argued that there is a difference between measuring instruments and human observation: a thermometer’s registration cannot be considered an act of observation, as it contains no meaning in itself."

as meaning is created and can only exist in the human individual's mind

"Thus, consciousness is needed to make physical reality meaningful."

Language the only tool the individual possess, to grab a hold, a firm foot for the mind to understand, as processes undergo, the outcomes created. Point at them, define them, symbolise them. Build equivalent neural structures, nodes to expand mind networks. Always engaged, ready to respond. Built from scratch, ever extending, plastic.

The objective being, but a mix-up of subjective views struggling against each other to arrive at the so-called objectivity. Objectivity which to a great extent is defined by factors other than the subjective views that have risen from, in the first place. Exercising our subjectivity continuously and by as many individuals as possible will lead to views more widely acceptable, consolidating a common ground for the next leap ahead.

Objectivity, intrinsic in the object, a goal unattainable whereas subjectivity, the look at the object from the viewpoint of the subject, what is only left for us to do, attainable. Probably imperfect and as such, it carries within the tendency for change, constantly striving to perfection. Regardless of any improvements that science or other discipline bestows upon any views that human individuals offer, do not change the fact that they are still subjective views. Assuming any of these views as objective is pointless.

Rejecting objectivity, embracing subjectivity.

Consciousness fractal multi-level approach, explanation?

2009-04-24T01:12:00.000+01:00

The abstract from the article MODELLING PROCESSES IN A FRACTAL NETWORK: A POSSIBLE SUBSTRUCTURE FOR CONSCIOUSNESS which is intriguing and should be passed through the grind of my cognitive apparatus

"Abstract: It is proposed that consciousness does not emerge from a single level of biological organization (for example: from computational activity at the synaptic level in networks of neurons), but is a consequence of interdependent modelling activities by networks at different levels of organization including the molecular, organelle, and cellular levels, in some way entrained to produce consciousness. Fractal stacking and intercommunication of networks at different levels is proposed as a substrate that may be required for consciousness, either natural or machine-based. Adoption of this conceptual starting point may overcome some of the difficulties encountered when reductionist strategies are applied to the study of consciousness."

Going along the same lines is the cognitive chaos website

Consciousness, a variable quantity that can be derived mathematically?

2009-04-23T01:54:00.002+01:00

The concept of quantity is defined as

"the measurable, countable, or comparable property or aspect of a thing",

as

"something that has a magnitude and can be represented in mathematical expressions by a constant or a variable",

and as

"something that serves as the object of an operation".

Thing being

"a separate and self-contained entity".

And in logic, quantity is defined as

"the exact character of a proposition in reference to its universality, singularity, or particularity",

borrowing the extensions of universality, singularity and particularity for potential applications for the concept of physical quantity.

The concept of variable is defined as

"a quantity that can assume any of a set of values"

Constructing a wireless receiver/broadcaster you would expect to tune in, to a broadcasting/receiving radio source and receive/broadcast an output which can be measured.

Consciousness, is constructed gradually since childhood and it can be thought as a wireless receiver/broadcaster as it receives/broadcasts signals. And it is variable within each individual, as it is surmised by its content, that make up its volume, volume thought as a physical as well as a mental quantity. Physical pertaining to the brain, neurons and neural networks organised in reverberated cell assemblies, and mental volume, taken in respect of concepts, thoughts, ideas that make up its content. The physical/mental volume of consciousness changes as the time passes along. It is a time-dependent quantity. The physical/mental volume of consciousness is variable from individual to individual, as well.

By the analogy of the wireless receiver/broadcaster, consciousness is quantified, by its receiving aptitude, by the quantity of the signals received. In broad terms it can be defined as how many signals are taken in, out of all the signals that exist at a particular time and space. Space refers to physical and mental space alike, whereas time is assumed to be the same, for either notion of space. The variable, in this case, can be expressed in the form of percentage, although regarding the measurement against signals existing, can be measured instead against an accepted standard, like an average constructed out of a population of individuals.

As far as the broadcasting aptitude, it is expected that, it would be dependent upon the signals broadcasted, expressed as a percentage out of the total of the signals received.

Any mathematical formula to measure consciousness, should be based on the process of learning, as is accomplished in its various ways. Any way, learning is effected, it is expected to change the physical/mental volume of consciousness, as by learning acquire and elaborate on concepts, thoughts and ideas and by that the number of signals taken in.

The more the learning, the more the concepts the individual possess, the more the signals the individual takes in, the greater its consciousness

Defining the unconscious and subconscious levels of the mind

2009-04-19T10:43:00.003+01:00

I did start some thoughts that dealt with the unconscious and subconscious defining lines which should further clarified.

"Subconscious mind is the sum total of our past experiences." It is proclaimed in this website.

Confusing the unconscious with the subconscious as they use interchangeably without attempting to draw the boundaries between the two states.

Whereas, in another website feign ignorance about the whole matter.

Another aspect of anger in the minds we make.

2009-04-18T20:26:00.003+01:00

The resistance is heightened. The already established mental structures ridden with cobwebs solidified, rigid, inflexible and stubborn, do not give up. Inertia proper. The high degree of its inertia, require enormous amounts of energy to shift it.

Copious quantities, that only anger can provide. Should not fret to express the anger, should let it be the force that will break up the mold, shift the mental structures. Anger, the outburst unleashed with the energy carried by the force ...

.. 'energy carried by the force',

... what are the implications of that phrase, taking it as far as universe creating energy. Energy by itself inert, the outburst being the big bang? Anger? Energy gathered up, reaching a critical point, in need to get unleashed, and it is unleashed via the forces? And the forces? Channel energy into paths that create forms? All kinds of forms?

And chaos's initial conditions, and its sensitive dependence due to the fact(?) that these initial conditions represent trajectories, or are connected with paths that the forces carrying the energy unleashed, attain the maximum levels possible?

The forces, the corridors for the energy to burst out?

Why making the familiar strange brings pain in your head

2009-03-14T14:05:00.004Z

...

.. the pain in somebody's head when it is contemplating the strange ..

.. the drastic re-arrangement of the synapses in the brain? .. brings pain? ..

.. only minor adjustments are allowed

.. small ideas .. single .. simple ..

.. which require the change in a few synapses .. or even leave the existing synapses intact .. only create new synapses

.. a pain threshold of breaking a synapse? .. is it measurable .. just for a single synapse?

.. should be more as ideas or concepts must engage, include a lot more synapses, certainly more than one

.. ideas despite being simple they are nevertheless complex .. ideas emergent .. entities .. emergent systems .. lying upon vast networks .. of neurons .. underlying superstructure ..

.. larger ideas would involve a much bigger network of neurons with a lot more synapses

.. personal experiences .. testimonies

ideas? .. they come by themselves? Why? Because they come, from out of the system boundaries, the supersystem .. the inclusive system, the system including

the previous paths, the paths within the system are circumvented, they are not visited any more, they are not included in the paths taken, the new paths.

As the paths do not include the ideas, whose extent is confined within the system, that avoids clashes inherent in the system, only. The feeling of helplessness and loss disappears, it does not materialise.

Clashes ensue following the paradigm of Gödel, as they develop out of contradicting rules that nullify each other, as a result there is loss of consistency

"Gödel proved fundamental results about axiomatic systems showing in any axiomatic mathematical system there are propositions that cannot be proved or disproved within the axioms of the system."

To get away from the idea, that using Godel's theorems, outside what is meant to be in the first place, namely mathematical systems, or even the volumes of Principiae Mathematica, is wrong.

In the particular case, of states, governments and societies, they are all axiomatic. Being systems based on axioms, values that are evident, without further arguments. And they are axiomatic, as it is widely based on values that they are regarded as evident without proof or argument.

.. societies .. are based upon axioms

A chaotic mind's, Q & A session on unconscious learning.

2009-03-12T12:03:00.010Z

thoughts I thought off in the past

these thoughts remain

they have accommodated themselves, they have built mental structures, no matter how solid and how clear and concise they might be

neural networks or better cell assemblies, John Holland's reverberated cell assemblies

the always on, the exclusive-or circuit, and their indefinite nature

and they are the structures that my unconscious mind is using

a well as my conscious mind

but my unconscious mind is faster (a quantum computer analogy?!)

unconscious learning? How? ....

since learning is directed focused attention driven

attributes of the conscious mind

or so we think it is only

but nevertheless, starting by accepting that this is the case, conscius directed learning,

How can we imagine unconscious learning to be?

Define the unconscious?

Delimiting conscious from unconscious?

Properties, attributes that apply to one but not the other?

for example attention, by virtue of the use of sense organs, vision, hearing, smell, only attributed to conscious processes. Only?

conscious awareness

conscious applying to the surface, unconscious deeper

hidden, buried deep into our brain.

The unconscious mind determines our actions, short-term acts, our reflexes.

the automated responses that we use to get by in life events

life events that require a quick response

not time to spent contemplating on our response

how to react to a given setup or situation

no-thinking involved or better thinking as a matter of contemplation, is not involved

which is slow very slow (ref)

modes of thinking, a matter of choice ... informed choice?!

chaotic mind engages the unconscious mind

because it's fast

synchronization? (another day)

may be unconscious learning, it is not learning, as it is not in the surface of my consciousness, it does not have direct access to the outside world, can not 'see' the objects that are necessary for learning to occur

for stimuli to engage upon, which without them the process of learning can not take pace

it is an indirect means for our consciousness to access the external environment

it requires our conscious mind to come in contact with the outside world

indirect learning?

our conscious mind offers the syllabus of what to be learned

that's another thought how are conscious mind is prone to manipulation

by societies, governments, states ... by companies, schools, pressure groups, peer pressure, (public opinion?), (common sense?), or other institutions tangible or not

our unconscious an agent of free will?

conscious mind the jailer?

conscious mind directs learning

limiting learning

our unconscious mind eager to learn more

it is restricted by the conscious mind, the conscious mind itself is under the influence of external pressures

unconscious mind might not exercise learning or exercise limited learning (as far as this session goes)

but it makes a more ( I would say even extremely) effective use of what has been leaned (let say in whatever way it has been learned)

because it is fast and because, everything (I would call it that) that has been leaned is retained

thanks to the always on, indefinite time stored, information, knowledge

the more the knowledge taken in

(another idea just struck me while thinking .....)

refusing to taken in knowledge, our conscious mind deems as unimportant, limits the layer(s) of knowledge our unconscious mind draws for the stuff to guide our reflexes

(oh, it would never stop. another idea just arrived)

synapses determine the availability of memories of information

the synapse directs towards the memories stored

synapse not in use is dismantled, paths to connected memories severed

memories are not lost, just they are not on, online

memories survive the severed channel event, they are just offline

unconscious mind have access to offline memories

The unconscious mind is a good learner and practices efficiently has been learned

Thinking and social engineering

2009-02-28T07:11:00.003Z

.. thinking and social engineering

.. the website that claimed that the British state uses social engineering to pass into individuals the ways of thinking they find that it is worth of following

.. what I read in another website about thinking harms the health of individual

.. as far as I can remember it was not from a state website but one of the newspapers, the Telegraph I think

.. that means that the paper is into social engineering

.. or the paper played the role of spreading the doctrine of another group who had in their mind to influence, or stir away individuals from thinking

.. and why you find this contemptible?

.. it is down to an attempt to subdue individuals for the purpose of rendering them easy prey for the goals states and societies were built for, monetizing

.. if individuals stirred away, or stop thinking it makes it easier for the exploitation of the other individuals which their only purpose is to milk profits out of their societies

.. the source of the research, put it that way, is America.

.. these thoughts followed a feeling of disbelief, as why would anybody would want to do anything like that

.. meaning to want to influence the very deep function of any individual, the fundamental principle of the individual which is thinking. Thinking which leads or is instantiated by learning. Enhanced by learning.

.. so subtle the intervention that is barely noticed

.. it introduces elements of conspiracy

nothing is wasted?

Chaotic dynamics on a par with the genetic code, in evolutionary terms?

2009-02-23T01:10:00.005Z

A claim is put forward in "Fractal Neurodynamics and Quantum Chaos: Resolving the Mind-Brain Paradox Through Novel Biophysics", in Chapter 6.2, Chaotic Excitability as a founding Eukaryote Characteristic,

"It is thus possible that chaotic excitation dates from as early a period as the genetic code itself and that the first eukaryote cells may have been excitable via direct electrochemical transfer from light energy, before enzyme-based metabolic pathways had developed."

Chaotic excitations preceding the evolution of enzyme-based metabolic pathways? Why not? Nowadays, sustaining complex life can not be imagined without the enzymes. Could life forms, before the advent of enzymes, have utilised the creative potential, inherent in chaotic dynamics?

It is mentioned further, that

"We have seen how chaotic excitation provides for exploration of phase space and sensitivity to internal and external fluctuations. "

Chaotic excitation provide the means to explore phase space. Phase space comprised by the vast range of existent states in the surrounding environment and chaotic excitation enabled early life forms to sense their surroundings, learn and adapt.

Chaotic processes created attractors, what materialised as stable physical structures. The features of life forms as they have developed by constant evolutionary transformations. Evolution processes materialised as permanent structures, the attractors, as the code written in genetic blueprints was instantiated?

Phase space comprised by the vast range of existing states, both in life forms and in the environment. Surrounding environment that a life form senses by electrochemical excitation. It is mentioned in the Electrochemistry Encyclopedia, that

"The conduction of electrochemical excitation must be regarded as one of the most universal properties of living organisms. It arose in connection with the need for the transmission of a signal about an external influence from one part of a biological system to another."

External influences as they are exerted by processes, constantly at play and simultaneously define the states that make up the chaotically explored phase space.

The surrounding environment, the atmospheric electrohemistry mentioned as:

"The existence of ions in the atmosphere is the fundamental reason for atmospheric electricity. The voltage between the earth's surface and the ionosphere is approximately 40 kV, which induces an electrical current of approximately 2000 A with a current density around 5 pA/m2 (1 picoampere = 10-12 ampere, one trillionth of an ampere per square metre)."

graphically describing

"The Earth is an "electrode" immersed in a weak gaseous "electrolyte," the naturally ionized atmosphere."

provide the context of the processes as well as the message carrier, electrical currents, which are detected, as

"The high sensitivity of the protoplasm and all cell organelles to any natural and chemical effect is the basis for excitability."

The high sensitivity, reminiscent of chaotic sensitivity as it responds to minimal changes with tantamount effects, triggers cell membranes, the boundaries of all life forms in all their evolutionary transformations, as a

"... change in trans membrane potential create a wave of depolarization, or action potential, that affects the adjoining, resting membrane."

Excitable membranes are ubiquitous in all evolved life forms, as it is further mentioned

"Nerve cells in animals and phloem cells in plants share one fundamental property: they possess excitable membranes through which electrical excitations, in the form of action potentials, can propagate. These propagating excitations are modelled theoretically as travelling wave solutions of certain parameter dependant nonlinear reaction-diffusion equations coupled with some nonlinear ordinary differential equations. These travelling wave solutions can be classified as single loop pulse, multiple loop pulses, fronts and backs, or periodic waves of different wave speed."

Chaotic dynamics created, brought life into existence and continue to guide life forms in their evolutionary journey.

"excitability: the disposition of a tissue or living cell to respond to a stimulus or change in the environment.
excitation: the act of producing or increasing stimulation; the immediate response of a cell or a tissue to a stimulus or change in the environment."

" subthreshold: (usually a stimulus that is) not strong enough to be perceived or to produce a response."

"At the cellular level, electrical potentials exist across membranes, and thus between cellular and specific compartments. Electrolytic species such as potassium, calcium, hydrogen, and chloride ions are actively involved in the establishment and modulation of electrical potentials."

The physical basis of meaning and paradigm shifts.

2009-01-30T10:04:00.008Z

Mathematical neuron?

Or, a function, or even a group of functions in a neuron, or neurons, that perform mathematical processing?

The thought just came to me, as I was grappling with a task, a mathematical task, and found myself unable to comprehend the meaning contained within.

I further connected my inability, with a lack in my mind, of the necessary mental structures to employ and derive appropriate responses to this kind of stimuli. I did not have the appropriate mental tools in order to elucidate and achieve meaning pointed by the particular stimulus. Therefore these stimuli, despite being present were either totally ignored or not being given appropriate attention, or even being given an incorrect treatment, resulting in incorrect responses.

Stimuli, that represent every minute detail in our environment, are taken in and processed accordingly, only if there are appropriate mental structures built, in our minds. Mental structures amassed by learning. The enormous amount of information around us precipitates the necessity for continuous lifelong learning.

For each minute detail, the individual should have its very own way of approaching it, of dealing with it. It even points towards the notion of the human individual being a blank slate, a tabula rasa, since its birth and constantly inscribing, all through its lifetime records of its life events and ways to deal with them.

Which in the neuron level of our brains is translated into having the necessary synapses between the relevant neurons. Neural pathways created by synapses, and by being activated via synapses hence synaptic pathways.

These thoughts give 'meaning', as it is sought by individuals, a physical basis, which might be the only basis there is, none other. Based on brain states achieved as synaptic pathways are continuously created, a thought pointing towards constant learning, as the human individual never ceases to learn. A deeply felt process that leads to a state of fulfillment that invigorates the individual.

A human attribute epitomized in the phrase

'Γηράσκω αεί Διδασκόμενος'

attributed to the Athenian statesman and lawmaker, Solon (ancient Greek: Σόλων, c. 638 BC–558 BC), often credited with having laid the foundations for Athenian democracy, which literally means 'I constantly learn as I grow old', nullifying any notions of an individual going through its life time without searching the reasons for just 'being'.

Certainly that what is supposed to be regardless whether individuals adhere to it or not, for whatever reason this might be.

Which by itself, it might give rise to a deeper understanding of what a paradigm shift represents, in the context of the human mind, and by that analogy in all cases that paradigm shifts apply. As the old thought patterns instantiated as habits and guide the behaviour of a human individual, are abandoned. The processes employed to deal with stuff encountered in life, drastically change.

In the same way, (chaos self-similarity principle(?)) while an individual learns new knowledge, it means that the brain creates new synapses, new synaptic pathways. the old synaptic pathways which were used to deal with a particular situation are destroyed. As such it cuts off the synaptic pathway, there is no synaptic pathway to instantiate the particular train of thoughts any longer and all the previous modes of thinking cease to exist, which amounts to, completely forgotten.

around in itself points towards the necessity for each individual to amass an enormous amount of information to deal with each and every step of the mental processes it employs to deal with stuff in life.

Consciousness reassures us that the world is, as is.

2009-01-23T11:02:00.003Z

It has been said over and over again(?), that the role consciousness can play, is in sorting out states the individual finds itself amidst. States being either world, or inner self, or states out of the interaction with other individuals. All that we have amassed as we delve deep, with our minds chaotic processes, into them states.

Checking out the things around us, reminding us what each thing is. That a tree is a tree, or a cat is cat. A reassurance of the content of concepts, the stuff they are made up of. Along with, that we put keys in such and such place and that when we need them, we will find them in such and such place. To preserve the continuity in our daily lives. Contiguity? Congruency?

Consciousness reassures us that the world is, as is. Checking up on the contents of the concepts we have learned at some point in time, along with all the properties and attributes each concept is associated with.

Thinking of idealised units of link-node-link chains organised by context?

2008-11-27T09:11:00.007Z

Relevant threads

- By virtue of reflexive and reflective reasoning then reflexive and reflective thinking?
- FROM SIMPLE ASSOCIATIONS TO SYSTEMATIC REASONING: A Connectionist representation of rules, variables, and dynamic bindings using temporal synchrony
- The paradigm shifts in our minds
- Handles-tags drag along thoughts from our minds
- "Use-it-or-lose-it" pruning of brain cells. An on-the-fly brain mechanism for dynamic minds?

I read in the paper by Lokendra Shastri and Venkat Ajjanagadde 'From simple associations to systematic reasoning', under the title 'Computational constraints', section 1.2

"Connectionist models (Feldman & Ballard 1982; Rumelhart & McClelland 1986) are intended to emulate the information processing characteristics of the brain — albeit at an abstract computational level — and reflect its strengths and weaknesses. Typically, a node in a connectionist network corresponds to an idealized neuron, and a link corresponds to an idealized synaptic connection.
Let us enumerate some core computational features of connectionist models: i) Nodes compute very simple functions of their inputs, ii) They can only hold limited state information — while a node may maintain a scalar ‘potential’, it cannot store and selectively manipulate bit strings. iii) Node outputs do not have sufficient resolution to encode symbolic names or pointers. iv) There is no central controller that instructs individual nodes to perform specific operations at each step of processing."

A node, in a connectionist or any other kind of network for that matter, corresponds to an idealised neuron, and a link to an idealised synaptic connection? Taking it further, a node corresponds to neural pathways connecting links, pathways which can include one idealised neuron or several idealised neurons? The main point being the passage of the signal from link-to-link? And not just any link, but a certain kind of link? A link, a synaptic connection, that lies within the context, the link-node-link path is attached to? A neurological basis of context? That links are attached by nodes, in link-node-link neural chains abiding to rules (... of context?)

Link-node-link creation, independent of length, namely the number of neurons involved. Independent also of the distance between individual links, or their place in the brain? What only matters is their placement within the contextual link-node-link chains? And one other thought that connects our brain organisation, with chaotic and fractal aspects. It is the potential inherent in such mode of brain organisation that even a remote, unused link, deeply buried, in all sense implied, can instantiate itself, unearth the attributes is attached with, and confer in the meaning of the currently active link-node-link unit.

Take the matter of idealised units, beyond a computational level, and instead talk about idealised units on the basis of context? Providing a simple mechanism for instantiating a thought, a unit of emergent thought, and multiple copies out of the same blueprint interacting, leading to complexity and the emergence of the mind?

The little red riding hood example and the steps in the inferential processing,

"The wolf will approach LRRH (to eat something you have to be near it); LRRH will scream (because a child is scared by an approaching wild animal); upon hearing the scream the wood-cutters will know that a child is in danger (because a child’s screaming suggests that it is in danger); the wood-cutters will go to the child (people want to protect children in danger and in part, this involves determining the source of the danger); the wood-cutters will try to prevent the wolf from attacking LRRH (people want to protect children); in doing so the wood-cutters may hurt the wolf (preventing an animal from attacking may involve physical force ...); so the wolf decides to wait (because an animal does not want to get hurt)."

a link-node-link path, and each link jump adds attributes that amass in the meaning conferred by the link-node-link chain, in a manner that comes out, from what the authors refer to as the “unary or even propositional fixation” problem

"This turns out to be a difficult problem for neurally motivated models. As McCarthy (1988) observed most connectionist systems suffer from the “unary or even propositional fixation” with their representational power restricted to unary predicates applied to a fixed object. Fodor and Pylyshyn (1988) have even questioned the ability of connectionist networks to embody systematicity and compositionality."

as 'unary predicates applied to a fixed object'?

Links thought off as handles or tags that involve their own specific load of attributes and properties, and drag along what is relevant to the context of the active node-link-node chain?

Though their potential surpasses their mere role in providing inferences for instantiating reasoning. By virtue of their associations with other conceived thoughts, that might even belong in other contextual units, can form context to context bridges, can drag along attributes that belong in other contexts, borrowing from context to context, passing from context to context and use that in innovating manners, the hallmark of creativity.

By virtue of reflexive and reflective reasoning then reflexive and reflective thinking?

2008-11-12T08:33:00.012Z

Following up the threads

- Thinking (with)in and (with)out the brain.
- FROM SIMPLE ASSOCIATIONS TO SYSTEMATIC REASONING: A Connectionist representation of rules, variables, and dynamic bindings using temporal synchrony
- The minds we make overall stupid despite being generated by an underlying remarkable ability to draw inferences?
- Intuitions. Should we be afraid or trust our intuitions? Building up a case for trust.
- Neural processes beat rational thinking.
- Not recommended: frantically seeking escape from a chaotic situation, we find ourselves in.
- Is thinking an automatic process?
- Unconscious knows better ... Indulge yourself.
- Our neurons chart the space we unfold our actions in
- Mind sets and their overriding influence

This paper by Lokendra Shastri and Venkat Ajjanagadde 'From simple associations to systematic reasoning' got me going. I felt that their conclusion, arrived from a somewhat different path, matches what I have arrived using different leads. Or might be simply that I have not wholesomely (systematically) engaged in their views, despite being aired since 1992.

I felt, I have to go through, trod again the path that led me to the views, currently prevalent in my mind, but I am hesitating as I can not decide how to do that. While I am in that process, I recognise the source of my dilemma, given by the authors account of reasoning, as they differentiate it, in reflexive and reflective reasoning.

As the authors stated

"As the above examples suggest, we can draw a variety of inferences rapidly, spontaneously and without conscious effort — as though they were a reflex response of our cognitive apparatus. In view of this let us describe such reasoning as reflexive (Shastri 1990).2 Reflexive reasoning may be contrasted with reflective reasoning which requires reflection, conscious deliberation, and often an overt consideration of alternatives and weighing of possibilities. Reflective reasoning takes takes longer and often requires the use of external props such as a paper and pencil. Some examples of such reasoning are solving logic puzzles, doing cryptarithmetic, or planning a vacation."

Is the clash within me, in choosing the mode of reasoning, I want to use to deal with the notions put forward. Reflexive reasoning or reflective reasoning. Though, to my mind is quite evident that my preferred way is in favour of the reflexive reasoning than reflective reasoning, as I found it to be more productive. Thus stated, I should point out that I do not ignore the significance of reflective reasoning, though I find reflexive reasoning a more suitable way to deal with problems.

By pondering on these thoughts I realize that the case on reasoning, the authors mention, do not include what I have contemplated on the matter. The matter being, that reasoning is only a small part of the brain processes that go under the much wider umbrella concept of thinking. Surpassing the limits and extending the scope by attaching the attributes associated with reasoning, as they are revealed by their findings, to be included in the attribute repertoire of the much wider concept of thinking.

Regarding reasoning the authors mention

" reasoning underlies even the most commonplace intelligent behavior."

which they see as

"One could argue that some of the steps in the above reasoning process are pre-compiled or ‘chunked’, but it would be unreasonable to claim that this entire chain of reasoning can be construed as direct retrieval or even a single step inference!"

not just a matter of retrieving information already stored, but as

"Hence, in addition to accessing lexical items, parsing, and resolving anaphoric reference, some computation similar to the above chain of reasoning must occur when the sentence in question is processed."

computations which make it possible, as in the case of language understanding to

"... language understanding, a task that we usually perform rapidly and effortlessly, depends upon our ability to make predictions, generate explanations, and recognize speaker’s plans."

predict, explain, recognize plans in other individuals minds. And all these are done rapidly and effortlessly.

It is not just reasoning that humans can perform effortlessly, as the authors point out, but even wider aspects of thinking. Adopting the authors terminology for reasoning to this wider view of mental activity, should consider referring to thinking along the same terms as reflexive and reflective thinking.

One ill that plagued me is the use of the words-symbols for attributes and properties amassed as they develop in my mind. The notion of orphan attributes and properties springs forth. Or better, as all these attributes are amassing, mainly by virtue of their associations, converge into something, which to my mind represents the concept. The matter conceived by the amassed orphan attributes.

This thought emanating, by the authors elaboration on the individual's, designated as agent, long-term knowledge base

"... it must include, besides other things, our knowledge of naive physics and naive psychology; facts about ourselves, our family and friends; facts about history and geography; our knowledge of artifacts; sports, art, and music trivia; and our models of social and civic interactions."

naively originated thoughts and in the process, being fleshed up, demand to be acknowledged and respected. Out of the chaos in my mind converging into stable attractors, forming visible structures, entities that need to be dressed up with words to symbolize their existence, and as such to become part either as attributes or any other form along the lines mentioned by the authors

"... hierarchy that represents entities, types (categories), and the super/sub-concept relations between them ..."

entities, types, categories, super/sub-concept hierarchies. To overcome their naive origins to more informed states, towards overarching and lucid meaning. From naive roots seeking out the word, the symbol to denote the converged distinct entity.

Thinking instantiates, using up the brain reflex mechanisms, named as reflex responses of human agents cognitive apparatus, taking advantage their effortless, spontaneous remarkably efficient character, to use the speed of their processing, to arrive to new knowledge quicker. Since reflexively processing the thoughts can produce many more associations than if it was processing the thoughts reflectively.

Advancing from naive, ill-, mis-, under- informed knowledge to more inclusive empowering knowledge, broadening and deepening the long-term knowledge base, towards the empowered state of an individual.

.... not just to reason but to think too.

Knowing the limits consciousness offers to self.

2008-10-13T10:36:00.014+01:00

ChaosandOrder
CHAOS AND COSMOS

Knowing the limits consciousness offers to self or attempt to comprehend the range available for consciousness to operate, will give an insight about the significance of consciousness and the role it plays in the life of the organism. As the emergence of self as a survival prerequisite ....

(the emergence of self a survival prerequisite? The human individual identifies self as a separate entity, realises the dangers lurking in its environment, which will jeopardize its integrity, its existence. The rise of self, before or after or along with consciousness),

... a part of consciousness and at the same time the part to which consciousness is attributed to, and arises from, in a loop-like fashion, should be regarded as that ingredient of the machine, we call organism, which gives rise to consciousness.

If we regard the organism as a machine, which performs certain tasks as a single unit of the whole that is the world, the nature of the tasks would be such, that facilitates the assimilation of the unit into the whole. The whole as such undergoes in its own tasks, brought about by the computations dictated by the laws of nature, woven by repeated cycles of organisation and emergence, down from the quantum world up to the macroscopic world, which we, ourselves, experience.

We are part of the world and we are the product of a cycle of organisation and emergence, as all other parts of the world are. The cycle of organisation and emergence down from the quantum level, has given rise to self and consciousness. We attribute with consciousness, those other parts of the world which are similar to us, (namely other individuals?). But if our consciousness arises as a result of the computations undergoing, to sustain our cycle of organisation and emergence, why would it not arise in other parts of the world which by themselves undergo computations to sustain their own level of organisation and emergence. Why our computations give rise to consciousness and theirs don't? Does that line of reasoning help in order to define what consciousness is? Is consciousness a knowledge of self, its placement in the whole? Is consciousness necessary for the sustainability of our cycle of organisation and emergence? No, it is not. There are other mechanisms responsible for that. Our body can sustain itself without the contribution of consciousness. Most of the mechanisms responsible for the sustainability of our body are unconscious and consciousness's involvement is indirect.

Though consciousness is attributed with free will, for free will as such, sustainability is a redundant option. It is only an illusion that by the means of free will, we achieve sustainability. The options available to free will have already been worked out by unconscious processes and the apparent freedom of choice is a matter of whims. Consciousness role has an observer status. It is the recipient of knowledge, the agent of knowledge, the observer and the carrier of our feelings.

The paradigm shifts in our minds

2008-10-07T07:46:00.007+01:00

The line of thoughts that follow, were triggered by reading Brian Greene's book 'The elegant universe'. However, I did not grab the idea coming from the original spark, while it was developing, and I lost it. The inspiration dwindled and gone. But the hot ashes were still there, nurturing the flicker. A subject that while was constantly there, was persistently ignored, overlooked. I did not pay the appropriate attention but now I see it with a different eye, looked from a different perspective, within another context.

So, it was not long before my attention's antennae picked another example, and a much stronger one that depicts the underlying substrate of my developing thought. The haphazard wondering in the internet about Pandora's box, brought me in Luboš Motl blog, the reference frame, which its stated aim,

"The most important events in our and your superstringy Universe as seen from a conservative physicist's viewpoint"

intrigued me. It drew my attention.

My original quest for Pandora's box, a blog I write to, forgotten, took second place, and in a Markov inspired act, in a manner I described before I followed a title that looked promising. Namely, the blog entry titled 'Observables in quantum gravity'

The first paragraph looked promising.

"The goal of every quantum-mechanical theory is to predict the probabilities that particular physical quantities - "observables" - will take one value or another value after some evolution of the system, assuming certain initial conditions."

The last line, 'assuming certain initial conditions', the connotations, as were brought into my mind, with chaos initial conditions and its sensitive dependence, as chaos being there in such a fundamental level, gained my attention and my resolve to dig deeper into Luboš Motl exposition of 'observables'. The name of the original author, Moshe Rozali, propped up and the emanating post, titled likewise as 'Observables in quantum gravity', was right in front of me.

I read the first paragraph

"In quantum mechanics a state is described by a ray in a Hilbert space, and an observable by an Hermitian operator acting on that Hilbert space. After measurement, the state collapses to an eigenstate of the operator representing the measurements. The probability of any outcome is given by the Born rule."

Quantum mechanical states, implicated into my mind with states, trajectories developing in a chaotic fashion and the idea of attractors lurking beneath, and I might find a clue in what these quantum mechanical states are included in, the Hilbert space.

I felt I had to explore what is behind this mysterious Hilbert space, which, I came across, before. The first search result, at WolframMathworld did not offer much, riddled with notations and meaningless names, killing intuition relentlessly. The second in Wikipedia, though along the same lines, offered me a working ground, fodder for future thoughts.

What donned to me is, that I can not grasp the essence in Hilbert spaces, as I do not have the conceptual structures to deal with it. Something along Julian Jaynes structions, the sort of instructions given to my nervous system so that once the materials, the aforementioned descriptions, are given to work on, it will result in the answer automatically, without any conscious thinking or reasoning. And this phenomenon, as Julian Jaynes proclaims, applies to most of our activities, from such simplicities as judging weights to solving problems to scientific and philosophical activity. Consciousness studies a problem and prepares it as a struction, a process which may result in a sudden appearance of the solution as if out of nowhere. Without them I am not able to grasp the meaning Brian Greene, tries to convey or what Hilbert space is.

I have not created the reverberated cell assemblies to deal with that problem, the reverberated cell assemblies, representing the concepts with their constituent properties, to provide a lucid framework for meaning to come out. Reverberated cell assemblies ever ready, their indefinite nature proclaim, to make understanding possible and therefore I am unable to understand what is going on.

Further on in page 111 of Brian Greene's book, I read

"At this point your classical upbringing is balking."

it stops short and refuse to go on. We are what the concepts we carry within, allows us to be, our limits, self-imposed (in almost everything, as I could think about it now), are determined by their amount, their accuracy, whether adequate or inadequate, correct or incorrect. All that it matters to us, comes out of the concepts we have amassed and continue to (the smart thing to do), through our lives.

If we do not continuously brush off the content of our concepts, in girth and in depth, then stalemate. All sorts of problems follow, which basically is translated in, that we get trapped, caged, the concepts we carry our very own prison guards, our jailers, self-imposed limits, bringing forth anxiety, helplessness, boredom. We are in desperate need of paradigm shifts, our very own personal paradigm shifts, remodeling our worldviews and our ways of living.

It is what is mentioned in this website

"The new paradigm would replace old assumptions, values, goals, beliefs, expectations, theories, and the like with its own."

or even more drastically, in an even more powerful way, as it is mentioned in the same website, attributed to Thomas Kuhn,

"a new theory or model is proposed which requires understanding traditional scientific concepts in new ways, and which rejects old assumptions and replaces them with new ones."

our goal is constantly to rejuvenate, in every way possible,

The paradigm shifts of our minds, our own individual paradigm shifts which as the concept defines, once achieved, we will never look back.

Consciousness arises in consciousness-experience molecular groups? Similar to photosynthetic photoactive systems?

2008-09-20T11:43:00.005+01:00

A thought struck me while I read through the report from SOFTPEDIA on 'Quantum Physics Explains Photosynthesis' and I grabbed it. My mind connected their findings with what is mentioned in the paper by Jonathan CW Edwards of 'Is Consciousness Only a Property of Individual Cells?'

I read in Jonathan CW Edwards thesis that single neurones are responsible for bringing about consciousness,

"Integration of signals inside cells is complex and can mimic multiplication. It may involve patterns. Thus although it might be argued that binding in a cell poses the same problem as in a net of cells, it does not have to. What we know of the brain indicates that binding could not occur between cells linked by discrete signals but might occur in a cell. A sophisticated substrate might be needed in the cellular 'black box' but if patterns are involved at all, this would need to be the place."

and

" ... consciousness is a basic correlate of function, but a function that only certain fundamental physical substrates can subserve. To know the true function is to know the substrate."

Binding all the elements of information to bring about experience and consciousness is not a task performed by the brain as a unit, but by single neurones? Each neurone creates a version of consciousness? And this is due to a sophisticated substrate? To know the true function is to know the substrate, Jonathan CW Edwards declares.

What can this substrate be? Something similar to the photoactive systems in photosynthesis? As it is mentioned in the SOFTPEDIA entry on the quantum physics explanation of photosynthesis

I read there

"The 2-D electronic spectroscopy can detect the energy transfer between molecules that are grouped in photoactive systems, due to their similar electronic and vibrational states."

Molecules grouped in photoactive systems on the basis of similar electronic and vibrational states? Like the Fenna-Matthews-Olson (FMO) molecular complex, the team investigated?

"The team investigated the Fenna-Matthews-Olson (FMO) photosynthetic protein, a molecular complex in green sulphur bacteria. FMO is preferred in photosynthesis researches because of its simplicity: it is made of just seven pigment molecules."

A molecular complex of a number of molecules embedded in the cytoplasm of a neurone cell with the task of creating experience and consciousness? In the same way that is referred to about energy transfer processes in photosynthesis?

"We have obtained the first direct evidence that remarkably long-lived wavelike electronic quantum coherence plays an important part in energy transfer processes during photosynthesis," said Graham Fleming, the main researcher and professor of chemistry at UC Berkeley. "This wavelike characteristic can explain the extreme efficiency of the energy transfer because it enables the system to simultaneously sample all the potential energy pathways and choose the most efficient one."

A system that is extremely efficient in energy transfer as it simultaneously samples all the potential energy pathways and choose the most efficient one? Simultaneity required by consciousness as Jonathan CW Edwards, mentions

"Thus, the key functional requirement of consciousness, as I see it, is that something has simultaneous (cotemporal) access to many elements (of information) in defined inter-relationships (SAMEDI), i.e. access to a pattern".

referred to as the information problem

"The information problem is how to find a neurophysiological unit in the brain that could have access to many elements of information as a pattern; perhaps 1000 elements in a single experience."

Simultaneity incorporated in

"The team detected "quantum beating" signals, coherent electronic oscillations in both donor and acceptor molecules, induced by light energy excitations."

coherent electronic oscillations in a consciousness-experience molecular groups between donor and acceptor molecules, that as it has been detected in photosynthesis

"Two-dimensional electronic spectroscopy detected on a femtosecond (1/1000 000 000 000 000 of a second) time-scale these oscillations meeting and how they interfered, building wavelike motions of energy (superposition states) that can experience all possible energy pathways at a time and reversibly, so that they can go back from incorrect pathways with no penalty."

by an ensuing superposition of states and by the interference of coherent oscillations instantiates consciousness-experience? The non-bitwise mode of integration? Mentioned by Jonathan CW Edwards.

"A non-bitwise mode of integration within cells is probably already supported by experimental evidence."

Wave-like coherence in the oscillations as mentioned by Gregory Engel in 'Quantum Physics Explains Photosynthesis' report,

"In these spectra, the lowest-energy exciton (a bound electron-hole pair formed when an incoming photon boosts an electron out of the valence energy band into the conduction band) gives rise to a diagonal peak near 825 nanometers that clearly oscillates. The associated cross-peak amplitude also appears to oscillate. Surprisingly, this quantum beating lasted the entire 660 femtoseconds."

"The duration of the quantum beating signals was unexpected because the general scientific assumption had been that the electronic coherences responsible for such oscillations are rapidly destroyed. For this reason, the transfer of electronic coherence between excitons during relaxation has usually been ignored," Engel said. "By demonstrating that the energy transfer process does involve electronic coherence and that this coherence is much stronger than we would ever have expected, we have shown that the process can be much more efficient than the classical view could explain."

Consciousness whole pattern processing regime?

2008-09-13T10:33:00.001+01:00

Patterns. You bring along the whole pattern for consciousness to process. In units as it is mentioned in, 'Is consciousness only a property of individual cells?', by Jonathan CW Edwards,

"The second, which I will call the physical substrate, is that of finding a substrate at the fundamental physical level which might support a subjective experience in which many elements are bound into a seamless whole."

Many elements bound into a seamless whole! Each element is, in its turn and for its own accord, a seamless whole made out of or bound from its own specific elements, downscale as far as it is permitted by the granularity (?) of the physical world. Granules, as a general term referring to the size of the physical units possible? Up to quanta or strings?

As a seamless whole is presented to our consciousness as whole patterns and processed as such. All the information elements bound in the pattern, are dragged along, no matter how relevant they appear to be. Even if they are seemingly incompatible or contradict with one another.

Emergence? And its incompatibility pre-requisite for emergent properties to rise? The consciousness whole pattern processing allowing emergence to appear? Working towards achieving that goal?

A storm in my brain ?!!!

2008-09-07T14:15:00.005+01:00

There is something there which I need to explore. More than explore, what I require to do, is elucidate further the thoughts triggered. I wonder how should I put it. It is about the mind's ability to quickly assess a situation, a state presented in front of you, and requires a fast and reliable solution. Though it is not strictly a problem, as much as a situation that requires a ready-made solution.

I am going around circling the matter I want to deal with, a brain-storm in anticipation of providing the solution and the words to describe it. In an attempt to generalize before even accessing the substance of the matter as such. States presented to us constantly requiring to be handled. Furtive states, in need for instantaneous solutions. You can not pause to think how to handle the situation, you have to act fast which brings it down to reflex actions. Reflex actions built by the accumulation of experience over the years. It is intrinsic within the solution necessary to calculate the movements needed to tackle the situation. Calculations done by using the raw power of your brain cells. No conscious handling. It takes too much time. Not counting one by one but in hundreds. Non-linear? Why the non-linear came to my mind? Does that mean anything? Gearing perhaps? Getting more from very little? Some sort of function where the output far exceeds the input?

It brings into my mind thoughts I expressed on the matter of nerve cells charting our surrounding space. And regarding the raw solving power our neurons possess.

....

The brain, as a quantum computer?

2008-04-06T15:15:00.003+01:00

"A quantum computer is any device for computation that makes direct use of distinctively quantum mechanical phenomena, such as superposition and entanglement, to perform operations on data. In a classical (or conventional) computer, information is stored as bits; in a quantum computer, it is stored as qubits (quantum bits). The basic principle of quantum computation is that the quantum properties can be used to represent and structure data, and that quantum mechanisms can be devised and built to perform operations with this data."

If we assume that line, what are the possible configurations of information storage? The qubit equivalent? What are the quantum mechanisms that perform operations with this data? That the brain makes direct use of the distinct quantum mechanical phenomenon of superposition is evident as it is required to operate within a framework of multiple potential states, simultaneously existing, without any distinct preference or indication of any, out of these states, being prevalent, superposed one upon the other, before the collapse of its wavefunction by an observer, which singles out one particular state, which acts as an effector in the actions an individual undertakes and thus determines the individual's behaviour.

What about entanglement? How can it be visualised? Entanglement of particles. Quantum particles. Quantum particles can be interpreted from the point of view of chaotically driven processes as attractors. Chaotic mechanisms, the brain is involved, produces attractors which direct an individual's behaviour. These attractors can be assumed equivalent to quantum particles, and these presumably would represent the entities engaged in entanglement. Entanglement represents non-local, (oh hell!), interactions between similar quantum particles with instantaneous sharing of information. Acting like pairs, entangled pairs. Likewise, attractors developed in the brain of human individuals interact non-locally with attractors developed in the brains of other individuals? A candidate explanation of ESP phenomena? Extra sensory perception effected by entanglement?

Human individual, a quantum mechanical entity?

2008-04-06T14:49:00.002+01:00

Human individual to be regarded as a quantum mechanical entity? The embodiment of a quantum mechanical entity its superposition of states. States in which the individual finds itself in, a multitude of states and the collapse of its wave function into a single state, become determining in the life of the individual, by effecting actions when it is required. Followed up, by its entry into a new superposition of states till another collapse will bring about the emergence of another single state to deal again with the multitude of situations, any individual finds itself in, in the course of its daily life.

Quantum mechanics and chaos do not exclude one another. Whereas quantum mechanics draws attention in the states and the description of these states, chaos refers to the processes which are responsible for these states. It is interesting this mixture of quantum mechanics and chaos, and above all this transference of the quantum mechanics adherents to describe situations of macroscopic environments.

Analysing each particular feature of quantum mechanical models and applying the doctrines to other systems and examine these systems from that particular prism, it would probably produce insights which will elucidate further the phenomena observed.

By talking about superposition of states, should bear in mind that the states are defined by their constituent variables and parametres, therefore multiple states existing simultaneously refer to the values of variables and parametres. The values of variables and parametres are not fixed, but rather fluctuate. As a superposition itself does not imply infinite states, simply multiple states, therefore the values of variables and parametres would not have infinite range, simply ranges which will ensure multiple states. This agrees with the parametric development of chaotic states.

Oh heck! What is that thought that entered my mind. Observation as the reason for the collapse of the wave function of the quantum mechanical superposition of states of a human individual. Observation, the act to effect the collapse comes from other individuals. As a human individual is observed by other individuals, this observation brings the collapse into its single state. Now this single state, out of the superposed multiple states, is determined by the observer. The observed individual collapses its wave function to that of the observing individual. This can explain the overriding effect of acting as expected by the observing individual. It goes along with the observer influences the observed. This should be counteracted by a subsequent observation from the observed individual, the observed becomes the observer and therefore affects the wave function collapse of the initial observer. These actions must provide grounds for explaining rules of conduct.

The individual can not help but act according to what is expected by the individual who have effected the collapse of its wavefunction in the first place? Therefore we act as it is expected? The single state out of the superposition of states that the wavefunction collapses to is the state that the observer determines?

Would the mind know but would not tell?

2008-04-05T20:52:00.003+01:00

The right questions asked and the answers are given. The mind works regardless whether the individual is aware of it or not. So therefore the mind as it is proclaimed here:

"Popper and Eccles (1977) and Margenau (1984) have also discussed the possibility of quantum reduction being dependent on the mind of the observer, leading to the paradox of Wigner's friend in which an observer's friend splits the wave function, and reports on the result."

reduce the wave packet and the information gained is used to effect things happening in the environs of the individual that splits the wave function. To achieve knowledge about the processes involved, a mind has to assault the item to be known, armed with an arsenal of ever more detailed concepts, probe deep, analyze minute processes, put forward questions, in structured sentences, in seek for an answer. And the mind provides the answer. The mind makes use of the brain's quantum machinery.

The collective human mind, in collaboration, managed to accumulate a lot of information. It has constructed models of the way nature works, as well as, how the mind works. Constructed attractors act like a magnet's poles, to thoughts and ideas in the minds of individuals, in a similar manner as the same authors mention here:

"An excitable cell or neurosystem which evolved initially to achieve constrained optimization through chaotic fluctuation, could thus also display a new type of predictive modeling through non-local quantum interactions. Predictive optimization may thus have driven the evolution of the excitable cell and subsequently a structurally-unstable chaotic brain in which consciousness and free-will become direct manifestations of the quantum non-locality underlying membrane and brain-function."

The individual coaxed towards achieving deeper understanding. Of its mind's inner workings? Our consciousness a wave front wandering amidst the swirl of intertwining folds of processes, becomes trapped in isolated regions oblivious of all other regions. Its location determined by a handful of thoughts and ideas it aspires to. A matter of will, but will which is largely determined by the prevalent ideas in the social environment it finds itself in.

The idea of observation and collapse in our daily lives. In the anticipation of forthcoming events. Representing the unknown factor. The indeterminate nature of things to come, in a superposition of states. A macroscopic equivalent mirroring the microscopic events unraveling in the quantum realm.

Is there a genetic predisposition to the things we draw our attention to? There is a lot of hubris in the lives of individuals, which affects what we draw our attention to, from what actually should pay attention to. Certainly, an individual's sensory apparatus can not sense everything that lies around us, exacerbated by lack of detailed knowledge, of information, for what lies around us. What determines that we would actually pay attention to, from all the possibilities presented to us, is strongly connected with emotions and feelings. Interdependent and bi-directional pathways, either influence emotions or our emotional make-up influence what we will pay attention to.

Tractable and intractable computations human individuals are faced with.

2008-03-23T13:12:00.002Z

In an uncanny manifestation, as I would call it for the lack of a better word available in my mind right now, sources unraveled before me, without a consciously prepared plan, only to lead me, almost effortlessly, to a sought after solution of a nagging problem. One seemingly intractable problem, in personal terms, on the grounds of the unyielding amount of operations in the process of arriving to a satisfactory solution.

Similar with what I mentioned in that post, the anticipation built-in in the firing sequences of neuron groups, with the additional element of intractable problems. Does that go beyond a simple immediate future anticipation? To processes connected to situations where ever ready, constantly on standby, lingering bifurcations sweep away the thoughts toward new, concluding attractors or falling under the influence of powerful trajectories of all-surpassing, universal attractors? As for example the attractor-notion of knowledge already there, awaiting your mind's arrival? Severely cutting down the number, by-passing unyielding operations? Arriving to a solution sooner?

Computational problems can be "efficiently solvable" or "tractable" or "intractable" as they would require a huge amount of operations, at least n^1000000 (n to the power of 1 million), as it is mentioned here,

"P is often taken to be the class of computational problems which are "efficiently solvable" or "tractable", although there are potentially larger classes that are also considered tractable such as RP and BPP. Also, there exist problems in P which are intractable in practical terms; for example, some require at least n^1000000 (n to the power of 1 million) operations."

These are the kind of problems human individuals face in life situations as it is mentioned in "Fractal Neurodynamics and Quantum Chaos: Resolving the Mind-Brain Paradox Through Novel Biophysics", in Chapter 6.1, The Computational Intractability of Survival in the Open Environment.,

"The principal task of the brain is to compute the survival strategy most likely to enable the organism to evade death and produce viable offspring. A computational problem is intractable if the number of computational steps required grows super-exponentially with the complexity of the problem. The traveling salesman problem (Bern & Graham 1989), finding the shortest route round n cities illustrates this, growing with (n-1)! A problem may also be formally undecidable in the sense of Gödel. Many adaption-survival problems in the open environment share the characteristics of intractable problems, because each strategy tends to be matched by a competing strategy in another organism and the number of options rapidly exponentiates. An active organism must also complete a processing task within 0.1-1 second if it is going to have survival utility, regardless of its complexity. Such arguments make it clear why parallel processing is an integral feature of vertebrate nervous systems."

In each step in our modern lives, though no different in real terms with the lives of human individuals in any era in human history for that matter, we are required to make decisions about effectively intractable problems. The human individual has largely managed to tackle successfully the computational problems associated with survival, and it did so by utilising our brain's chaotic potential. Thanks to our innate ability to engage and utilise chaotic processes led to the establishment of numerous attractors, providing solutions for many problems. Attractors manifesting in numerous forms and shapes, tangible and intangible, matter-transforming or social and mental constructions, tools in the constant grappling with nature, while at the same time continuously transforming into new shapes and forms.

Thinking (with)in and (with)out the brain.

2008-03-06T11:35:00.003Z

New thoughts:
A distinction between thinking as it occurs in the brain and thinking as it is done by the use of language and logic combined.

The brain has the ability to provide solutions to problems as long as the relevant concepts are provided. The concepts provided must confer meaning to the individual otherwise the brain would not process them in an efficient manner

The thinking which is done by the use of language uses external tools and its efficiency, in most of the cases, is doubtful. It is done 'outside' the brain and its strength barely approaches the actual potential of the human brain. Of course I can not deny that most of the thinking it has been done outside the brain, and has produced the breadth and length of the knowledge humanity possess now. But it kickstarted by thinking done 'inside' the brain. It was and is heavily geared by the intuitive resilience of the individuals that produced and produce the foundations of largely all fields of knowledge.

Other individuals took the thoughts intuitive spurts produced, made further alterations, added more concepts, primarily by thinking 'outside' the thought mechanisms of the human brain.

The human brain's understanding of reality, has an uncanny capability to provide solutions that no language techniques can match. This is because it works in the same way nature works. What drives nature is dictated by chaos, and the same goes for the brain. Built out of the same blueprint. It works in ways that the conscious mind can not fathom, and unable to follow. To talk about gaining knowledge of what underlies the intricate fabric of nature, this can only be revealed by utilising the intuitive powers of the human brain. All knowledge that exists is already there and our brain knows 'where', we should let our brain to take us there. Each individual has this knowledge within grasp. Let our brain guide us.

Alongside an intuitive knowledge gained explaining nature's workings, there is another body of knowledge accumulated, with very little use. A drawback, an obstacle and baggage which hinders our goal in understanding nature's phenomena. It is not only that it does not assist us, but it throws us away, it misleads us. We should pick and choose the concepts which we need, identify and subsequently ignore concepts that bear no relevance in what is needed to know reality.

The mind and chaotic attractors?

2008-02-25T19:45:00.003Z

I read in this website of student.fizika.org an interesting account of mind chaos and I will let it flow into my own chaotic mind and see what will bring out.

"In this model, low level chaos is lifted into a higher energy state by olfactory input. Chaos in this state enables the system to explore its phase space, falling into an existing attractor in the case of a recognised odour, but bifurcating to form a new attractor in the case of a newly learned stimulus."

Admitting of the existence of low level chaos before the presence of a stimulus provides a picture of the state of the mind before the stimulation. It brings into my mind the noise existing into our brain, Erich Harth's penumbrae, what is needed for some random sparkle to build upon. By referring at that state as chaos, it reflects its random character. And as the stimulus results in a flurry of activity, in a process similar to Erich Harth's Alopex optimisation algorithm, lifted into a higher energy state by the sensory input. And once, in that higher energy state the system explores its phase space. Phase space? An abstract space. The 'space' in which all possible states of a system are represented. Can phase space be visualised? All possible states? Regardless of being visualised exploring phase space, the system explores all possible states and the states focuses upon are the states that belong in an attractor. An attractor the set of states (points in the phase space), invariant under the dynamics, towards which neighboring states in a given basin of attraction asymptotically approach in the course of dynamic evolution. And the including basin of attraction, the set of points in the space of system variables such that initial conditions chosen in this set dynamically evolve to a particular attractor.

The chosen attractor. Chosen? What criteria is a choice identified with? Based on system variables. Variables that have been analysed by sense detectors. The values of the variables chemicals present, represent the initial conditions and dynamically evolve to a particular attractor. An existing attractor if the chemical and its odour has already presented itself, along with the word, the symbol associated with or bifurcating to form a new attractor if the chemical and its odour has not presented itself as yet, and duly assigned with another word, another symbol which it will make it easier, later on to convey information to other individuals about the new chemical and its odour.

Building up attractors by engaging into chaos. Why? Is there not any other way? Because it is fast? Or is it because it emerges out of noise, unstructured states? Out of nothing? And what would that noise be, the unstructured states found in the deepest level of organised matter. Quantum froth? Quantum noise? Our very own entanglement with the quantum world?

Or is it because

"The transition into chaos thus provides sensitive dependence on input, ergodic 'randomizing' phase space exploration, parametric bifurcation to form new symbols, and possible quantum amplification. Return from chaos in turn fixes stability structures from the fractal dynamics."

Chaos processes make it possible to take into consideration minute differences in the presented conditions as they are sensitively dependent upon and thus increase human analytical powers discriminating between finer and finer features. Minute details noticed multiply, a plethora of features swamp the human intellect. Each individual with a unique view of the world? A reason that explains the diversity of human endeavour?

Thoughts about stream of consciousness

2008-02-07T12:01:00.000Z

A stream of consciousness rushed through me, almost out of nowhere and it kept me thinking. It struck me, as I pondered on thoughts unraveled a few hours ago. What impressed me most, it was how easy one thought followed another, effortlessly, without pause. A continuous unbiased flow following, I dare say, a predetermined path.

It brought into my mind, the first time I heard something profound about consciousness, that left me puzzled and astonished. It was at the time, I was pondering about a seat of consciousness and struggling to get in terms with the consciousness concept. A colleague of mine, being overtaken by the event he was describing, a person who he admired, and mentioned this individual's expressive power, designating it as "a stream of consciousness". The analogy struck me as alien. I was grappling and contemplating about the concept of consciousness from a different angle and his approach impressed me, though unfamiliar at the time, but I did not dismiss it. My own exposition the other night, reminded me of his remarks. I felt, I experienced what he described a stream of consciousness, as he described it.

What is the significance of this? How can it be explained? How can it become possible? Is it an illusion? A furtive sensation not worth to grapple upon? But its results stared back at me. A feeling of disbelief. Surely, there must be something here. Can it have a physical explanation? To that effect, I feel the answer might lie in Richard Feynman's retarded and advanced waves. What I came across, for the first time, in John Gribbin's book, "Q is for Quantum. Particle physics from A to Z".

Richard Feynman along with John Archibald Wheeler grappled with the idea of 'action at a distance', the idea that interactions between objects occur instantaneously, regardless of the distance involved. It is referred primarily to gravitational interaction such as between the sun and the earth and it operates without any intervening mechanism. They provided a version of the idea, which was used later on by John Cramer, to build the model of the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics.

As John Gribbin states in his dictionary under Wheeler-Feynman absorber theory,

"When a charged particle jiggles, it radiates both into the past and into the future. This causes another charged particle to jiggle in the future. The jiggling of that particle sends another wave both into the future and into the past. The two sets of waves cancel out everywhere except in the region between the two charged particles. But because one wave goes forwards in time and the other travels backwards in time, the connection is made instantaneously."

The two sets of waves that a source simultaneously radiates, were called retarded and advanced waves. The retarded waves, sent to the future, are moving outwards from their source and forwards in time, and they arrive somewhere, their destination, at a later time than they set out on their journey. The advanced waves, sent to the past, are moving towards their source and backwards in time, so they arrive to their destination, their source, before they set out on their journey.

As is pointed out further, clarifying the notion stated before,

"The half retarded wave goes out from the first electron forwards in time, while the half advanced wave goes out backwards in time. When the second electron shakes in response, it produces another half retarded, which is exactly out of step with the first wave and so precisely cancels out the remaining half retarded wave for all later times; and a half advanced wave, which goes back down the track of the first wave to the original electron, in step with that wave, reinforcing the original half-wave to make a full wave, ...
This half advanced wave arrives at the first electron, of course, at the moment it started to shake, ... Then it continues back into the past, canceling out the original half advanced wave from the first electron. The result is that between the two electrons there is a single wave .., but everywhere else the wave cancels out, ..."

In my mind the transactional interpretation John Cramer proposed, provides a way to explain the phenomenon of consciousness. Each transaction represent an instant of consciousness, and all the instants put together become a stream, a stream of consciousness.

The atemporal view might be used to explain the vastness of our consciousness as there are no limits either spatial or temporal for each transaction. The objects interacting in each instant of consciousness can be anywhere in space and time and their interaction takes place instantaneously thanks to the advanced waves that travel backwards in time. This could explain how our imagination can have no bounds as well as our consciousness being boundless.

Further, the acceptance that the retarded and advanced waves sent in each transaction travel at the speed of light, it likewise gives a measure of how long it takes for an instant of consciousness to take place as well as the collation of all the instants in a stream of consciousness and by that give a measure of the speed mental events can take place. This notion is inherent in each individual and can explain the impatience an individual expresses, when it complains about how slow computers can be, oblivious to the fact that the huge number of calculations a computer performs, are beyond the individual's conscious abilities.

Man is a unified whole of mind-body. In search for the parts that make up the whole.

2008-01-24T12:25:00.001Z

"The whole is more than the sum of its parts"

The above mentioned quote has been around since the time of Aristotle and is used to explain emergence, as these quotes, suggest, attributed to the pioneer psychologist G. H. Lewes,:

"Every resultant is either a sum or a difference of the co-operant forces; their sum, when their directions are the same -- their difference, when their directions are contrary. Further, every resultant is clearly traceable in its components, because these are homogeneous and commensurable. It is otherwise with emergents, when, instead of adding measurable motion to measurable motion, or things of one kind to other individuals of their kind, there is a co-operation of things of unlike kinds. The emergent is unlike its components insofar as these are incommensurable, and it cannot be reduced to their sum or their difference." (Lewes 1875, p. 412)(Blitz 1992)"

Emergence was further defined as:

"the arising of novel and coherent structures, patterns and properties during the process of self-organization in complex systems."(Corning 2002)

and elaborated, to describe the qualities of emergence by this definition in more detail:

"The common characteristics are: (1) radical novelty (features not previously observed in systems); (2) coherence or correlation (meaning integrated wholes that maintain themselves over some period of time); (3) A global or macro "level" (i.e. there is some property of "wholeness"); (4) it is the product of a dynamical process (it evolves); and (5) it is "ostensive" - it can be perceived. For good measure, Goldstein throws in supervenience -- downward causation." (Corning 2002)"

The ideas mentioned can be used to think further in matters concerned with the ongoing monism vs dualism dispute. The connection of mind and body as it is evident by the following quote:

"Corliss Lamont rightly contends that the fundamental issue is the relationship of personality to body, and divides the various positions into two broad categories: monism, which asserts that body and personality are bound together and cannot exist apart; and dualism, which asserts that body and personality are separable entities which may exist apart. Lamont is convinced that the facts of modern science weigh heavily in favor of monism, and offers the following as scientific evidence that the mind depends upon the body:

- in the evolutionary process the versatility of living forms increases with the development and complexity of their nervous systems
- the mind matures and ages with the growth and decay of the body
- alcohol, caffeine, and other drugs can affect the mind
- destruction of brain tissue by disease, or by a severe blow to the head, can impair normal mental activity; the functions of seeing, hearing and speech are correlated with specific areas of the brain.
- thinking and memory depend upon the cortex of the brain, and so ‘it is difficult beyond measure to understand how they could survive after the dissolution, decay or destruction of the living brain in which they had their original locus.’ (page 76)

These considerations lead Lamont to the conclusion that the connection between mind and body “is so exceedingly intimate that it becomes inconceivable how one could function without the other … man is a unified whole of mind-body or personality-body so closely and completely integrated that dividing him up into two separate and more or less independent parts becomes impermissible and unintelligible.”[1]"

The idea of the individual as being a unified whole of mind-body or personality-body has to looked at, from the perspective of 'the whole is more than the sum of its parts' concept, as both modes of inquiry, reductionist and holistic, in collaboration will provide answers to the ongoing problem.

Though science has built up a case of hard facts to defend its stance than the dualist side, however is short-sighted and downright ignorant to dismiss whatever has been with us, in individual and collective level, since the dawn of humanity and continues to be with us all along. Certainly what is for science to examine is not tangible and hard to configure but there is bound to be something to work on.

Ways of approach can be provided by following the perspective of strong emergence, as someone can surmise by reading the following quotes:

"Mark A. Bedau observes:

"Although strong emergence is logically possible, it is uncomfortably like magic. How does an irreducible but supervenient downward causal power arise, since by definition it cannot be due to the aggregation of the micro-level potentialities? Such causal powers would be quite unlike anything within our scientific ken. This not only indicates how they will discomfort reasonable forms of materialism. Their mysteriousness will only heighten the traditional worry that emergence entails illegitimately getting something from nothing."(Bedau 1997)

However,

"the debate about whether or not the whole can be predicted from the properties of the parts misses the point. Wholes produce unique combined effects, but many of these effects may be co-determined by the context and the interactions between the whole and its environment(s)." (Corning 2002)"

Along that same thought, Arthur Koestler stated,

"it is the synergistic effects produced by wholes that are the very cause of the evolution of complexity in nature" and used the metaphor of Janus to illustrate how the two perspectives (strong or holistic vs. weak or reductionistic) should be treated as perspectives, not exclusives, and should work together to address the issues of emergence.(Koestler 1969)"

Further,

"The ability to reduce everything to simple fundamental laws does not imply the ability to start from those laws and reconstruct the universe..The constructionist hypothesis breaks down when confronted with the twin difficulties of scale and complexity. At each level of complexity entirely new properties appear. Psychology is not applied biology, nor is biology applied chemistry. We can now see that the whole becomes not merely more, but very different from the sum of its parts."(Anderson 1972)"

Consciousness, a force?

2008-01-24T09:50:00.000Z

Consciousness manifests something that is going on. Something that stirs up and creates states, world states. A force that materialises by attentive brain function. Brain function an operation that involve processes. Processes are dynamic, they continuously develop and evolve. They are driven as physical quantities constantly take up new values. Varying within ranges, they are variables and as they drive processes along are considered as forces.

Mental processes are dynamic driven by physical quantities acting on brain mechanisms identified by neuroscientists, but not only. Is consciousness, the outcome of mental processes, a force, at par with the other fundamental forces in nature, or derived by a fundamental force or a pseudo-force, a fictitious force?

It is well documented in quantum physics that:

"While the spin of an electron is always up or down when you measure it, it does more adventurous things when you don't."

Measurement an application of our observing powers, a mental activity, a thinking process, the projection of our thoughts, our consciousness to the external world.

Are these not the traces of force? Does this not implicate consciousness? Consciousness can therefore be regarded as a force. Taking that stance we might be able to explain a lot of related and unrelated problems seeking solutions. And not only the fundamentals of reality, the quantum and classical worlds, but even problems that each individual faces in its everyday life course and even exotic problems which stand detached from the concept of reality we know and accept. Find it acceptable.

'Holistic' programming? Is it a base to make sense how our brain and mind work?

2008-01-07T12:01:00.000Z

"Is the brain 'massively parallel'? Is the brain a computer? Is the self an illusion? Some ideas have an appeal that gets them widely adopted in spite of their inherent unlikeliness."

Triggered by 'surely not?' website.

The brain is a processor. It processes events in the world. Processor or processors irrelevant at the moment as well as parallel, massively parallel or serial.
Quoting from the contents of the website:

"Each processor typically has its own memory and operating system; where the activities of the different processors overlap, the relationship is carefully managed so that they do not have to remain in step, and this requires careful prior programming."

Can we , in any way possible, talk about programming in the brain? Right now, a 'programming' I could think of, is the 'holistic'; some sort of programming based on the holistic approach.

"This does not seem to me even remotely like the way the brain is organised, so far as we understand it. There do not seem to be any good candidates within the brain for the role of processor (neurons are surely too simple) ..."

It is simplistic as an argument as well, in the attempt to build a case against the thought to treat the brain as a computer. The feeling of abhorrence in entertaining such a vile thought takes over, muddles up thinking and deters a more sober approach to the whole issue.

With regards to the neurons and their function in the brain, we should take into account their organisation as reverberated cell assemblies mentioned by John Holland. At the moment there is no need to elaborate of what the processor might be. It suffices to say that components of a brain processor might be the reverberated cell assemblies or groups of them.

Our brain sees the whole, our mind makes a whole while using our 'in-control' consciousness. We always assume that we see the whole picture since both our brain and our mind follow the same 'holistic' programming albeit our 'in-control' consciousness is not as efficient as our brain as it does not have direct access to the brain mechanisms, its access is only indirect via our 'out-of-control' consciousness, and its efforts to emulate brain operations are clumsy. Treats disparate parts as a whole, oblivious to the fact that there are either parts still missing, or parts falsely attributed to the whole, and in the process is making a fool of its carrier.

How can we fathom the holistic premise? Are there any maths which attempt to explain how 'the whole is more than the sum of its parts'? Any such maths might provide the base for elucidating the rules of how 'holistic' programming works. A start would be, by looking at John Holland's mechanisms in agent based systems. How simple rules by being endlessly repeated create enormous complexity. The constrained generating procedures a result of simple mechanisms.

In my mind the holistic premise is what makes the difference and it works in ways I can not explain. But I do abide to the idea that my brain knows better than me, and I follow its cues. It is why I made a copy of this web page to have at hand as what it contains it fitted a (or the) whole. It is part of. It did not happen by chance, it happened because it fitted a whole.

What 'whole' or to what effect still to be decided.

Blindsight because our neurons chart an individual's surrounding space.

2007-12-27T15:33:00.002Z

Blindsight and its connection with the in-built neural function and the space being charted by our neurons. Eric Harth "The creative loop" page 137

"The experiments with D.B. were continued over a number of years and always yielded the same results: The light pattern projected into the patient's blind field caused no awareness on his part, and yet information was clearly received by the brain."

"But the remarkable fact is that this information, although usable, is not accompanied by any feeling of awareness. There evidently is, as L. Weiskrantz puts it, a 'straightforward and unambiguous route ....

Neurons have built-in solving power, churning out solutions fast. Better keep consciousness away.

2007-12-27T15:04:00.007Z

It is down to the structions he (ref. Julian Jaynes) posits, that direct the neurons to perform an operation, or the .. that the .determining tendency.. mentioned by Julian Jaynes for ... what I see as a preparation and executive stage (ref. 'thinking's alternate phases'). As about the perfection of the operation is mentioned by .greek name.. attributed to Edelman. In Nature 1998 magazine the decision making is hinted in the unconscious whereas in the same issue there is the reference to zombie and what the brain sees and the mind do not see. Again in the paper by (ref. .....) about savant consciousness and the ability of the brain his studies revealed.

May be consciousness play the role of the conductor of a symphony orchestra. It leads and directs an orchestra but is neither the composer nor the musician. It gives directions and cues to the musicians when to perform but neither writes the play nor play the musical instruments.

Peter ... gives an account of the way consciousness plays tricks even in tasks which are very demanding and supposedly are rational. But our rationality doesn't lay there. Our rationality, or I would say the rationality of the mind lies in the function of the neurons themselves. It is the circuits we so admire in the architecture of the computers. All the boolean algebra that computer chips do so efficiently. Because what is rationality? Simple one plus one makes two, but in repeated almost endless loops, something our neurons do a lot more efficiently.(are a lot more efficient in doing so).

There are plenty of hints which display the real role of the unconscious part of our brain but always have been downplayed. I first came across the first one in Erich Harth's book, "The creative loop". In a paragraph he mentioned about the natives in Hawaii when they first saw the ship of Captain Cook. They totally missed it, they did not even see it, their consciousness did not have a concept of a ship and therefore did not take into consideration the stimuli their brain was sending. Such an overriding effect that consciousness produced is startling but it can be explained by the way the brain works and what consciousness records. At the same time puts consciousness function in its proper perspective.

Its what Julian Jaynes mentioned about the scientists' places of making their discoveries. The three bbb's bed bus bath.

"Consciousness studies a problem and prepares it as a struction, a process which may result in a sudden appearance of the solution as if out of nowhere. During World War II, British physicists used to say that they no longer made their discoveries in the laboratory; they had their three B’s where their discoveries were made—the bath, the bed, and the bus."

I do not know what to call it. Unconscious has been tarnished and does not give the perspective I envision for the whole process. Maybe be it is better just to use a term, something irreducible, solid and straightforward. Something that actually exists and its presence cannot be denied.

The .. is using the immense power of neurons abandon consciousness in its composer role, rely on our neurons, let the structions do their work and should be content and should not be apprehensive of putting our consciousness at the back seat, what it matters is get the job done, and with our consciousness as a spectator sit back relax and and enjoy the trip.

Illusions can directly be attributed to the concepts the collective human mind has accumulated in his efforts to understand reality. These concepts continue to be in force and muddle up the human mind's efforts to elucidate further reality. (my refeenc) and arragher;s reference.

The illusion exists and is propagated in the mental constructs human individuals create in their attempts to understand nature's workings and in what is called philosophy. The myriads of concepts which they do not have a foothold in reality. Of course humans efforts to understand reality have employed imagination. And the use of their imagination had to follow some rules in order to be able to expand beyond a limited area, be consistent as what has been contemplated in the past had to be the starting point on what to be contemplated in the future. Need a continuity. But the final goal was the process which required elucidation and in that process the concepts needed elucidation were finite and specific. That means a lot of the concepts invented had to be abandoned, their use being temporary, a transitional stage. Once the concepts of the original process have been elucidated (achieved) the redundant concepts need to be abandoned, have to be abandoned. Their use obsolete. This can be seen in the words, in every day life are going out of fashion, they become forgotten and discarded. The same goes with models, redundant concepts have built, and which have been employed to explain natural phenomena. It is what is known as paradigm shifts 9Scardos reference) and he book of ... gives a thorough account of ways of thought that have been abandoned, even concepts which were widely accepted and concepts that stirred the hearts and directed the lives of many people (reference mine)

So therefore the zombie is not the unconscious part of our consciousness. It is our consciousness itself. I do not know what possessed the first person that coined the term zombie for such an obviously higher function of the brain, but certainly it was other than admiration or even reverence to such an exquisite operation. Probably the result of consciousness within himself which could not bear the thought it was demoted to a lesser role than it was supposed to be playing.

Brain and consciousness holistic approach.

2007-12-21T08:49:00.000Z

The brain sees the whole and that is how it acts upon the objects in the world, as wholes, holistically.

The brain makes up the whole from the parts. The holistic approach and action of the brain toward the environment is a mode of function that is passed to our consciousness as well. We approach everything presented to our consciousness in a holistic manner, not as individual separate objects. More precisely the part of a whole that has drawn our attention, the stimulus from the surroundings our attention is focused upon, drags along every other part that makes up the whole.

That is how the gestalt process works, where even if a small part of a pattern is presented to us is sufficient to bring along to our consciousness the whole pattern. Our consciousness or brain is making up the whole from any of its individual parts.

Our consciousness acts in a holistic manner with concepts too. It includes within it the anticipation John Holland attributes to his reverberating cell assemblies and as such it directs our actions that about to happen in the future. Concepts connected by threads woven into a whole submerge in our consciousness, that represent our edge of consciousness at that particular moment, as it shifts in time, constantly re-arranging its contents. An uncanny action which if it is left undisturbed it will surprise us.

If however attempt to interfere, applying doctrines alien to human nature, adhering to the distorted simplified models prevalent in society we loose that spontaneity that our holistic consciousness amply give us. The holistic nature of consciousness becomes a drawback, as it treats the part as a whole, ignoring everything else. It directs our attention into a single thing, lead us in a state of ignorance and in one-dimensional overriding approach to life events.

Consciousness treats reality holistically, as reality acts as an infinite connected whole to our senses. Mach's principle at work.

Connections?

2007-12-17T06:58:00.000Z

synchrony like resonance,

helps the signal emanating from the oscillators fall into step vibrating in a lock-step fashion as in a plasma of atoms?

Charged particles must be close enough together such that each particle influences many nearby charged particles, rather than just interacting with the closest particle (these collective effects are a distinguishing feature of a plasma). The plasma approximation is valid when the number of electrons within the sphere of influence (called the Debye sphere whose radius is the Debye (screening) length) of a particular particle is large. The average number of particles in the Debye sphere is given by the plasma parameter, Λ.

Each particle influences many nearby charged particles. Cellular automata? Sphere of influence, and within that sphere of influence the necessity for a large number of particles. Charged meaning that they must be excited, being ready for exerting other particles and by being exerted by other particles.

Particles as entities, and entities existing in many forms. Entities as concepts, ideas, processes. Oscillating, excited. Ever ready to participate in processes, to influence and be influenced by other entities nearby. Within the sphere of influence. and whenever there is a large number of entities, then they get into step, become synchronised, a resonance field, a plasma? The synchronized entities can easily assimilate newcomer entities and their power nonlinear, geared.

Entities as concepts. Thoughts thought from men organised in a similar manner, the plasma mode. Primeval forces, the powerhouses of cosmos whose remnants are seen in the huge gas clouds the nursery of stars, the stars themselves, the core of earth. And what we see in the universe a result of harnessing that awesome power? The result of the myriad similar processes undergoing in the very same plasma, generating the forms our senses detect. The phenomenally stable objects our experience witnesses. But inside they are other than stable. Stability is phenomenal. An illusion?

And the objects we observe, out of the plasmas of entities, so delicately balanced around minute determining initial conditions, chaotic developments, the starting points, which if upset will violently re-arrange the whole plasma, the object so dearly ingrained in our minds. Our minds in step with the object, intertwined and spawned by the same processes that gave rise to the objects.

and what about the grand-father clocks against the wall, their knocking vibrating in step, synchronisation

Topics include: atomic and molecular dynamics in strong fields, high harmonic generation, coherent X-ray radiation, nonlinear plasma dynamics and relativistic optics, laser-based electron and ion acceleration, inertial confinement fusion and fast ignition, laboratory astrophysics, high energy astrophysics and cosmology, as well as applications of superstrong pulses to high energy physics.

harmonic generation and synchrony, and resonance, nonlinear plasma dynamics and relativistic optics?

Results are presented for a theoretical model, known as the ion model (IM), recently elaborated to calculate the radiative opacity of a hot dense plasma. The density functional theory is used to obtain the general set of self-consistent field equations that describe the state of the whole ensemble of plasma atoms and ions. Theoretical features of the Hartree–Fock–Slater model, the detail configuration account, and the IM are considered. The IM is used for optimal selections of compound chemical compositions for laser and heavy ion target designs.

radiative as radiating? Self-consistent field equations that describe the state of the whole ensemble of plasma atoms and ions? Atoms in a plasma vibrating in a lock-step fashion? Oscilatting in lock-step?

Consciousness? In want for a better term

2007-12-04T06:18:00.000Z

There is a quality more fundamental than consciousness. Its influence and impact more pronounced, yet in my mind the underpinning concept elusive. Consciousness a neurological product mostly used to pamper our egos, to make us proud of ourselves, to build our theories of mind. But there is a more fundamental level, more powerful that springs out from the interconnected all-surpassing reality network.

Reality as it is overwhelmed and exists as such, by dynamic processes driven by the fundamental forces. Ubiquitous forces constantly in action from the quantum to the cosmic level, bring out, realise another force within us. Consciousness, that we know, one of its products.

But consciousness, that we know, does not have a deciding influence. It can be shut off, blacked out, possibly by restricting the blood flow to that particular region in the brain, where the module responsible for raising it, resides. But that doesn't mean that the individual, whose consciousness module shuts off, ceases to exist or stops performing. Its body still vibrant and very much alive, the involuntary nervous system, and not only, still kicking in and take matters cared for, but not only. It outperforms in the active tasks, that living demands execution for, from when the consciousness module was around to applaud or mollify its actions.

Static or dynamic worldviews?

2007-12-03T07:48:00.000Z

"The physical universe is manifest entirely as structural stabilities of conscious experience"

What is implied by 'structural stabilities', is that we sense the world as static, while in reality, the world is dynamic. What we sense is a view from a window, in space and time, in one of the branches of a chain of dynamically evolved processes. The view of the world through that window in that particular instance, frozen in a single unit of perception to form our conscious experience.

Is that the result of the unitary nature of consciousness? The way consciousness materialises in our brain. The vehicle, by which the product of consciousness is transported? The static nature of the percept produced, a false sense, overriding the continuity inherent in the dynamic event? Does that imply a quantum origin for consciousness, with its included packet idea? The single percept being the packet? The quantum.

Consciousness the tool of chaos in world events

2007-12-03T06:41:00.000Z

In defining what triggers chaotic events the following is relevant "chaotic dynamics possess both sensitivity to initial conditions and computational unpredictability" and "arbitrarily small fluctuations are thus inflated into global instabilities by the "butterfly effect", in which a perturbation such as a butterfly can become the source of a subsequent tropical cyclone. A chaotic system is arbitrarily sensitive to perturbation and hence responsive".

By taking in account the way we use our consciousness in our lives the above definitions provide a measure of its use and the manner it acts and determines events in the world around us. Our consciousness is extremely sensitive to stimuli and it does produce effects that are in comparison a cyclone in its track in the world.

Our consciousness can detect minute changes, fluctuations in the stimuli the world sends to our brains and is capable by the actions triggered by in the individual, to have a profound effect in world events.

A 'butterfly effect' right in our own doorstep.

Consciousness a physical quantity that can be measured?

2007-11-30T17:58:00.000Z

The thought crossed my mind to think consciousness as a variant physical quantity in a similar manner as any other physical quantity. And as such introduce concepts as size, range, sensitivity of consciousness, as attributes that can be measured. Consciousness attribute values are defined by variables connected with the stimulus that raises a certain amount of consciousness. Depending on the kind of stimulus these variables can be light, sound, heat, pressure. As most such variables are forms of energy they can be referred to in respect with their energy content. Other variables which should be considered are the attributes involved with the processing of the signal once in the brain.
.....

Moving the consciousness subject too far ...

2007-11-28T11:39:00.002Z

The threads responsible for these thoughts
Chaos in my mind. Channels tapped
Raw ideas, grab them as they come

OOOmf..
The thoughts that entered my mind are going too far, even for my own consciousness to abide to. It all started, by thinking about concepts and what makes them be what they are. Researchers, in all advanced disciplines, talk in a language of their own, that (the thought passed my mind) even between them they would have difficulty communicating. Their papers are so detailed, so subtle the meanings trying to pass to each other that are bound to create situations where these meanings are not passed along to their fellow researchers as they meant to be. Why do I go too far with this? An urgency.

I had in mind what I read about meaning lies in people and not in the words we use to communicate. I was querying in my mind a comment I read in a website about the difference between unconscious and subconscious and the evolution of its meaning to our present day. I was thinking that it did not matter after all. What it matters is how each individual constructs the meaning in his mind.

That led to concepts and their significance and whether all concepts are as significant as any other and what about the concepts that are continuously invented as researchers continue to probe reality deeper. The thought occurred to me that the concepts researchers develop are in remote branches of some fundamental concepts and their significance lies in how much they elucidate further the fundamental concepts, as such. As deep down the significance of their work lies in the usefulness they confer in the understanding, not only for them or their fellow researchers, but in the general public at large.

And there a unified, global approach that puts the efforts of scientists in all disciplines all over the world in its right perspective. But it did not stop there. My thoughts about a mathematical substrate that our consciousness lies had a momentum by themselves and carried me through in the next stage. Grab them as they come. The thoughts I mean.

A whole that is made out of concepts and the mathematical substrate, mathematical processes, or simply processes that take place within reality and the processes in our minds, go along hand-in-hand there is no distinction, no separation between them. Process space reality of its own, a phase space I would say, like the phase space in chaotic developments. There is no room for material world. The material world is the manifestation of the processes themselves. A result of specific processes. Processes are not underlying the reality we witness with our senses. It is the reality itself. Our brain the conduit that connects our minds with that process space that engulfs us, gets in tune with the processes around us, and opens up a stream for our consciousness to pass. It is what makes me write now and the words come unbiased. I record them as they come.

Many individuals have managed to tune the processes in their minds with the processes in reality in such a way that their feats astonishes us. I consider them as examples of the possibilities open in front of us, once is realised how reality organise its fabric. When I saw the dutch fakir balancing mid-air on its slender cane to his side, it struck me then and I see it now, as a manifestation of perfect tuning of mind and reality processes. The google search triggered by this spectacle led me to a website that added on in my amazement as its subject is about human levitation. Defying the laws of physics? Can that be possible? I see these feats as an expression of the approach of mind and reality processes in accord with each other. Can that lead to states which defy the physical laws?

Mathematical substrate, the bed consciousness lies upon and draws from

2007-11-27T09:41:00.000Z

The deepest level experience is embedded on and from which consciousness and awareness originate. A substrate of processes that continuously unfold and built up reality and the human mind in a similar fashion emulating nature raises our consciousness and awareness.

Our sense organs gauges that monitor reality and pass this information to the brain and under the direction of our consciousness unfold our actions. Our eyes, ears and all other organs sensitively measure and calculate the values of constantly changing variables within their given range and feeds them to an enormous bed of mathematical functions for processing, filtered, and our consciousness the focus that interprets the result.

Mathematical functions that include triangulations, differentiations, integrals all that is included in a mathematician's inexhaustible arsenal to chaotic developments and quantum computations that enter, when necessity demands at appropriate levels emerging experience rise from.

Our body, a mass of chemical concentrations, equilibrium states and other parametres, with our brain and the emerged consciousness included, define our experience. Mathematical functions underlie almost everything we do, from the simple acts of walking, reaching out for objects, driving a car. And not only, they are directing our mental functions too, the formulation and development of thoughts, of imagination, the pleasure we take when we listen to music or watching a film. They constantly assessing, judging, estimating and direct the actions.

They are taking place in a level our consciousness can not detect. They are beyond the reach of consciousness. But consciousness can direct our mind to pay attention to, to subtly direct and guide their development towards a richer more fulfilling experience.

Beyond consciousness again.

2007-11-26T11:09:00.000Z

.... the processes of the mind ... processes of the world .... both have the same fundamental beginnings ... in analogy with the machine language all computers and sophisticated software programs are based upon, understand and communicate by ...

Does experience materialise in the same way? The processes in the mind, fit, melt with, fuse with the processes of the world? Brought forward by a quality other than consciousness, though consciousness is needed to propel it further ahead? Consciousness can lead awareness to new heights. Makes it possible for an individual to develop its mind processes to be in tune with the processes in the world.

The importance of the preparation stage in the height of experience, consciousness can lead to.

2007-11-26T08:34:00.000Z

The materials in the preparation stage that consciousness takes care of, determine in what depth the functional stage will go to. The result of that stage depends on the quantity and quality of materials the conscious phase provides. Materials as these are concepts and ideas experience has produced. Concept acquisition varies between individuals and ranges from a superficial, epidermic, skin-deep to a deeper and more far-reaching content.

Concept acquisition is defined by the quantity, the sheer numbers of concepts embedded in a given reality that our consciousness has a record of and the quality of the recorded concepts as it is defined by the extent of properties and attributes, the extensions of each concept, are known to us. If there is a small quantity, it means that only this small quantity is going to be considered in the unconscious phase. If the quality of the associated attributes is dubious then the end result of a thought process will be dubious too.

As the functionality of the consciousness content is double, it does not only determine the mental structures embedded in our brain, it also determines, most crucially, what stimuli from a given reality will enter in the unconscious phase of the thinking process. Only the stimuli that are connected with the concepts we have acquired, will be considered in the unconscious phase, whereas stimuli that are not part of our acquired concepts will be ignored. They would not be considered at all, in the functional stage, despite being present.

What is disheartening is that the human individual suffers from a crucial ailment. What it does not know it does not exist. It provides the groundwork of truth. Truth that is known only to an individual but seldom shared by others. There is a sensation that is brought about from consciousness that lulls the individual in a false sense of fulfillment something that is more evident in kids, a solipsism that makes them believe they know everything, a sort of omniscience which characterises adults too. A feature that plays a big part in the development of our personality, which hinders our need to continuously aim for a deeper and wider concept acquisition.

The conscious effort of accumulating ever more concepts and concept attributes makes experience richer and more fulfilling than ever as more and more stimuli from reality would be allowed to enter let in the unconscious phase. The way our unconsciouses phase will make use of them, it can not be determined, it is chaotic, unpredictable, and therefore exciting and is bound to lead the individual in exhilarating heights.

People whose conceptual arsenal are more far reaching than others, will be able to include a larger amount of stimuli, they will attribute other persons as dim-witted and stupid as not being able to see what for them is so obvious as the depth of their concepts provide a richer bed of materials than others.

Thinking's alternate phases

2007-11-26T06:39:00.002Z

"There was no conscious content for the actual judgment itself, although such a judgment was embedded in the consciousness of the problem, its materials, and technique."

The conclusion Julian Jaynes arrived, to explain the result of Karl Marbe's experiment in 1901, where he asked his professors to make a simple judgment between two identical looking weights as to which was the heavier, hints towards an alternating thinking process. A part where consciousness sorts out the materials, and takes care of them and these are the concepts and ideas, all the data held in the mind, at that particular moment, full with their properties and extensions as well as information about how these can be processed, the technique, but that is as far as it could go.

The actual processing escapes consciousness. It is done in the absence of consciousness. A stage where all the calculations, functions, variables is so intensive that consciousness is to slow to follow? It is so chaotic that consciousness will slow it down? Maybe it could go even deeper, in quantum computations, consciousness is unable to record?

Thinking accomplished in alternate phases? A preparation stage where everything needed is taken care of, a conscious phase. And a functional stage, where the actual process of thinking takes place, which is so complicated that is beyond consciousness's detection machinery, consciousness is unable to follow. An unconscious phase? A chaotic phase driven by quantum computations?

Consciousness is reduced to the level of the spectator and

"at the point of success , your consciousness is somewhat surprised and even proud of you .."

and fills you with praise.

Beyond consciousness? Is there?

2007-11-25T15:48:00.000Z

The quote from Julian Jaynes lecture mentioned in "Is thinking an automatic process?" raises questions that go beyond the process of thinking. Mankind has looked upon the concept of consciousness to explain its prowess to probe and understand reality. As Julian Jaynes, in his theory of the bicameral mind attempts to put things straight and define consciousness as it really is, dis-associates thought from consciousness. If thinking is not conscious and the way we give answers to questions is dictated by apparently non-specific neural mechanisms, such a process demotes the significance of consciousness and raises the question of another level of organisation, to which consciousness is only a part of.

What is there beyond consciousness? Julian Jaynes in his controversial theory of the bicameral mind asserts that consciousness is a recent attribute of the human mind. That consciousness of a few centuries ago was just voices in the head. Visions. But if consciousness is not the ultimate gift of the human mind, and evolves in the same way as everything else, under the same rules of evolution, then there must be something else that sustained humanity in its path of development, something more fundamental than consciousness.

Consciousness develop on the bed this fundamental level provides, and might be an offshoot of some primitive quality that has evolved into the consciousness we experience. What is the stuff of this fundamental level and how is it organised? Julian Jaynes referred to structions, as the mode of organisation of the nervous system which identify the materials used in thought and lead the thought to conclusion. Structions, like instructions or commands or routines. Or algorithms? The mathematical instructions? A realm driven by the mathematical laws? Mathematical processes the deepest level of existence and consciousness an offshoot of some obscure quality?

Is thinking an automatic process?

2007-11-22T00:11:00.000Z

Julian Jaynes in his lecture "Consciousness and the Voices of the Mind" mentions

"instructions given to the nervous system, that, when presented with the materials to work on, result in the answer automatically without any conscious thinking or reasoning."

Somehow this statement strikes a chord as I draw from my own experience while thinking. Even now when I try consciously to develop my thoughts about this statement I pause and the next words to come are bursting out, as if from nowhere. Often enough I caught myself thinking about a notion and wonder. What pushed me into formulated such an idea?. John H. Holland mentions about reverberating cell assemblies organised as 'exclusive-or' networks of neurons, the parts of the nervous system that once they are presented with the materials to work on, they will automatically give the answer. Consciousness is not engaged, neither reason. If I reason at all, I would have lost the essence of my inquiry.

Julian Jaynes continued further and stated that

"this process on a smaller scale is going on in me at present as I am speaking: my words are as if chosen for me by my nervous system after giving it the instruction of my indented meaning."

We should not therefore be talking about a stream of consciousness when we talk, since as an automatic process our neurons know better. Than us? Do we identify ourselves solely with our consciousness? Is it because by consciousness we give substance to our ego?

But looks as if the the unconscious knows better.

Kinds of thinking

2007-11-18T06:13:00.000Z

Julian Jaynes in an extract from a lecture given at a symposium on consciousness in 1985, titled "Consciousness and the Voices of the Mind" focused on the problem of consciousness and its origin in evolution.
He mentioned first that
"It is easy for the average layman to understand. But paradoxically, for philosophers, psychologists, and neurophysiologists, who have been so used to a different kind of thinking, it is a difficult thing."

What is that different kind of thinking and why it happens? Or, are there different kinds of thinking? and if so what makes them different? The average layman's kind of thinking and the expert's kind of thinking? What is the difference between these two kinds of thinking, if they are actually kinds of thinking. Both follow a trajectory that moves forward to whatever that leads to. As it moves forward it is thoroughly engaged and seldom, or never, looks back. A paradigm shift.

The layman's kind of thinking less specialized therefore broad whereas the expert's specialized and therefore narrow. The layman's kind of thinking quickly takes up the new proposal whereas the expert's kind of thinking has to accommodate the new proposal only after some drastic changes in the expert's underlying conceptual framework.

Kinds of thinking driven by the accumulated arsenal of concepts. Concepts building up in ever expanding tree structures probing deeper into reality driven by the concerted efforts of experts in a field.

Experts' kind of thinking is narrow but probes deeper into reality equipped by their advanced grasp of concepts but at the same time limits their exposure to new ideas as it is hard to abandon a somewhat cherished view of looking at things.

A layman's kind of thinking devoid of such qualms can easily accept any new ideas. A versatile mode of thinking that it is easier to adapt to the new ideas and advance them to whatever extent he chooses to.

Julian Jaynes' innovative approach to consciousness are easy for the average layman to understand and at the same time a difficult thing for the expert.

Η ξυραφενια κοψη της συνειδησης

2007-11-14T11:46:00.000Z

... jumps out ... furtively engage our attention ... lingers on for an imperceptible moment and away ... streaming ... give focus to our awareness ... impulse drives and gestalt assists .... there are times the need arises to take pace and train it ... use the tools language provides to put it into context ... ruled by the premises declared by chaos ... as everything around us yearn our attention ... change the rules ... provide a different focus ... for your attention ... and let it enter ... the rule change will bring into focus and into your attention a whole new horde of stimuli ... standing unaware neglected ... but nevertheless in constant motion ... let them enter into your consciousness unbiased ... do not try to train them ... what drives their motion and define their trajectories is far more valuable than you would have ever imagined ... this is the beauty that lies within ... do not kill it by putting it into frames language provides ... let the words flow by themselves ... meaning comes from within ... it is not the time to reason ... leave the irrational beat the rational ... let the associations to materialise free ... let chaos rule ... create ...

The razor edge of consciousness

2007-11-14T08:36:00.001Z

........ chaotic attractor?

Mind reading and self-awareness

2007-11-13T22:18:00.001Z

"Research shown, the author continues, that chimpanzees and possibly humans have a module of mind reading, a set of neurons that fire when we detect signs specific to a variety of mental states in others. It has been suggested that individuals that suffer from autism lack the mind reading module and that they can not connect, be on-line projecting an emotional distance."

"To be self-aware means recognizing the limits of self-hood."

To recognize what? Where your own self-hood ends and the world begins? What separates your self-hood and the world around you? Or what you are capable of and what not? How being capable of distinguishing that the world as a self-hood perceives it, is distinct from the way other self-hoods perceive the world, make it possible to recognize their self-hood limits?
Certainly they realize that the information they have about the world is different from the information ....

That should be based on information you gather about your self-hood and the world. I think that should come when a self-hood realizes that is capable of thought in a world populated by other self-hoods, and by default as mirror images, all capable of thought. As a self-hood is capable of thought it gathers information about its self-hood and the world around. Being aware of your own thoughts, you recognize that a 'self' is capable of thought as your own self is.

You can't step back and reflect on your thoughts without recognizing that your thoughts are finite, and that other combinations of thoughts are possible. Without those limits, we would certainly be aware of the world in some basic sense - it's just that we wouldn't be aware of ourselves, because there would be nothing to compare ourselves to. The self and the world would be indistinguishable.

So the limits discussed are about our thoughts being finite. Finite as opposed to infinite. Our thoughts aren't infinite or omniscient as the three-year old.

Reflection on your thoughts is a conscious process and could not be performed by a four-year-old. Does that imply that a reflex action, hard-wired in the brain? Still a reflection process less plausible

Without recognition of other thoughts to measure our own thoughts against, our own mental state wouldn't even register as something to think about.

He knows that as he extrapolates his conclusion that the perception is aware of, would be owned by the other self-hoods, and his perspective allows him a unique view and other self-hoods that are alike him would see the world from their own perspective, their unique view. And the differences he perceives other self-hoods would experience is due to the realization of the uniqueness of perspectives of self-hood. I would dare say the theory of minds implied it does not come out of any reading of the mind of other individuals as mostly the result of the rudimentary concept of the expected contents of the box.

Self-aware and limits of self-hood. It gives a measure of what he can and he can not do, which by itself represent limits nevertheless but acts mostly as confirmation. The authors have messed it up by going further than what can be legitimately concluded from the findings. Their plea to indistinguishableness between self-hood and world can not be affirmed, it is not a logical conclusion. It muddles up, confuses and stirs away from a realistic conclusion.

Self-awareness ...

2007-11-13T06:06:00.000Z

In the book extract the author states "to be self-aware means recognizing the limits of self-hood". What self-awareness actually is as all awareness developed belongs to the self. The carrier and the carriage. The carrier being the self and the carriage is awareness. Self-awareness, is therefore awareness, the carriage, about the carrier. And the limits are set as the self-hood, the material object, obeys the laws of nature.
Can self-awareness be awareness about our awareness? Awareness looking at itself and not the carrier. Self-aware, to be aware of being aware. But that requires mental thought and use of concepts, the realm of consciousness. Does self-awareness develop when consciousness kicks in?

What about the creative process ...

2007-11-12T09:27:00.000Z

Creativity is described as a mental process involving the generation of new ideas or concepts, or new associations between existing ideas or concepts or simply the act of making something new. It is a complex phenomenon, a trait we are born with and since it involves the re-shuffling of concepts and ideas held by individuals or groups of individuals, we can be trained into using it. This is what we constantly do, otherwise we wouldn't have managed to develop as individuals or as groups of individuals. The degree to which creativity , as defined by its products, it becomes evident it is a totally different matter and it has nothing to do with the creative process as such. Usually the creative products are judged by criteria that are irrelevant to the process itself, therefore denying its presence. Someone must either be so damned modest or blind to deny creativity's very presence within himself.
In simple terms what is mentioned in the Wikipedia by George Kneller, (though I do not know the person) "Creativity, it has been said, consists largely of re-arranging what we know in order to find out what we do not know.", says it all. So it is time to pull this artificial mystery veil off and start dealing with it. In a creative manner.

In a passage from the synectics theory pdf, their view of creativity, is in direct conflict with the theory that any attempt to analyse and train imagination and those aspects of the human psyche associated directly with the creative process threatens the process with destruction. In other words, true analysis of the creative process is considered impossible since if the individual attempts to examine himself in process, the process ceases immediately, and his examination is bankrupt. This theory implies that illumination is destructive. At present this prejudice seems groundless. Synectic's attempts to illuminate the creative process have resulted in several working hypotheses which are useful in practice and have increased markedly the creative output of both individuals and groups.
What hinders each individual's creative potential is a weak grasp of concepts that underpin his reality. Expanding the breadth and depth of the concepts, an individual abounds by, will provide an abundance of leads for his creative nature to generate new ideas and concepts. Abiding to our conservative nature and the unwillingness that stems from it, hinders such a process and stifles creativity.

Concepts and consciousness

2007-11-12T08:37:00.001Z

In a previous post I dealt with the matter of consciousness from the point of view of a wine-taster and I mentioned that a constantly evolving formal terminology is used to describe the range of perceived flavours, aromas and other characteristics of a wine. And that is what makes it possible for a wine-taster to tell the difference between wine samples. Concepts involved are strongly affirmed via an ever more detailed description. Therefore the breadth of concepts relevant to wine, (the category wine?) expand.

In this paper about synectics I found similar lines of thoughts, similar as regards to the significance in a rising consciousness of describing further the concepts, even for concepts which are very difficult to pin down. Synectics deals with the creative process. They mention that the creative process in human beings can be concretely described and, further, that sound description should be usable in teaching methodology to increase the creative output of both individuals and groups. This position agrees with what I mention before for wine tasters. It is the constantly evolving formal terminology by ever more sound descriptions, that is used to develop the methodology to increase wine-tasting skills as groups and as individuals. That points towards the significance of following similar lines of action for all the concepts that comprise consciousness in both the individual level and group level, group level being community, society, culture. And why not, it should be the way education is delivered.

Unconscious knows better ... Indulge yourself.

2007-11-08T10:47:00.001Z

The word unconscious struck me there ... conscious and unconscious as they refer to states our mind might be in. The conscious and unconscious states of our mind. Mind states triggered or materialised in response to signals, and among other, emotion-related signals also. And somatic markers, the special instance of feelings (feelings .?.), generated from secondary emotions. Emotions and feelings somatic markers connected by learning (we learn about and are able to distinguish particular feelings and emotions and attribute them as somatic markers) to predicted future outcomes of certain scenarios.

We learn to distinguish emotions and feelings by the signals they are related to or being related to them. What are emotions and what are feelings? And what are their signals, we learn about and later associate with one or the other predicted future outcome. Emotions, an umbrella concept. An instance of emotion takes place by reference to a variety of mental and behavioural states. The particular instance of emotion, which can be taken, as well, as an emotional instance, refer to or relevant to a particular mental and/or behavioural state. This might be lust to liking, joy to aggression, aesthetic appreciation to disgust. The flavour and intensity of the instance a slider control from one to the other end of a set range. Related signals are learned. knowledge gained by learning associates a specific emotional instance to particular signal(s).

What are these signals? What is their origin? External or internal? Emotions are triggered by either external or internal signals. A triggered instance of emotion sends additional signals to the brain, the frequently visceral signals, the gut feelings. The secondary emotions that generate the somatic markers? This special instance of feelings which by learning are connected to future outcomes? Where a negative instance of feeling, slider control in the range near the undesirable end, juxtaposed to a particular future outcome, combined act as an alarm bell against that particular choice and avoid that future outcome. And where a positive instance of feeling, slider control in the range near the desirable end, juxtaposed to a particular future outcome, combined act as a beacon of incentive in favour of that particular choice and future outcome.

And all these processes may operate covertly, without coming into consciousness. What? Is our consciousness untrustworthy? Can it not be trusted? What is there that knows more than our conscious mind? Our unconscious mind?

The claims brought forward in Nature magazine insist that it does. Accurate decisions can be made without awareness.

You, yourself, your precious conscious mind, that you so much marvel and proud for, can be asleep ... for all I care ... says the unconscious mind.

"I will take care of you" ... daydream and fill your heart with pleasure.

Consciousness vs. awareness?

2007-11-07T22:44:00.002Z

Consciousness and awareness put side by side or versus each other? Consciousness a mechanistic process which analyzes the product of the senses, which our awareness produce. In the example cited 'being tired', the awareness part and 'being conscious of being tired', the consciousness part, 'are two different things'. What is the difference? The awareness part we feel it, it is a sensation which is conveyed to our brain by our weary body due to fatigue in our muscles, triggered possibly by accumulated chemicals like lactic acid which produce neural impulses, conveyed by the nerve cells into our brain and our brain brings about the sensation of tiredness, the awareness of tiredness.

What about the consciousness part? What 'being conscious of being tired actually means'? The first thing obviously is that we can think about it, and use this assertion into what we can do about it. We bring about logic in order to respond to the situation our awareness of tiredness demands. So, since we are tired then we should rest and further depending on the task we set about to perform, to assess whether we can continue the task or not. All in all consciousness assists in deciding of what to do about our awareness, how to react to our awareness, to the messages arriving in our brain by the mechanisms employed by our awareness.

Thoughts about analogue vs. digital seem relevant. Analogue for awareness and digital for consciousness. Analogue general un-refined, where output comes from a broad spectrum of "registers" and digital the refined output where the signals received are rid of the noise and the effect each or a specific "register" receives, is clearly defined. Awareness gives us a broad view of a particular field on all our "registers", the senses for that matter, and consciousness makes it specific for each "register" or just the "register" we choose to focus on according to the task to be performed.

The matter is not finished yet. Referring to awareness as the state of being fully conscious of pertinent stimuli and really experiencing a task or situation brings in aspects attributed to consciousness. This makes fuzzier the boundaries between the two faculties. Or is it that consciousness rise, it becomes more subtle, more acute, by learning, training, repetition or other process therefore it makes it possible to distinguish between minute fluctuations in the stimuli presented to our senses. What our "registers" are picking up. It is still perception, the way we perceive our environment and therefore awareness. It is how a wine-taster develops the skills to evaluate wines using a constantly evolving formal terminology to describe the range of perceived flavours, aromas and other characteristics of a wine which an untrained, lay-person is largely unaware of. The concept of wine enriched with the properties of complexity and character sharpens wine tasters awareness of wines.

So this developed skill goes hand-in-hand with the firm acquisition of all the relevant concepts in the wine-making process. Concept development arising by the need to identify even finer differences between wine samples and once a concept is affirmed, continuing persistent differences might incite the creation of newer novel concepts, the process repeating itself, an abundance of concepts, a rise in consciousness that result in an even more acute wine-testing awareness.

Consciousness extends its breadth and depth, embracing ever wider realms of existence as more and more concepts are incorporated, hand-in-hand with an ever sharper and more acute perception and heightened awareness.

Innate predisposition for information processing

2007-09-28T09:54:00.000+01:00

I feel compelled to repeat that phrase in fear of forgetting it. Humans
possess an innate predisposition for information processing. How
aptly Silven M. put it, in his summary of his Psykologia paper in 1997.
I read it as built-in curiosity bug, what powers human tendency for learning and, since predisposed, an element of eagerness and a thirst for learning. Or not. Computers do information processing, as such a mechanical procedure. Nothing is added to the 'personality' of the computer. It does not grow or evolve. It is not the owner of the information processing product. Does that mean that this difference, the ownership, is what really matters?
Humans own the information processing product and use it accordingly to make sense of their social and physical world. To categorize the objects and events by building an arsenal of mental representations, the information processing products, that comprise the elements in the changing surrounding world.
The author continues, as humans since birth we continuously engage in objects and events information processing, manage to dissolve apparent chaos in our environment, which is referred to as piagetian or psychoanalytic chaos. Piagetian probably related to the environment and psychoanalytic to the internal world, conflicts and so on. Heavy. The innate processes give structure to the infant's world.
A structured world view is gradually accomplished by the infant's mind processes. The elements in the structure are the mechanisms dictated by the social and physical laws and are continually applied. The chaos in the world never ceases to exist. It does not disappear. The human mind by the emergence of consciousness and language assimilates its carrier in the chaotic framework. The concepts acquired, in parallel with the development of language provide the features required so gradually fits in its environment and assume its role alongside the objects in the environment and continue to do so in the course of its life. So mind processes and chaos deciphering go along hand in hand.

Broker of ideas

2007-09-20T10:32:00.003+01:00

Broker of ideas? I caught myself thinking about this notion and made me wonder. What pushed me into formulating such an idea? Thoughts. Agitations in my mind, triggered by words I read. The chase being more exciting than the completion of a task. The snippets of ideas that come across and the turmoil they bring about, once they enter into my mind processes. The fertile background of ideas already in, all the concepts and notions already acquired and stored into my brain.

Sequences of reverberating cell assemblies, the groups of neurons, John H. Holland talked about in his "emergence from chaos to order" book p.96-101. Laid out in a dynamic form, ever ready to respond to a nudge, due to the indefinite nature that memories are stored. The exclusive-or networks of neurons, that keep memories alive for an indefinite time, active, dynamic, till another pulse, triggered by any sort of stimulus, it finds its way into the networks' neighborhood.

The more the neural networks, the reverberated cell assemblies, amassed in the brain of an individual, the more abundant and varied the output would be, an inkling of a furtively passing, wondering thought would produce; giving, depending on the case, a variety of solutions, a rich repertoire of alternatives.

That beats the argument of many, when they attempt to discredit thinking and learning, even as being harmful to your health, or doubt the advantages of formal education. That they are taught so many useless things, an idea closely linked to the education tightly snared in vested economic interests bandwagon.

I do not think so. What you learn, enters your memory storage registers for an indefinite time to become the bed upon which later ideas will breed upon. The narrower the bed the more limited the output, any incoming idea will produce. Very few solutions and as a result stalemate. A stagnant life pattern. The broader the bed the more abundant the output an incoming idea will produce, plenty of solutions and alternatives, a versatile and adaptable personality.

always-on reverberated-cell-assemblies, individual-as-broker-of-ideas,exclusive-or neuron-networks,memories-indefinite-nature

Dreaming, shuffling memories to new combinations

2007-05-31T11:43:00.001+01:00

"Under construction"

It was 04:45 a.m. The vivid dream woke me up, puzzled as I was trying to distinguish between dream and reality. I felt I had to note it down, while it was remembered, still fresh in my memory. Before it is forgotten. However, it would not be significant as dreaming is just the shuffle of the things; events that happened, thoughts that crossed your mind, the day before. But wait, is there something worthwhile here. A new combination. Dreaming is shuffle, shuffle to new combinations, new combinations represent new thoughts, new thoughts a prerequisite of creative processes, dreaming connected to creative, creative to dreaming, dreaming the foremost example of imagination.

Apart from that, the mental note I so fervently wanted to write down, it was about a note posted in the Internet, that included within it, a reference to itself. A reference to itself? Self-referential? Was it in the Internet or was it in your own brain? Would it make any difference? Does that point to a similarity between the two structures? Of organisation? Self-similarity? That even though not everything has been elucidated for either of the structures, we should be free to assume that any model that applies for either of them, it would apply to the other one too. Any elements that become explicit for one, would expect to hold true for the other, too.

The odd thought that surfaced in that peculiar dream was triggered by my occasional browsing of program fault reports to Microsoft, among the tedium of information about the processes on, when the fault occurred, there are memory dumps of what was happening while you were online. Among them were personal messages from people that manage these memory dumps, in a form that resembled greetings to each other and these messages are carried while you browse the internet, completely unaware of their existence, the noise that represent the froth of the World Wide Web virtual digital environment. A TCP or UDP packet roaming the virtual vacuum, entering an IP address leaving their signature, sometimes harmful if it is a virus, wandering aimlessly directionless, a virtual message-in-a-bottle in the digital ocean. What if that virtual message-in-a-bottle had shape, determined by code in the same manner as a widget, and could sent information in an associated e-mail address that once it has been detected and clicked it would send that information to its e-mail address, a record of its whereabouts. At the same time the reference to itself would create information that will change the message-in-the-bottle in ways that reflect the information acquired by its encounters in the World Wide Web. To what effect? Who knows? The whole process might be in want, of identifying itself by goals and purpose, however its more important aspect is that it contains a chaotic seed (the self-referential and what will emerge, it can not be known. It would suffice to simply state that it will produce emergence. An emerging state. Its self-referential nature implied by the feedback loop, more vividly remembered. So somehow the statement contained a reference to itself, and that reference was fed back, and producing another statement, with new elements added on, and still containing the reference to itself too.And the process continued till, may be not 'till' but simply stating: producing emergence.

Illusion

2007-05-25T02:55:00.001+01:00

     When I start to write I feel an excitement that captivates me, I am hooked. I do not know where it would lead me, what I do know, I sense that the tiny flicker of a thought in my mind can turn into a wildfire. Like Erich Harth's noise in our brain that some random sparkle, a random fluctuation in feedback response, builds upon.

     As the flicker gathers pace it engages more and more of the ideas, the thoughts that passed into my consciousness in the past, the books I read, the passages I reaped through, grasping, twisting and turning them around, abstracting, combining with one another, constantly. Traversing through boundaries, surpassing context finally arrives to a new thought, a different kind of idea, developed in a sense similar to the one given by Kosslyn's words,

"to contemplate something that has never existed before",

mentioned in Erich Harth's book "The creative loop".

Provide a different approach a solution that makes sense. The thoughts jump from one to another effortlessly as if the path was already trodden, long awaiting for me to arrive. A force pulling me towards. I do not look back. A mental shift, a paradigm shift and once I arrive there the only way I can go is forward. Another thought another idea still awaiting.

     This brings to me thoughts of intellectualization, as in the Wikipedia entry, attributed to Sigmund Freud which I found highly indignant and was left agitated as it made me feel as I was a mental case and I should seek treatment by some shrink. It was not comfort and I did not find solace in the statement that Leonardo Da Vinci was branded by Freud as a classic case for this affliction. What can I offer towards this approach that mollifies my expression? It is an extract from an interview of a scholar, I listened to in a Greek television channel, although it goes along the same lines, it lacks the clinical approach. It goes: 'All great achievements of human kind were the result of enormous efforts, humiliations, sacrifices. The reason being the need of personal expression of individuals with great anxiety. People that are in excellent condition, in health and wealth, have no reason to express their anxiety. They do not have anxiety, they have everything. Suffering is the source of inspiration. It creates anxiety and anxiety provides the push forward to reach a goal'. What goal? Can it be reached? Who knows.


Thoughts about humanity's place in the universe, the vastness of reality and earth our planet barely a grain in comparison, amidst all-powerful destructive forces and vast timescales. Could anything that we do can make a difference? That is not a pessimistic view. It is all a matter of putting things into perspective and go about our goals without flinching, undeterred, to constantly evolve and keep in perpetual motion, a dynamic state of being. Along these lines, I understand the part of the extract I did not mention. The Greek scholar also said

"to preserve the illusion".

Who can tell that the world we live in, is not an illusion. Another "matrix re-loaded".

We all have the potential to turn flickers into wildfires but some of us lost it somewhere in our arduous journey along the long drawn paths of our evolution.
     What was the catalyst that effected that process? What was the reason of loosing our potential to turn flickers into wildfires?

Just by chance again I came along a source that I felt it would provide an answer. In Noah Kennedy's book "The industrialization of intelligence" in page 78, it is mentioned that the German social historian Max Weber stated that:

"the historical seed for all social discipline was military discipline, and that in all societies the social discipline developed for warfare would always have some significant influence on the structure of the state and the economy. Weber considered it self-evident that the second great agency of social discipline, and the one most likely to borrow lessons from the warriors, was the large-scale economic organisation: the Pharaohs' workshops, the slave-owners' plantations, the capitalists' factories and, presumably in our time, the corporate office."


What can we perceive from that extract? Is it not obvious? The infrastructure of the even larger-scale economic organisation of today, built along the lines of Max Weber's insight, demands from us rigid social discipline similar to the military discipline? And in the process leave behind the inspiration the flicker-wildfire-potential, soldiers in the line of duty. And to what avail? Certainly our world needs growth and progress and co-ordinated action is the only way to achieve it. But is it necessary to do that with military discipline? Can we not do that in another way. Who is actually benefiting from that?

     An answer might be given from the extract that continues about the ruminations of Max Weber which goes:

"The need for war discipline arises from the utility in warfare of directing individuals so that masses of individual actions can be channeled into what from their leaders' standpoint is rational group behaviour."

     So warfare proper, masses of individual actions directed, the need to direct it. By whom? By the leaders? Can an individual's standpoint be so determining, so absolute that would be allowed to dictate the behaviour of all the rest of the individuals? Do individuals need that? For what?

     One of the main attributes of the economic organisation is to provide benefits. Benefits for the participants. In all scales. However, these benefits are not proportional are disproportionate. The efforts of each participant is equally important to the economic organisation, as everyone is an integral part. It provides the whole, a whole that is more than the sum of its parts. And as each part is equal, there should not be distinctions in benefit out of the economic activity. Each one should be appreciated and the profits shared proportionately. Everyone should be entitled to work and develop a sense of belonging.

A sense of belonging which will provide social discipline based on self-discipline and replace the military discipline that robs individuals of their personality. Alienates them and robs them of their dignity and humanity.

Chaos in my mind. Channels tapped

2007-05-16T08:56:00.001+01:00

I was wondering why, when I write I can not find the right words to express myself. In the process of formulating the thought, words surfacing are incoherent, haphazard, inappropriate. However, if I doubt them and not use them, I would stop the formulation of the thought completely, especially when I think along the lines: "Am I right to use that word?" Even if I pause, I would loose the lead, the inspiration of the moment. If I reason at all, I would have lost the essence of my inquiry.

Chaos complete. Erich Harth's incomprehensible noise, mentioned in his "Creative loop" book. The unstructured, unordered (?) state space in the periphery of a chaotic attractor. And out of that noise a tiny fluctuation is singled out, is amplified and it grows into a full fledged thought, almost effortlessly, as if you tapped into a channel. A channel that leads your thought into the ordered segment of the state space of a chaotic attractor. Tranquility.