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